THE NOVEMBER elections are rapidly approaching and as the candidates are preparing to accept their respective party's nominations and the media coverage is gearing up, few people would like to concentrate on the subject of terrorist attacks in this country. Unfortunately, our modern world is one that is fraught with peril, and terrorism is something that we need to be prepared for at any time. To this end, Secretary of Homeland Security Tom Ridge is doing us a great service by looking into the possibility of postponing the election should it become necessary due to an attack.
Postponing an election causes many people to have a knee-jerk reaction of "that's a bad idea!" While it is true that we have had elections through tumultuous times in the past -- the Civil War, two world wars, etc., -- the threat we faced then was at least tangible. Now we face a hidden threat from a cowardly, unpredictable enemy, and it is up to us to be prepared to deal with it.
On Sept. 11, 2001, a mayoral primary was scheduled in New York City. After the terrorist attacks leveled the Twin Towers, the New York State Board of Elections suspended the primary for the day and moved it back in a clearly well-thought-out move. Such an election simply could not function during the panic of that fateful September day.
Unfortunately, in the event of a terrorist attack, a federal authority that has the ability to postpone the elections as the New York Board of Elections did does not exist. While certain elements within the Democratic Party have attempted to politicize Ridge's actions, he has made the correct move in investigating this possibility.
For a moment now, let's take a look at a certain doomsday scenario: On Nov. 1, the day before the presidential election, al Qaeda or another radical Islamic terrorist organization strikes the United States. This strike could be anything on the scale of Sept. 11, but for the sake of argument, let's say that they successfully hit a major city with a low-yield nuclear device. As far as the world intelligence community is concerned, the possibility that such a terrorist group could have access to a low-yield ex-Soviet or home-grown nuclear device is not that far-fetched. As a terrorist, what better time to put a nuclear device to use than during election season?
So, for the sake of this argument, the center of New York City essentially becomes uninhabitable. Obviously, this would make it very hard and very unwise to continue with the election. The nation's attention would be firmly focused on these attacks and not on the job of electing a new president and other leaders. The logistical mess such an attack would cause would alone be reason enough to warrant a delay of the election.
It is clear that in the event of such a doomsday scenario, a delay would be necessary and proper. If the proper precautions were not taken, then the only course of action would be for President Bush to issue an executive order officially postponing the elections by several days. While this would accomplish the same goal, legal issues abound. Certain extreme liberals have spent four years complaining about the election of 2000; I could only imagine the complaints if Bush had to act unilaterally to postpone the elections due to a terrorist attack.
In order to prevent such harm, it is fitting and proper for Ridge to investigate which arm of the federal government would have the authority to postpone the elections. By establishing who has that authority and how they could use it now, before any attack could occur, we can prevent unnecessary partisan bickering in the case of an attack.
I do not believe that the terrorists will attack us before the November elections. For the terrorists, it is too much of a gamble. Unlike in Spain, it is difficult for the attackers to determine what outcome an attack on the United States would have, and which outcome would be preferable. Hate-mongers such as the fundamentalists that we are now facing need someone to hate in order to stay in power -- it is quite possible that they will benefit more under President Bush. There are too many variables for them to risk an attack now.
However unlikely it seems that they may attack us, we have an obligation to be ready to deal with every contingency. To prepare for an attack on Election Day is not a sign of weakness but a sign of strength. We will stand up to the terrorists and say, "Try to do your worst; we are ready and we will have our elections."
Daniel Bagley is a Cavalier Daily associate editor. He can be reached at dbagley@cavalierdaily.com.
Read More
PATEL: Personal development courses support students beyond the gradebook
By Heer Patel | 3 days agoThe University must rethink its approach to education beyond traditional major-specific requirements and mandate personal development courses.
EDITORIAL: Commercialization threatens U.Va.’s educational mission
By Editorial Board | 4 days agoAfter all, measuring the University’s worth in terms of accrued capital, operational efficiency and numerical rankings molds this space into just another cookie-cutter institution.
YOUNIS: Why every U.Va. student should say yes to English
By Ayat Younis | January 9, 2025Every student at the University, regardless of their primary field of study, can professionally and academically benefit from engaging with the English department.
