A Red-Blue Terror Alert 'Natch.Why

| No Comments

A Red-Blue Terror Alert

'Natch.

Why adopt such a strange formula? Well, maybe it's not that strange: what it most resembles is the Electoral College, which also gives disproportionate weight (though not that disproportionate) to states with small populations. And with a few exceptions, small-population states are red states — indeed, the small-state bias of the Electoral College is what allowed Mr. Bush to claim the White House despite losing the popular vote. It's hard not to suspect that the formula — which makes absolutely no sense in terms of national security — was adopted precisely because it caters to that same constituency. (To be fair, there's one big "red state" loser from the formula: Texas. But one of these days, sooner than most people think, Texas may well turn blue.)

In other words, the allocation of money confirms Mr. Chait's point: even in a time of war — a war that seems oddly unrelated to the terrorist threat — the Bush administration isn't serious about protecting the homeland. Instead, it continues to subordinate U.S. security needs to its unchanged political agenda.

I don't think we'll be hearing from the Krugman Truth Squad.

Leave a comment

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by Azael published on March 31, 2003 9:18 PM.

Intelligence: No Sign Saddam Is was the previous entry in this blog.

Rumsfeld's Design for War Criticized is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.