The Real Lesson In The Kerik Affair
By Randall Nunn (12/17/04)
After listening to the reports coming out about former New York City Police Commissioner Bernard Kerik, whose name has been withdrawn from consideration for the post of Director of Homeland Security, it occurred to me that there is a warning for all of us in this botched nomination. That is this—be very careful in giving too much power to huge government organizations that supposedly are going to protect our security.
If our government can do no better job than what we have just seen in checking the credentials, background and fitness of Bernard Kerik to run one of the largest and most sensitive government agencies in the country, what makes us think that government can efficiently and effectively protect us against more dangerous enemies from without? Yet Congress, the administration and talking heads everywhere seem to be in a rush to give more powers to government that could ultimately result in less personal liberty for all Americans. What ever happened to the idea that the people protecting us ought to be well trained and go about their work diligently within the framework of our constitutional liberties and stop terrorists and catch lawbreakers through effective police and investigatory work, rather than by asking us to give up more rights and liberties so they can have an easier time performing their duties? Good police and investigative work is hard and requires long hours, good judgment, persistence and intelligence to perform it effectively. No doubt we could pass more laws making it easier for these people to do their tasks, but is that wise? And does it make us safer? If our government came within a hair of appointing a man like Kerik to such a powerful and sensitive position, why do we think it deserves even more power, simply so it can do its job more easily?
It is certain that our government could locate and catch terrorists more easily and quickly if all American citizens had ID cards, no guns, were under continual surveillance by all manner of technical devices and were required to submit to examinations and interrogations whenever the authorities thought it appropriate. But would we be a free people and would this be the America that the founders labored so hard to craft? If government can be so spectacularly incompetent in such a matter as the Kerik nomination, we dare not continue to give the bureaucratic behemoth even more power and surrender more civil liberties under the guise of protecting ourselves and our country. As conservatives, we may be more comfortable with the growth of the security apparatus because President Bush is in office. Would we be as comfortable if some far-left ideologue was in office with the same powers?
One need only think back to the days after the Oklahoma City bombing, the Branch Davidian tragedy and Ruby Ridge to be reminded how quickly American citizens can become the target of government authorities if the popular sentiment of the time is inflamed against them. The D.C. sniper case is another example. The police were looking for the wrong suspects, partly because the profile for the shooter that was developed by the authorities was the product of conventional wisdom and political correctness. There is absolutely no dispute that our enemy in this war on terror is extremely dangerous, ruthless and driven by irrational hatred. That being said, there is all the more reason to go after the terrorists in a manner that honors our principles but without weakening our civil liberties here at home. We too often take the easy path of simply passing laws that give government more power and more money in the false belief that we will also be made more secure in the process. Can a government that cannot properly determine who should be entrusted with such far-reaching and awesome power be trusted with our individual liberties? Wisdom would suggest that we should not give great power to government under threat of an emergency unless we can confidently say that we would trust that power in the hands of the worst officeholder as well as the best.
There is no substitute for hard work, common sense and dedication in combating evil and crime. Good old-fashioned investigatory work may be slow and tedious but it usually results in a focus on solving the crime rather than figuring out process shortcuts that soon inflict harm on civil liberties. Government does not often voluntarily relinquish power that it obtained during an emergency when the threat dissipates. Let’s go after the enemy aggressively on the battlefields and track down the terrorists wherever they may be, but when it comes to actions in this country that affect the liberties of our citizens let’s be sure that we don’t concentrate too much power in too few agencies where that power could become entrenched and corrupted. The recent blunder by the French security authorities in using unsuspecting passengers’ bags in the Paris air terminal for exercises with bomb sniffing dogs and the resulting embarrassing loss of a bag containing explosives (and the recent similar fiasco in the Newark airport) and now the failed nomination of Kerik in this country should alert us all to the fact that big government is far from infallible and can constitute a danger to free people everywhere if it is not carefully watched and controlled by those from whom it derives all of its powers—its citizens.
(Printer friendly version) Email: Randall Nunn
