As many are aware, and as has been well documented by Phillyskyline.com, the National Park Service plans on erecting a $2 million eyesore in Independence Mall in the name of protecting “our National Treasures from terrorist attacks.” This is part of a large scale effort by the Bush administration to buttress our beloved icons of freedom with forbidding security measures in order to convey a hands off message to all potential terrorists.

For those who have not yet heard, the current plan bisects Independence Mall with a seven foot high wrought iron fence, currently replacing the double bike racks along the back of Independence Hall. In addition, all visitors of the building, as well as the Liberty Bell next door will be screened with metal detectors.

The overwhelming reaction by communities and community leaders has been justified outrage. In addition, Mayor Street, Rep. Fattah, Senator Specter, and Governor Rendell have all been on record admonishing the Dept of Homeland Security for placing a barrier where its not wanted, and more importantly, where one is not needed.

One of my favorite aspects of our city is how it can provide us with a microcosm for issues in play on the national stage. This is not a diatribe against commodifying our icons as symbols, or an attack on the Bush administration. Those are arguments on different sites. This is rather an observation about the local reaction to the culture of fear.

A recent release by the Cato Institute, though admittedly a right leaning research tank, lays this beef out pretty clearly, and can be accessed here:
http://www.cato.org/pubs/regulation/regv27n3/v27n3-5.pdf
The most central point is that our politicians do us a disservice by playing up the role that terrorism plays, causing hysteria, which leads to faulty prioritization. I wont quote the essay at length, but encourage everyone to read it as an exercise in careful, and unpopular thought.

My point is simply that in focusing attention on a threat to the Independence Hall, the Dept of Homeland Security is focusing on a moot point. Granted, it is a local, state, and national treasure, but as a monument it represents more than just our origins, it should represent our future. Building a fence around it is not only forbidding and indicative of a restrictive state, as others have pointed out, but it also shows that we care more about bricks and mortar than our own citizens.

The odds of dying from a terrorist attack are worse than dying from a direct lightening strike. As mentioned in the article, counting all deaths since 1960, including 9/11, more people died from allergic reactions to mixed nuts than did from terrorism. On the other hand, people without healthcare are dying in PA every day. We have had over 1,400 shootings, and are slated to break 400 murders this year, a topic we have talked about at length. Wouldn’t $2 million in Federal money go farther earmarked toward these causes, rather than protecting a building from an improbable threat?

The real spirit of the Hall is embodied in its visitors. In 1812, the British burned the original White House to the ground, the original symbol of our independence from monarchy. Seems we’ve done ok since then.

Just for thought: The Dept of Homeland Security had a budget in 2004 of $36.5 billion. If the Dept saved as many people a year as died in 9/11-about 3,000- this would cost about $12.2 million per life saved, if indeed that many people were saved.