Sep 9, 2004
Failing Grades

America's Security 3 Years After 9/11

Sep 9, 2004
12:00 AM - 11:59 PM EDT

L-R: Gayle Smith, Philip J. “P.J.” Crowley, Mara Rudman, Lawrence J. Korb, and Robert O. Boorstin discuss the Administration’s achievements and failures since 9/11 in preventing the proliferation of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons; protecting the homeland; projecting leadership abroad: engaging the military; reforming intelligence; and combating the growth of terrorist movements.

Failing Grades: America’s Security 3 Years after 9/11

September 9, 2004
At this event, the Center for American Progress will present its report card on the administration’s achievements and failures since 9/11 in preventing the proliferation of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons; protecting the homeland; projecting leadership abroad: engaging the military; reforming intelligence; and combating the growth of terrorist movements.


Robert O. Boorstin, Senior Vice President for National Security, Center for American Progress, “One of the problems we have seen in North Korea and in Iran is that this president has been totally unable to solve divisions within his own administration so that we could move forward on either front.”	Philip J. “P.J.” Crowley, Senior Fellow, Center for American Progress, “In the homeland security area we gave the administration a D+. They have created the veneer of homeland security, but the reality is that we are not as safe as we should be three years after 9/11.”	Lawrence J. Korb, Senior Fellow, Center for American Progress, “In terms of the effectiveness of our military power we would have to give the administration no higher than a D because, particularly with the case of the army, we are in danger of breaking the force, and we have no strategic reserve left to deal with situations outside of where we are now.”

John Podesta, President and CEO, Center for American Progress, “I usually think the American people get it right if they’re presented with the facts and a serious explanation about what the choices are and what the alternative strategies are.”	Mara Rudman, Senior Vice President for Strategic Planning, Center for American Progress, “In the area of nonproliferation, the grade that we would have liked to give the administration is literally off the charts, and not in the positive direction…This administration has shown a remarkable lack of effort in the nonproliferation area – Lack of effort that has made us, as a country, more vulnerable.”	Gayle Smith, Senior Fellow, Center for American Progress, “Let me start with the terrorist threat. We gave the administration a C-. This is largely because the administration got off to a good start, but showed pretty poor follow through. It’s the sort of the report card equivalent of, if you will, acing the multiple choice test and flunking the essay.”