Massive Failure of Leadership

Kevin Drum, like apparently everyone else in the blogsphere, has a post today about the Newsweek story on the potential rescheduling of the November election. Most observers I've read have opined on whether cancelling, rescheduling or delaying the election is a good idea. Certainly we need to have that debate.

What I'm struck by, though, is why we're starting that debate today, 112 days before the election. Does absolutely every single person in the Bush administration lack even a scintilla of foresight?

I would argue that coming up with a plan -- a process -- for dealing with a disrupted election should have been very high on the list of to do's following the September 11 attacks. Afterall, the attacks disrupted primary voting in Manhattan. (As I recall, the election cancelled on 9/11 took place a few weeks later.) It ought not take a rocket scientist -- or even a Harvard MBA -- to plan ahead for the possibility that a future attack might disrupt more than just a regional primary.

And, lest we forget, the somnambulant administration was given another wake-up call in the form of the Madrid bombing on March 11 of this year. Still they slumbered.

Now, finally, in the highly charged atmosphere of a general election campaign, we get the first public hints of a potential need to consider the impact of a terrorist attack on our electoral process. I'm really flabbergasted that we've waited so long to consider these questions. And now that someone has decided to address the issue there's a belief that it's a good idea to examine the issue at the most politically inopportune time.

Also, it must be said, the blame for this delay can not be laid upon the administration alone. It seems to me that a legitimate process for cancellation or postponement of a general election must involve the elected representatives of the people. Hence, Congress ought to have some major role in the decision making process. And though potential rule changes affecting the dates of elections could be enacted without changes to the United States Constitution it is not necessarily the case that state constitutions would be untouched. Thus, the legislative impact may extend to the state level. So, clearly, our elected legislative representatives deserve rebuke as well.

But we don't typically hold a congressman or a senator accountable for the failure to coordinate policy and set direction for the many levels of government in the United States.

In times past we've looked to a strong Leader with a clear vision and an abiding interest in the preservation of American ideals.

Where is such a Leader?