Opinion: More security for nuclear sites

Recently, the U.S. Department of Energy requested more money to maintain safeguards at U.S. nuclear weapons facilities. Often criticized in the past for lax security, the facilities are seen by some as particularly vulnerable to terrorist attacks. But DOE's request for $26-million "to adequately protect the public, our workers and the environment" was rejected by the White House.

The Bush administration, apparently, is waiting for a new security plan to be completed before putting any more money into the effort. But according to U.S. Rep. Ed Markey, D-Mass., the nation cannot afford to wait.

Ten DOE sites reportedly contain enough weapons-grade plutonium and highly enriched uranium to build a crude atomic bomb, Markey said. Two of those facilities are near densely populated Denver and the San Francisco Bay area. He fears that terrorists on a suicidal mission could gain control of a nuclear weapons site and either build a bomb or use conventional explosives to detonate a "dirty bomb" that would spread deadly radioactive material.

"Recent press reports have detailed both al-Qaida members' attempts to obtain nuclear materials as well as their desire to attack U.S. nuclear facilities," Markey said in a letter to President Bush, requesting that the funds be released.

Terrorism scenarios such as the one described by Markey are no longer unthinkable. The White House is assuring Americans that security is adequate at nuclear weapons sites, yet the history of those facilities suggests otherwise. Considering the magnitude of the threat, President Bush should leave nothing to chance. He should work with Congress to give the DOE the funds necessary to enact emergency measures while it works on a more permanent security plan.