The events of Sept. 11 and after opened a lot of eyes to a lot of vulnerabilities in matters of homeland security, public health, law enforcement, investigation and prosecution. While there is disagreement on whether some of these vulnerabilities are real and overlooked or imagined and overblown, federal and state officials are scrambling to plug as many as possible.

The security measures proposed by Gov. King this week make up a modest package of plugs. Maine’s location and population make it an unlikely target for a concerted terrorist attack, but it certainly is not immune from spillover effects, copycat crimes and hoaxes, and the package reflects that potential. The proposals are practical; they do not trample civil liberties, but they can leave a footprint.

The most practical, and likely to be used, components deal with public health and the state’s ability to respond to the anthrax attacks experienced elsewhere. Brief detention without court review for up to 72 hours of people exposed to highly communicable diseases, mandated cremation of contaminated corpses during emergencies and required reporting by health care providers to health officials of information about contaminated persons all address lapses discovered in places where anthrax exposure occurred. There are civil-liberties implications, but abuse, given the professionalism of providers and officials, seems unlikely.

Adding terrorism, threat of terrorism, and the manufacture, possession or use of weapons of mass destruction to the state’s criminal code as a Class A felony would be, in the event of a real terrorist attack, a duplication of federal law. In the event of a threat, it could be a practical deterrent in cases too small to attract federal attention. It certainly will be interesting to see the extent to which prosecutors consider hoaxes, such as school bomb hoaxes, as threats worthy of the state’s highest criminal sanctions.

A proposal to restrict public access to security plans for government buildings plugs an oversight in the state’s right-to-know law but does little else – terrorists do not need blueprints to carry out attacks. On the other hand, part of the anti-terrorism challenge is to defend against senseless behavior. The proposal making price gouging a crime during emergencies addresses a potential problem but, like the hoax-as-threat issue, creates the potential for some exciting prosecutorial adventures come the next ice storm.

The part of the governor’s anti-terrorism initiative that disappoints, on several levels, is in his supplemental budget – the merger of the Capitol Security force with the state police. These armed security guards may well need more than the 100 hours of training currently required, but the narrow scope of the job simply does not require the 720 hours of full-fledged police officers. The expense of this merger – $365,000 for starters, plus the ongoing expenses to recruit, train and retain guards – is unsupportable, especially during a recession and quarter-billion budget gap.

The urgency with which this proposal was made last month is contradicted by the governor’s complacent reaction to objections raised this week by members of the Legislature’s Criminal Justice Committee. If the safety of those who enter the state’s most important public building is, in fact, in unnecessary jeopardy, one would expect stronger words of advocacy from the governor than his standoffish observation that improving it is the Legislature’s call. While other potential breaches are either overlooked or overblown, this one seems to be both.