After the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, the federal government naturally devoted much more attention and funding to improving airport and airplane security. While many of the security upgrades were necessary, this focus has left the country with gaping vulnerabilities.

President Bush’s proposed budget worsens this problem by not specifically allocating money to the security of U.S. ports, rail lines and other non- aviation infrastructure. To remedy this situation, Congress should first determine what facilities are the most vulnerable and then devote money to securing them.

Such a review should not just focus on what targets terrorists might attack, but also how they might use them for other purposes. For example, ports have been vulnerable for decades but have not been attacked. Perhaps terrorists have determined that it is too hard to cause serious damage to a cargo port.

However, if the goal is to get bombs or other weapons into this country, seaports would be a likely target. Ninety-five percent of U.S. cargo flows through ports. By weight, Portland handles the most cargo in New England. Only a small percentage of containers at cargo ports are searched, meaning that weapons could be fairly easily smuggled into the country.

Smuggling people into the country is also a possibility. Perhaps the emphasis on airport screenings and no-fly lists has succeeded in disrupting such plots by taking away the airlines as an option for getting terrorists into the United States. But, it could encourage determined terrorists to turn to the seas.

During a Senate committee hearing earlier this month, Susan Collins recalled a recent incident at the Port of Los Angeles where a crane operator spotted 32 Chinese nationals in two containers that had been smuggled into the country. “That really concerns me, because if the smugglers of the illegal aliens know to use the container system, then surely al-Qaida has identified that as a possible means of smuggling an al- Qaida cell into our country,” Sen. Collins said during the Feb. 2 confirmation hearing for Michael Chertoff, whom President Bush nominated to head the Department of Homeland Security. Worse, Sen. Collins added, was the fact that the men were not found by high-tech cameras or other surveillance techniques or screening programs.

Mr. Chertoff agreed that more review was needed. “I think we have to have a formula for funding and a formula for lending assistance to state and local governments across the board that takes account of the reality of vulnerabilities and risks in making sure that we’re making a fair allocation. And I think we need to encourage feedback to make sure we’re on the right path.”

This is a sensible approach. However, rather than prioritize transportation risks, the president’s budget includes $600 million for all non-aviation security measures. It eliminates a $150 million grant program specifically for ports that Congress funded last year. This leaves port directors to squabble with their rail and trucking counterparts, something both Sens. Collins and Olympia Snowe rightly find unacceptable.

A thorough evaluation of the country’s weak spots coupled with recommendations on strengthening them should guide decisions about where Homeland Security money is spent.