Click here to view this article as an Adobe Acrobat PDF.

In the wake of the September 11 terrorist attacks, Americans mourned their dead, flew their country’s flag, prayed, and began to think about national security in new ways. Polls are a useful tool to study their responses to the attacks and their perceptions of the terrorist threat today.[1]

Resident Fellow Karlyn Bowman

In a democracy it is essential to pay attention to public opinion, and today in the United States more than a dozen pollsters in the field regularly assess it. While polls are a good way to measure opinions, they are a crude instrument. For that reason they should not be used to make policy. Their value lies in helping policymakers understand the views of a complex and varied public. For the public and policymakers alike, the attacks of September 11, 2001 thrust security issues to the front ranks of national discourse where they are likely to remain for some time to come. The memories of September 11 connect those issues powerfully to national political affairs.

The Rise of Terrorism

Almost from the start of the modern polling era 70 years ago, pollsters have probed people’s views about threats to the United States. Starting in the 1940s, people were asked about the threat posed by Germany and Japan. Gallup asked about the nature of the communist threat and the presence of communists on our soil. Averting a nuclear attack became the overriding priority for Americans during the Cold War. The fall of the Soviet Union gave Americans a breather, but polls from the 1990s make it clear that the public perceived new dangers, including terrorism. Americans were also concerned about weapons of mass destruction (WMD), unfriendly countries becoming nuclear powers, the spread of infectious diseases, and international drug cartels, to name only a few problems pollsters inquired about. Interestingly, concerns about problems in individual nations--instability in countries of the former Soviet Union and the emergence of China--seemed to take a back seat to global challenges. In late August-early September 2001 interviews, 53 percent told Pew Research Center interviewers that the world ten years after the Cold War was a more dangerous place. Only 14 percent said it was less dangerous.

Several motifs that bear on how Americans think about the terrorist threat today run through survey data collected before September 11. First, Americans are internationalists, albeit reluctant ones. They have long believed that the country has to play a major global role. They prefer to act with allies--when that is possible. They know that it is not always possible.

Second, Americans are generally inattentive to foreign affairs. The wake-up calls provided by the 1986 report of the Vice President’s Task Force on Combating Terrorism,[2] the congressionally mandated report of the National Commission on Terrorism in 2000, [3] and the several reports of the U.S. Commission on National Security/21st Century (also known as the Hart-Rudman Commission) did not stir the public.[4] This may be regrettable, but it is unsurprising in a country in which busy people have confidence in the system of representative government, if not always in its performance.

Third, Americans believe that U.S. military strength should be second to none. Since the 1980s, in most polls, that view has included soft support for a missile defense system--an issue about which U.S. and Canadian publics differ. The military is the most popular institution in American life. Scandals about procurement, sexual harassment, and even Abu Ghraib have little effect on the military’s standing, because, in the public’s mind, the military’s mission is clearly defined and people believe it carries out that mission well and deals forthrightly with problems.

Since the 1930s, Gallup has asked Americans to volunteer what they think is the most important problem facing the country. Their responses provide a unique historical record. Before September 11, in dozens of iterations of the question, terrorism was rarely mentioned, and when it was (usually around the time of a terrorist attack abroad), only small numbers volunteered it. After September 11, terrorism was the top problem for many months. In Gallup’s latest asking of the question, from August 2005, 27 percent said the war in Iraq was the country’s top problem, followed by the economy (13 percent) and terrorism (10 percent).

“Terrorism” made its first appearance in the Chicago Council of Foreign Relations poll series in 1986 when 20 percent volunteered it as one of the country’s “two or three biggest foreign policy problems.” In the Council’s quadrennial surveys, two percent volunteered it in 1992, one percent in 1994, and 12 percent in 1998. Terrorism was emerging as an issue of concern, but concern about it only ticked up when the pollsters asked about it in proximity to a terrorist attack.

In 1998, for the first time in the Council’s surveys, “combating international terrorism” was included in a list of foreign policy goals. Seventy-nine percent described it as very important. In another question, 84 percent described international terrorism as a “critical threat,” followed by chemical and biological weapons (76 percent). These were the top two issues of 13. In a Pew poll from June 2001, WMD were seen as a major threat by 74 percent, while 64 percent mentioned terrorism, and 58 percent Saddam Hussein’s continued rule.

The attacks of September 11, 2001 intensified and sharpened concerns about terrorism that had been building. Americans were angry, and more than 80 percent wanted to retaliate against those responsible. The war in Afghanistan had substantial support. In a Pew survey taken soon after September 11, taking military action abroad to destroy terrorist networks was more important than building up defenses at home to prevent future attacks.

It was clear to the public that the war on terrorism would not be won overnight. In late September 2001, 92 percent told Gallup, CNN, and USA Today interviewers that the war on terrorism would be a long war. In November, a similar 87 percent gave that response. A Martilla Communications Group poll shows that this is still true: 70 percent said in January 2005 that “while we can greatly reduce the threat of terror, we can never eliminate the threat completely,” while 27 percent believed the war on terrorism could “be won in the long term if we defeat Al Qaeda and break up other terror networks.”

These days most public pollsters follow the media’s ever-moving searchlight. Few questions are asked about Afghanistan anymore. A July 2005 Harris poll, however, concluded that U.S. adults felt “quite negative about the prospects for success.”

The New Normal

The polls after September 11 provided an indication of the public’s deep emotional reaction to the tragedy. A majority of men and women told Gallup they cried after the September 11 attacks, and sadness was an almost universal emotion. But America is a very resilient country. Six months after the tragedy, solid majorities described the country as completely or somewhat back to normal. Fewer people said they had cried in the past two weeks as a direct result of the events of September 11. Worries about flying and traveling overseas also diminished quickly after immediate post-September 11 reactions.

A National Opinion Research Center study of emotional and physical symptoms found the nation “on track toward a psychological recovery” soon after the attacks, though some groups, such as women, minorities, low-income groups, and people in poor mental health, did not recover as quickly as others. People who watched a lot of television were less resilient than those who spent little time watching television.

Even though 20 percent of New York City residents reported that they had a relative or close friend missing, injured, or killed, by June 2002 most residents told CBS News/New York Times interviewers that their lives had gotten back to normal. Thirty-six percent were still uneasy about riding the subways. Despite their worries, however, most had no intention of leaving.

A 2002 Gallup survey taken in early 2002 of New York City, Washington, D.C., and
Oklahoma City residents showed that New York City residents were more likely to be “very” worried (19 percent) about the possibility of another terrorist attack than D.C. residents (9 percent), Oklahoma City residents (6 percent), or the nation as a whole (8 percent). Still, the proportion with acute worries was small.[5]

For Americans, living with the terrorist threat is now “the new normal.” Nearly 75 percent told Pew interviewers in 2003 that occasional acts of terrorism will be part of life in the future. Only 22 percent disagreed. Security risks today mean terrorism.

Since September 11 several pollsters have asked regularly about the threat of another terrorist attack on U.S. soil. The Pew Research Center asks people how worried they are that there will “soon” be another terrorist attack. CBS News and the New York Times ask about the likelihood of another attack “within the next few months,” and Gallup, CNN, and USA Today ask about “further” acts of terrorism “over the next several weeks.” All show that only a small proportion thinks another attack is not at all likely. Concern edged up after the July 100 2005 London bombings.

Gallup asks a more specific question about risk, whether “you or someone in your family” will become a victim of terrorism. Since November 2001, around 10 percent have said that they are very worried this may happen. Between 18 and 31 percent have said they are not worried at all. Worry tends to be higher among women than men in this area as in many others. But differences among generations, partisans, or regions on this question are small. A March 2005 poll by AP and Ipsos Public Affairs puts concerns about becoming a victim of terrorism into some context. Thirty percent said they worried frequently about not being able to pay their bills, 20 percent about getting hurt in a car accident, 13 percent about a terrorist attack using nuclear weapons, 12 percent becoming a victim of terrorism, and 11 percent a nuclear attack on one country by another. As for becoming a victim of terrorism, 28 percent worried about it occasionally, 35 percent rarely, and 25 percent, never.

In 2003, 92 percent told Fox News/Opinion Dynamics interviewers that there were members of Al Qaeda here; four percent said there were not. Ninety-four percent in the mid-July 2005 CBS News/New York Times poll said there were terrorists living in the United States today who are planning to launch future attacks, while three percent said there were not. This conviction and the belief that there will be another terrorist attack keep security issues in the front ranks of administration and congressional activity.

However, beliefs about the likelihood of another attack do not seem to be spurring Americans to action, a pattern observed in public opinion polls from earlier periods. A 2004 survey by Wirthlin Worldwide for the Red Cross found that only about one in ten had done the things the Red Cross thinks are essential to respond to a catastrophic disaster described as an arthquake, hurricane, or terrorist attack. Americans recognize the “importance of being personally prepared,” Wirthlin concluded, but few people have done things to prepare. Other surveys confirm these findings. Around three in ten told Harris Interactive pollsters immediately after September 11 that they considered stocking up on supplies. About one in ten told Gallup in March 2002 that they actually did. In the 1950s, Wirthlin tells us, Americans favored public bomb shelters, but only two in ten had thought about building or paying for one themselves. The polls do not tell us why Americans haven’t taken these actions since September 11. Perhaps it is because they believe it is the federal government’s responsibility to protect them, or perhaps it is because they feel that there is very little they can realistically do to prevent or prepare for a terrorist attack similar to September 11 or to the London subway bombings.

Although many pundits have expressed cynical attitudes about the government’s terror alerts, suggesting that they are a political device to boost President Bush’s popularity, most Americans think they are good idea. Between 66 and 71 percent gave that response to CBS News interviewers in four questions between 2001 and 2004. In a June 2003 Fox News/Opinion Dynamics poll, 51 percent said the color-coded system was helpful; 38 percent said it was not.

Government Performance

Americans believe that the actions of Congress and the Bush administration have made the nation safer since September 11. In a Pew question from mid-July 2005, 70 percent (down from 88 percent in October 2001) felt the U.S. government was doing very or somewhat well in reducing the terrorist threat. In eight repetitions of this question, no more than eight percent have given the response “not at all well.” As for the Bush administration, in July 2005, 61 percent told Gallup interviewers that they had a great deal or a moderate amount of confidence in it to protect U.S. citizens from future acts of terrorism. Seventy-nine percent gave that response in May 2004. In a question last asked in 2004 by CBS News/New York Times interviewers, 54 percent said administration policies had made the United States safer while 29 percent believed these policies had made the country less safe.

In a July 2005 poll, 54 percent of respondents told CBS News/New York Times interviewers that the federal government had done all it could reasonably be expected to do to improve airport security since September 11, while 42 percent said it could have done more. Twenty-six percent said it had done all it could to improve security on trains and mass transit systems, while 61 percent said it could have done more.

Civil Liberties

People seem to be willing to let authorities cast a wide net in dealing with potential terrorists. In July 2005, 71 percent of people told CBS News that surveillance cameras were a good idea “because they may help to reduce the threat of terrorism,” while 23 percent said the cameras were a bad idea because they “may infringe on people’s privacy rights.” However, the American people do not want their own liberties compromised and object to monitoring of e-mails or phone calls. A Harris Interactive survey from June 2005 showed that 81 percent supported stronger document and physical security checks for travelers, 76 percent expanded undercover activities to penetrate groups under suspicion, 62 percent closer monitoring of banking and credit card transactions to trace funding sources, and 61 percent adoption of a national ID system for all citizens. Just 37 percent supported expanded monitoring of cell phones and e-mail, while 60 percent were opposed.

As time goes by, and in the absence of new attacks in the United States, Americans seem less willing to give up civil liberties. In a Los Angeles Times poll in September 2001, 61 percent of respondents said it would be necessary “for the average person to give up some civil liberties” in order to curb terrorism; 33 percent said it would not be necessary. In a mid-July 2005 Pew poll, those responses were 40 and 53 percent, respectively. The change may be explained by a reduced fear factor or by Americans’ familiar suspicion of federal government power.

Although pollsters did not explore attitudes toward Arabs systematically before September 11, Gallup suggests that the public held “somewhat negative views” about them.[6] Immediately after September 11, majorities opposed “singling out” Arab Americans or putting them under “special surveillance.” They supported increased security requirements such as more extensive security checks and tighter immigration requirements. In a June 2005 Public Agenda/Foreign Affairs poll, people rated tighter immigration controls second only to the improvement of intelligence operations as important proposals to increase security.

In a late July 2005 Fox News/Opinion Dynamics poll, 76 percent favored “random searches of bags and packages on subways, trains, and buses in major cities.” Nine percent saw this as a violation of civil liberties. Sixty percent said the searches were effective in preventing terrorist attacks, while 26 percent said they were “mostly for show.” Thirteen percent said they would mind having their own bags searched.

Three times since 2003, Fox News and Opinion Dynamics have asked people whether the Patriot Act is a good thing, a “necessary and effective tool in preventing terrorist attacks,” or a bad one that “goes too far and could violate the civil liberties of average Americans.” In June 2005, 57 percent said it was a good thing and 30 percent a bad thing. Opinion has been stable on this question, with little significant change from previous years.[7] As for extending it, opinion is stable once again, with 56 percent supporting an extension of Act in 2005, compared to 53 percent in 2004.

Iraq

Large majorities of Americans supported the decision to go to war in Iraq. The belief at the time that Iraq had WMD contributed to the support of the decision, but WMD were not the sole (or perhaps even the most important) rationale for going to war. Americans did not support a war in Iraq out of the blue; they had made up their minds about Saddam Hussein more than a decade earlier. On nine occasions between 1991 and 2001, they told CBS News pollsters that the United States should have gotten rid of him instead of bringing the troops home after the 1991 war.

Every poll that asked the question found that large majorities of Americans felt the peace in Iraq would be more difficult than the war. Today, in most polls, Americans are divided and leaning toward viewing the war as a mistake. About a third in Gallup’s early August 2005 poll wanted to pull our troops out now, an increase from 2003, when only 14 percent did.

Public opinion is unsettled on the question of exactly what the war has done for U.S. security and safety. In mid-July 2005, 44 percent told CBS News interviewers that as a result of U.S. military action in Iraq, the threat of terrorism had increased, 13 percent said it had decreased, and 42 percent saw the threat as about the same. In an August 2005 ABC News/Washington Post poll, 49 percent said the war in Iraq had contributed to long-term security of the United States; 49 percent said it had not. Nine percent of those surveyed in a July 2005 Fox News/Opinion Dynamics poll believed that terrorist attacks against the United States would stop if the United States removed its troops from Iraq; 85 percent said they would not.

Summing Up

This review shows that perceptions of the terrorist threat grew slowly before September 11. Today that threat is part of everyday life, and Americans expect another attack on our soil. Immediately after September 11, Americans were not in the mood to assign blame for intelligence failures. Questions that ask Americans to look back aren’t asked very often, so we don’t know how they feel today about culpability. In general, Americans tend to look to the future, not the past. Today they believe the government has made some progress in dealing with intelligence failures and enhancing security.

Americans tend to give their presidents considerable latitude in the conduct of foreign policy and national security, once a basic level of trust has been established. President Bush had no foreign policy experience before he assumed the presidency. Although Americans felt that he would be a strong leader, it is not clear from the polls conducted in 1999 or 2000 how much trust and confidence they had in his foreign policy skills. But his responses to the terrorist attacks on both a personal and policy level were such that he gained their trust almost overnight. The absence of WMD in Iraq and the difficulties on the ground there have eroded that trust and contributed to a more negative view of President Bush. That said, at this point the president and the Republicans still lead the Democrats as the party better able to handle foreign policy and national security issues. 

In the 2004 election, security issues played an important role. The top issue voters selected from a list as most important to their vote was “moral values,” cited by 22 percent. But following closely behind in the network consortium’s Election Day poll were the economy, cited by 20 percent, and terrorism, cited by 19 percent. Voters who selected terrorism as their top issue voted 86 to 14 percent for President Bush over John Kerry. In another question, only a small number of voters (five percent) said they were not at all worried about terrorism. Twenty-two percent said they were very worried and another 53 percent said they were somewhat worried.

Today concerns about terrorism are on the back burner of the stove at a steady simmer. Concerns about Iraq and the performance of the economy are on the front burner at a full boil. It is difficult to know how much current negative views of the war in Iraq are seeping into the public’s view on how the war on terror is being handled. The president’s ratings on handling virtually every aspect of his job are down. In a late August 2005 ABC News/Washington Post poll, 56 percent approved of the job he is doing handling the U.S. campaign against terrorism. This level of support is about what it has been for the past year, but it is down significantly from 2002, 2003, and early 2004. Of the eight areas the pollsters inquired about, terrorism was the only issue on which positive views of the president’s performance outweighed negative ones.

Speaking for myself, I don’t think about the terrorist threat every day, but when I walk into the subway or stand in the queue at an airport, I am reminded that the world is a very different and more dangerous place than in the past. In a poll taken shortly before the terrorist attacks in 2001, 53 percent said the world was a more dangerous place than it had been ten years earlier. Today, 75 percent give that response, and it is a safe bet that fears of some sort of terrorist attack pushed that response up.

I suspect that I am like most Americans in thinking that policymakers are taking the terrorist threat much more seriously than they did before September 11 and making some progress in dealing with it. Americans’ resolve to address the threat has not waned, and they will continue to give the president and policymakers considerable scope to deal with it.

Karlyn H. Bowman is is a resident fellow at AEI.

Notes

1. The polling data underpinning this study cover the period up to July 2005. More recent polling data is available at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) website, http://www.aei.org/PublicOpinionStudies. All of the findings reported here are from American Enterprise Institute Public Opinion Studies, which are also available on the AEI website or from the author. U.S. government counterterrorism exercise.

2. Public Report of the Vice President’s Task Force on Combating Terrorism, February 1986.

3. Countering the Threat from International Terrorism, June 2000. 

4. The Hart-Rudman Commission addressed policy recommendations dealing with terrorism in the third report, Roadmap for National Security: Imperative for Change, February 2001.

5. The Gallup survey of New York City, Washington, D.C., and Oklahoma City residents was co-sponsored by the University of Oklahoma’s Department of Psychiatry, and was conducted between January and March 2002. 

6. Gallup release, “Americans Felt Uneasy Toward Arabs Even Before September 11,” September 28, 2001. 

7. The results for the 2003 Fox News/Opinion Dynamics question on the Patriot Act were
57:27; in 2004, they were 54:28.