Over the past four years, the United States has been searching for effective ways to protect our homeland against the threat of terror. Before Sept. 11, the focus on homeland security wasn’t publicized or criticized the way it is today.

Four years after the attacks, it’s becoming clear that our system of protecting the citizens of the United States is proving successful in some areas, but potentially disastrous in others.

The question of our safety isn’t answered simply by looking at all of the progress that has been made to secure the borders of our country, but by exposing the level of vulnerability the United States still carries today.

The approval of the Patriot Act and the establishment of the Department of Homeland Security have raised the level of protection in America. Many changes have been made in the past few years.

Major improvements to the security of America include the following: the National Counterterrorist Center, established in 2003, successfully integrates intelligence from and coordinates operations across multiple agencies; the Terrorist Screening Center created a single terrorist watch list for the whole country; the Department of Health and Human Services created enough smallpox vaccines for every American and has improved global disease surveillance; the Transportation Security Administration has made major improvements in the security of U.S. commercial aviation by reducing vulnerability to hijacking; the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of State have enacted a series of border-security reforms that have made it significantly more difficult for foreign terrorists to enter the country. And there have been no terrorist attacks in the United States since 9/11.

Despite these developments, major complaints about the progress of security in the United States come from reports of vulnerability from within our nation’s borders.

In light of the terrorist attacks, the Sept. 11 Commission was organized to track the progress of homeland security and recently gave a grade report. Their “report card” included 5 “F”s, 12 “D”s and two “incompletes” in categories including airline passenger screening and improving first responders’ communication systems.

“An ‘F’ is too high a grade for the Bush White House and Washington Republicans,” said Harry M. Reid, Senate minority leader from Nevada.

The commission’s chairman, Thomas H. Kean, former Republican governor of New Jersey, believes terrorists will strike again and the United States is not prepared to intercept the terrorist cells that lay in wait to execute their plans.

Federal intelligence agencies still refuse to share sensitive and critical information. Local agencies remain unprepared to respond to any type of terrorist attack with mass casualties. A nationwide network of health surveillance is needed to detect the beginning stages of a bio-terrorism attack in order to respond to early stages of such an event before mass destruction occurs. Federal, state and local personnel still lack the sponsored training exercises needed to prepare for disasters a fraction the size of Katrina.

There remains a lack of funds, innovation and experience in the government today. Reform and reconstruction is greatly needed to get all agencies involved and prepared.

In the wake of terror, it’s important that the United States feels a sense of security within its borders. But there is a question as to whether the safety felt here is not indeed a false sense of security. A sense of vigilance ought to be in the minds of all Americans and those in charge of our safety to be prepared for terrorist threat. Perhaps the real enemy here is complacency.