"Last year, customs officials screened only five percent of the 11 million cargo containers entering the United States. That rate is both unacceptable and dangerous to our national and economic interests"
About this Quote
Five percent is the kind of number that sounds like a rounding error until you picture the scale: 11 million steel boxes, each a potential conduit for contraband, counterfeit goods, or something far worse. Allyson Schwartz isn’t just scolding bureaucracy here; she’s staging a political gut-check. By pairing a precise statistic with the loaded twin verdicts “unacceptable” and “dangerous,” she turns a technocratic policy gap into a moral and national-security emergency.
The intent is straightforward: justify tougher port security, more funding, and more aggressive oversight. The subtext is more interesting. “National and economic interests” is a deliberately broad umbrella, fusing two constituencies that don’t always share priorities: voters who hear “terrorism” and business leaders who hear “supply chain integrity.” It’s an argument built to travel across committees and cable segments alike, because it frames trade not as an engine of prosperity but as an exposure point - a place where openness becomes vulnerability.
Context matters: post-9/11 politics trained lawmakers to treat logistics as frontline defense, and the modern economy trained them to treat delays as costly. Schwartz threads that needle by implying we can’t afford laxity, but also can’t afford disruption. The quote leverages a quiet fear: globalization has made the border porous in a way passports can’t fix. By focusing on containers - anonymous, massive, routine - she highlights a specifically modern anxiety: the threat hidden inside ordinary commerce.
The intent is straightforward: justify tougher port security, more funding, and more aggressive oversight. The subtext is more interesting. “National and economic interests” is a deliberately broad umbrella, fusing two constituencies that don’t always share priorities: voters who hear “terrorism” and business leaders who hear “supply chain integrity.” It’s an argument built to travel across committees and cable segments alike, because it frames trade not as an engine of prosperity but as an exposure point - a place where openness becomes vulnerability.
Context matters: post-9/11 politics trained lawmakers to treat logistics as frontline defense, and the modern economy trained them to treat delays as costly. Schwartz threads that needle by implying we can’t afford laxity, but also can’t afford disruption. The quote leverages a quiet fear: globalization has made the border porous in a way passports can’t fix. By focusing on containers - anonymous, massive, routine - she highlights a specifically modern anxiety: the threat hidden inside ordinary commerce.
Quote Details
| Topic | Justice |
|---|---|
| Source | Help us find the source |
More Quotes by Allyson
Add to List

