I guess I would say I don't know.
Have you read Taleb's The Black Swan? He has a counterfactual story that is extremely similar (though it uses 9/11); basically there aren't any (even negative) incentives for politicians to push such policies through until after some huge disaster happens.
I haven't read Taleb, but I have heard a few interviews of him where he got the opportunity to outline his ideas.
I think politicians in general have a tendency to overreact to adverse events, and often by doing things that involve signals of reassurance (such as security theatre) rather than steps to fix the problem. I'm open to the possibility that they don't do enough to prevent problems, but as a rule governments are very risk averse entities, usually preoccupied with things that might go wrong.
To whom it may concern:
This thread is for the discussion of Less Wrong topics that have not appeared in recent posts. If a discussion gets unwieldy, celebrate by turning it into a top-level post.
(After the critical success of part II, and the strong box office sales of part III in spite of mixed reviews, will part IV finally see the June Open Thread jump the shark?)