Following the murder of a retired politician last week, the United Kingdom is debating the security measures provided to its politicians. Reform Party leader Nigel Farage has pushed hard for improved security, complaining that current provisions are woefully inadequate. He is correct, although his party’s solution to provide full-time protection to politicians is unfunded. Still, entering office on Monday, the new prime minister, Andy Burnham, should act with urgency to remedy the situation.Ann Widdecombe was a retired Conservative Party politician who had previously served as a government minister during the 1990s. A regular guest on daytime television and political affairs shows, Widdecombe was widely liked for her irreverent, old-school personality. A 28-year-old man has been arrested on suspicion of her politically motivated murder. This assassination should be a wake-up call for the U.K.The first issue is an outdated, cost-saving approach to security. The U.K. revels in avoiding the kind of encompassing security bubble that often surrounds U.S. politicians. And it’s true, some U.S. politicians receive wholly excessive security measures that do nothing but burn taxpayer dollars. Why does the mayor of Chicago need a security detail larger than those of many heads of state? Why do non-national security-related Cabinet secretaries have two vehicle motorcades with police escorts? Former Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt was notorious for his outsize security detail, for example. Indeed, the contrast between U.S. protective security tactics and those of the U.K. is truly striking. Consider the contrast in security that King Charles III receives in the U.K. and what he received during his recent visit to the United States.