Using an "all hazards" approach will make it less likely to have a political reason. It doesn't really look at the likelihood of a specific event, but the likelihood of common types of hazards. In this case the loss of electricity is the hazard and the cascading effect would still occur no matter if it is man-made or natural disasters. Having a plan for no electricity will get you further than thinking about some low-probability high-impact event. Plus, if you know enough about the low-probability high-impact event you can break it down into it's associated secondary hazards and ask about that. BTW, this is the modern approach to Emergency Management.

The first thing you have to decide is what you will specifically plan for. Low-probability high-impact events are NOT in my plan. Why? Because it's likely there are too many variables for me to plan for, but I can plan for the basics: Shelter, Water, and Food.