Congress Should Abolish TSA And TSA Activities That Have Not Shown Substantial Benefit
You know, like how groping and scanning of passengers by repurposed Cinnabon workers has not led to the catching of a single terrorist?
A Cato Institute report by Chris Edwards calls for privatizing security at airports and turning it over to airports and turning intelligence work over to actual intelligence agencies. You know, the kind with trained agents who operate -- supposedly, anyway -- based on probable cause: reasonable suspicion a person has committed or will commit a crime.
No, flying to see Granny does not suggest a person wants to blow stuff and people up.
Edwards' blog item on this is here, at Cato. An excerpt:
We would be better off without a monolithic federal agency that controls all major aspects of aviation security. Most airports in Europe and Canada use private companies for their passenger and baggage screening. That practice creates a more efficient and innovative security structure, and it allows governments to focus on gathering intelligence and conducting analysis rather than on trying to manage a large workforce.Congress should abolish TSA. The TSA activities that have not shown substantial benefits should be eliminated. Passenger and baggage screening--which represents about two-thirds of TSA's budget--should be moved to the control of airports and opened to competitive private bidding. And the remaining parts of TSA--including intelligence and analysis activities--should be moved to other federal agencies.
Edwards' full analysis is here, in a PDF that comes up as a link (no download). An excerpt of a part that especially concerns me -- about our civil liberties:
Airport Screening and Civil LibertiesAviation screening is an important element of aviation security, but that does not mean that all TSA actions are appropriate. Some TSA practices push the legal boundaries of permissible searches and seizures. Another issue is whether the TSA is using its screening activities to discover evidence of crimes that are beyond the scope of its proper role in aviation security.
The Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution bars unreasonable searches and seizures. With airport searches, individuals do have a reduced expectation of privacy, and federal courts have held that warrantless searches of all passengers prior to boarding are permissible. But some of TSA's current practices, such as full body pat-downs and the use of Advanced Imaging Technology machines, may be over the legal line.
...The intrusiveness of TSA pat-downs has also caused a lot of concern. Americans have been appalled at reported incidents of offensive pat-downs of young children, the disabled, the elderly, and people with medical conditions that require them to wear items such as insulin pumps, urine bags, and adult diapers. In one case, a woman dying of leukemia was taking a trip to Hawaii. She had called the TSA ahead of time to ask about her special needs. But in the airport security line, TSA agents lifted her bandages from recent surgeries, opened her saline bag and contaminated it, and lifted her shirt to examine the feeding tubes she needed to prevent organ failure--all in front of other passengers and after the TSA refused her request for a private screening. Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) and other policymakers have condemned the needless harassment that some passengers have received from the TSA.
Another civil-liberties concern is that the TSA sometimes acts as if it had broad police power outside of its transportation security role. For example, recent sweeps by teams of TSA agents at rail and transit stations have resulted in arrests for minor offenses such as drug possession, and this activity seems to simply duplicate local police functions.
When Americans travel by air, they do not surrender all their privacy, and case law bars TSA airport screeners from looking for evidence of crimes beyond plots against aviation security. Yet TSA seems to have developed mission creep at airport checkpoints.
In 2010, TSA screen- ers scrutinized Kathy Parker while she was departing from the Philadelphia airport.105 Parker was carrying an envelope with $8,000 worth of checks, about which Philadelphia police and TSA screeners interrogated her. They told her that they suspected her of embezzling the money and leaving town in a "divorce situation." Police tried to contact her husband by phone, but they were unsuccessful and eventually released Parker.
Aside from invasions of privacy, the frequent congestion at U.S. airports caused by security procedures has a large cost in terms of wasted time. There are about 740 million passenger flights a year in the United States.107 For example, if a new security procedure adds 10 minutes to each flight, travelers would consume another 123 million hours per year. That is a lot of time that people could have used earning money or en- joying life with their families. Policymakers need to remember that citizens value their time and that unneeded bureaucratic procedures destroy that precious resource.
How do you feel about the pre-911 security process?
NicoleK at November 22, 2013 7:04 AM
Define "substantial benefit." The government might counter that it gives otherwise unemployable douchebags a job, complete with government pension and benefits.
I would tell you that it served to expose terrorist sympathizers like lujlp.
Patrick at November 22, 2013 7:51 AM
And as if the TSA wasn't enough, now it seems the FCC is going to allow inflight cell phone communication.
Ack.
Flynne at November 22, 2013 8:16 AM
Amy Alkon
https://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2013/11/congress-should.html#comment-4070023">comment from NicoleKHow do you feel about the pre-911 security process?
That it was useless against anyone who really wanted to do harm and a violation of our civil liberties.
Amy Alkon
at November 22, 2013 9:16 AM
Amy Alkon
https://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2013/11/congress-should.html#comment-4070025">comment from Flynnenow it seems the FCC is going to allow inflight cell phone communication. Ack.
As if we didn't already have enough reasons to avoid air travel.
Speaking about enabling violence on planes…!
Amy Alkon
at November 22, 2013 9:17 AM
But, Amy, the TSA has shown substantial benefits ... to Congress.
The newly unionized government employees have provided many a pro-union Congressperson with a solid stable of voters.
Congresspeople who are in danger of being portrayed by their opponents as weak on national security can point to their support for TSA security theater as proof of their commitment to law and order, security, and general toughness.
Several hundred thousand people barely qualified to flip burgers are now employed in a high-paying job and will vote for the Congressperson who supports the TSA in order to keep from going back to a minimum wage job.
The rigid and capricious rules have keep the public compliant in the face of ever-increasing government regulations and blinded people to exactly how much control the government has taken of our lives in the past 20-30 years with social programs, security theater, police militarization, and endless regulations governing every aspect of our lives.
And, since Congress does not have to go through the screening process, they get to the plane faster and don't have to wade through hordes of the Great Unwashed at the airport.
Yep, the TSA has been a God-send ... to Congress.
Conan the Grammarian at November 22, 2013 9:29 AM
"I would tell you that it served to expose terrorist sympathizers like lujlp."
And the sycophantic authoritarian lapdog that is Patrick, to whom a brownshirt would have been a valuable government employee working in full accord with the courts.
Funny how that worked out.
Radwaste at November 22, 2013 11:30 AM
By the way: here's Patrick Smith on arming TSA agents.
"First, citizens need to realize that TSA screeners, despite what their blue shirts and silver badges might imply, are not law enforcement officers, and do not have police authority — such as the power to arrest. Deputizing and training even a limited number of these employees to carry and use deadly weapons is granting the agency a power it neither has neither earned nor requires to fulfill its mission."
Fondling a screaming toddler doesn't require anything but mental illness.
Radwaste at November 22, 2013 11:34 AM
Giving credit where it's due, I have to say that Rad's last comment was profoundly sick yet so hilarious.
Patrick at November 22, 2013 2:23 PM
Instead of looking forward to seeing TSA abolished, what we're facing lately is serious mission creep, with TSA and similar ilk invading highways, bus and train stations, even ball parks.
jefe at November 22, 2013 4:59 PM
Patrick,
I want to extend a personal invitation to you to tell me what is wrong with this argument. I want every single fault, wrong headedness, or failure of logic in the following statements.
=================================================
The TSA was not needed one hour and one minute after Tower II was hit!
The paradigm, the norm, the expected, what everyone was taught to do was to sit down, shut up and wait for the plane to land and the negotiations happen. That was the model from before Entebbe and afterward.
The passengers on board did not really know what was about to happen on September 11, 2001 at 8:46:30 when Flight 11 struck Tower I.
Even the passengers on Flight 175 probably didn't realize what was about to happen when they struck Tower II at 9:03:02.
The Pentagon crash of Flight 77 at 9:37:46 may have been still a matter of ignorance.
At 10:03:11 on September 11, 2001, United Airlines Flight 93 crashed after the brave souls counter-attacked and caused the hijackers to crash the plane.
The time difference is 60 minutes and 9 seconds from Tower II being struck to the crash of Flight 93. The shoe bomber and panty bomber were taken down by fellow passengers as well. Recently, JetBlue's Flight 191 pilot was taken down by the passengers once he was out of the cockpit. Additionally how many times have you heard of passengers' concerns and diverted flights?
The TSA is and has always been a joke, no make that a total stupidity, that has wasted our country's fortune going down a rabbit hole.
If you don't believe me look at the 9/11 timeline.
There will never be another 9/11 style attack unless the attackers can arrange planes full of geriatrics, and even then it would be doubtful.
Oh, and someone brought bombs being an issue. If bombs were effective and simple then the Lockerbie bombing would have been repeated multiple times between 21 December 1988 and 11 September 2001. That's 4647 days or 13 years. Where was the TSA in that time? There was one successful bombing that was done in Colombia and two unsuccessful attempts in that time. The bombing in Colombia was a drug dealer assassination and not a terrorist attack.
Basically the normal was used in an abnormal way. Once it was realized it was countered.
=================================================
Jim P. at November 22, 2013 6:35 PM
Patrick,
Crickets.....
Jim P. at November 23, 2013 5:47 AM
You know Patrick, for a guy who claims to ignore me you spend a lot of time fixated on me
lujlp at November 23, 2013 8:46 AM
Patrick,
The crickets are still all I hear.....
Jim P. at November 24, 2013 5:31 AM
Leave a comment