BooneCountyGirl
skyler the weird
Rick Barton
Joe
Wiley Coyote
CLT Should KO TSA
John Pistole, head of the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), this week defended recent moves by the agency to conduct more invasive security screenings at our nation’s airports. In particular he defended the controversial full-body scanners that can search for items under passengers’ clothing and the more-aggressive pat-downs that involve the touching of genitalia of passengers who opt-out of the full-body scans.
The debate has stimulated an age-old discussion on the tensions between liberty and security, as these two competing editorials indicate. Other rights have also come into focus, such as whether First Amendment religious rights trump these new TSA procedures or whether the procedures constitute a violation of Fourth Amendment search and seizure protections.
As important as these moral, legal and philosophical questions are, what is sometimes lost in this furor is that there are practical alternatives to current practices. The TSA would like you to think that the only alternative is to drive, or take trains or busses. However, as Rep. John Mica (R-FL), the likely next Chairman of the U.S. House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, pointed out today, airports can opt-out of using TSA for airport screening. And they should.
Since the TSA was founded in 2001, the agency has grown to over 56,000 employees with an annual budget of over $8 billion. Approximately 71% of that funding goes directly to aviation security at over 450 U.S. airports. One of the biggest complaints has been that the TSA engages in security theater rather than providing legitimate security. But the recent encroachment on civil liberties, religious beliefs and violation of search and seizure provisions has caused many to call for the replacement of TSA.
As of 2003, airports have been under no legal obligation to contract with TSA. Now, due to an outcry by the public, it seems airports are weighing their options. Just today, it was announced that Orlando’s Sanford International Airport is considering contracting with a private firm. Macon City Councilor and the Senior Editor at RedState.com has called for replacing TSA at the Georgia city’s airport.
In 2006, the Heritage Foundation encouraged policy makers to rethink airport security. Among their recommendations is that the TSA “get out of the screening business” instead certifying private security companies. Airlines and airports already have the monetary incentive to provide a safe travel experience for passengers, as Art Carden of Forbes argues. In addition, security companies who are forced to compete for lucrative contracts would seek to employ the best possible personnel, while developing new technology that protects that public and preserves their rights.
Some on the left have already started to push back on calls for airport screening privatization, pointing to failures by private firms before 9/11. Yet, in this post-9/11 world, can we really do any worse than TSA perceptions of security, i.e. security theater, and the systematic treatment of all U.S. citizens as criminals? No. Therefore, we must seek reasonable alternatives. The most viable is for airports across the country to opt-out of the TSA and replace them with privately incentivized firms who are carefully and consistently evaluated.
Here in the greater Charlotte area, Charlotte-Douglas International Airport contracts with TSA and with it has come enhanced pat-downs and full-body scanners. To date, however, there have been no recent public comments from airport CEO Jerry Orr about TSA’s new procedures and the subsequent public response.
Area residents should contact Jerry Orr’s office and request public comment and insist that Charlotte Douglas International Airport takes the lead on respecting the rights the citizens it serves by opting out of TSA. Orr can be reached at (704)-359-4000 and by e-mail at jorr@ci.charlotte.nc.us. In addition, citizens should contact Mayor Anthony Foxx and the Charlotte City Council and tell them that it is time to privatize Charlotte’s airport screening.
We need your help! If you like PunditHouse, please consider donating to us. Even $5 a month can make a difference!
Short URL: http://pundithouse.com/?p=4228
Recent Posts by Douglas Price |
Great column, Douglas! I agree Charlotte should kick the TSA out, if for no other reason than the principle of the matter. I wonder, though, would the private security firm have to abide by the repugnant TSA screening protocols? If so, it’s, “meet the new boss, same as the old boss”. However, for the principle of the matter (smaller federal government), I’m all for it either way. Great read!
Like or Dislike:
4 
0
The answer to this is to get rid of TSA altogether. Matthew is right to be skeptical though…if the government demands x-rays and groping then x-rays and groping we will have, even without the TSA. The whole thing boils down to the 4th Amendment and whether or not the Federal government has the right to basically punish innocent civilians (through demeaning procedures, search and seizure) for the crimes of some terrorists. Has anyone noticed that we are being demeaned in order to placate some Al Qaeda insanity? Who has grounds to sue the Feds over this?
And will that stop them?? There is something really wrong with this picture. It is not about safety. I think it is one more assault on the Constitution and private citizens. Maybe yet another test to see how far they can push Americans into submission. There is more at stake than we see on the surface…
Thanks for the information, Douglas….
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
If you think Jerry Orr is going to recommend anything which might possibly upset someone higher up in the government bureaucracy than he is think again. Orr runs a good ship, but Orr is not going to be a leader.
Additionally, Charlotte should sell the airport. The proceeds would be enough to pay off all Charlotte bonds and thus lower the taxes on the citizenry. We won’t have that, the chamber is afraid and too many bureaucrats might actually have to work for a living.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
Just because Orr is extremely unlikely to do something is no reason not to pester the crap out of him about it. There needs to be a price for not doing the right thing, even if it’s annoyance.
In the end, though, we as consumers can vote with our feet. I say we just flat-out refuse to fly until this is rectified, and if we do have to fly, we all force them to do the pat-down and make it as unpleasant for the government molesters as we possibly can.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
There are currently are US airports with private security. SFO (San Fransisco International) is TeamSFO. MCI (Kansas City International) also has a private contractor.
Since they are forced to follow TSA protocols they are often WORSE. They are too afraid of getting in trouble with the TSA to actually provide effective security.
ID does not = security. there is no difference between a 1 liter baggie of liquids and unlimited liquids. Shoes are not the enemy.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
And I should add that I’m against this whole “guilty until proven innocent” and I throw up in my mouth every time an infrequent flyer says “i see they have those new machines. I can’t wait to go through it. Anything for safety.” What they are really saying is “you know what, I just may have a knife hidden on me” otherwise WHY would you let someone treat you like a criminal?
Like or Dislike:
3 
0
Interesting column, but so lacking in legal facts I don’t know where to start. Okay, first, with respect to pat-downs, I suggest you Google “United States v. Aukai” and read it, a decision written en banc by the 9th Circuit in 2007, concerning the legality of TSA’s minimally-intrusive constitutionally reasonable administrative searches.
Now, what is the difference between TSA agents and private security guards at airports? None, since they all have to adhere to TSA security guidelines. The airports with private security must perform the same new standard patdowns as the government agents. Are those private guards also “molesting” alarming passengers? Aren’t these guards also performing “security theatre”?
Look, just admit that you folks don’t want any security whatsoever at the airports. You don’t want to be “hassled” at the checkpoint. And, you really want to live in a pre-9/11 bubble. Totally forget about 9/11 and the thousands who died because careless private security guards did not do their tasks well.
You folks seem to forget that terrorists are devising ways to kill Americans. Remember the shoebomber, Richard Reid? That’s why travelers take off their shoes.
Have you folks heard of Daniel Patrick Boyd? How about Adam Gadahn or John Walker Lindh? Yeah, American supporters of Islamic terrorism. Think profiling folks of middle eastern looks is the answer? Al Qaeda is recruiting fair-skinned Americans and Europeans to do their dirty deeds.
I think you folks need to wise up. TSA is not The Enemy. They are your first line of defense in air travel.
Like or Dislike:
0 
5
If conducting virtual full-body stripdowns, forcing cancer survivors to remove prosthetic breasts, and genital groping is your idea of ‘minimally-intrusive constitutionally reasonable administrative searches’ … I’ve got nowhere to go with that.
The TSA is an agent of the government, which makes its main interest the acquisition, expansion and exercise of power, versus a private security contractor whose main interest is profit derived from efficiency, productivity and accountability – three traits sorely lacking in the TSA’s unwieldy, 67,000+ sprawl of bureaucracy. Let’s toss in customer satisfaction just for kicks.
Even working under the same security protocols and mandates, private contractors can provide better service at a better price through local control and supervision. That’s why airports like Orlando-Sanford, among many others, are already looking in that direction and why Rep. John Mica, one of the authors of the original TSA bill, is encouraging airports to opt out of the TSA.
People want security-screening that produces effective results, similar to what El Al airlines uses in Israeli, where passengers are observed, profiled and questioned by trained professionals, without having their junk groped or their shoes removed.
The TSA’s version of El Al comes with a clever acronym – SPOT (Screening Passengers by Observation Techniques) – and wholly predictable results. They’ve hired and deployed about 3,000 so-called behavior detection officers “without first validating the scientific basis for identifying suspicious passengers in an airport environment,” according to a GAO report. “TSA is experiencing implementation challenges, including not fully utilizing the resources it has available to systematically collect and analyze the information obtained by BDOs on passengers who may pose a threat to the aviation system.”
The annual cost of the SPOT program, by the way, rolled in at $212 million this year and is expected to top $1.2 billion over the next five years.
Yet since the program’s inception, at least 17 suspected terrorists have slipped through SPOT airports on 24 different occasions, including Times Square would-be bomber Faisal Shahzad, who was able to board a plane despite being on the terrorist no-fly watchlist and JFK’s participation in the SPOT program.
That’s our ‘first line of defense in air travel’?
Wonderful.
Like or Dislike:
4 
1
it’s sobering to consider what is so obvious to thinking folks is defended with such hubris.be sure to read the last line of the essay;
http://www.lewrockwell.com/mccarthy/mccarthy12.1.html
Like or Dislike:
2 
0
Mark,
So, in your eyes, the profit factor is far more important than the actual security of passengers? If so, why don’t cities privatize their police force? Why won’t the government privatize the military? Save us all hundreds of billions of dollars in the process.
Dude, do explain the “efficiency, productivity and accountability” part of your argument.
Listen up, with all those security cameras above the checkpoint, any TSO caught, in your word, “groping” would be investigated, disciplined if not outright fired and possibly federally indicted for battery or assault.
So far, TSA has publicly aired videos of cases in which passengers outright lied to TSA and the press over their treatments by TSA. This entire matter is being overblown by bloviators who have absolutely no understanding of security.
Is there room for improvement within TSA? Yes. Should we profile? Damn right. Should we not check everybody at the checkpoint? NO WAY!!!
Hey, care to know how many guns, knives and machetes artfully concealed in carry-on bags were caught by TSA-Charlotte last year? Oh, but you’re worried that TSA hasn’t captured any terrorists. Listen up, TSA’s job at the airports is to deny entrance to terrorists by finding those weapons and explosives. It’s the job of the military, intelligence and law enforcement to capture and/or kill those terrorists.
There are about 420 airports using TSA agents while only 17 have gone private. I think it’s gonna be a while before you see the private contractors actually control a majority of the airports in this country.
Anyway, I see that you avoided discussing US v. Aukai (2007) 9th Circuit. Why? Cat got your tongue?
Lastly, do answer my query: What is the difference between TSA and private contractors given they both have to adhere to TSA security guidelines? Stop bloviating!
Fact is, there is no difference. God bless.
Like or Dislike:
0 
2
First line of defense against what exactly. Fear of flying. The link supplied by Hal is illuminating.
More people die in cars – etc.
Stopping control of the aircraft – putting in the secure cockpit doors would seem to eliminate the ability of the aircraft to be taken over. Guns with pilots helps at that point. We border on the ridiculous. But hey, anything to help government employment numbers.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
Discussing a court ruling is really an exercise in futility. The courts decide what they decide based on what? Certainly it is not the constitution. To quote:
“I call the present system ‘Post–Constitutional America.’ As I sometimes put it, the U.S. Constitution poses no serious threat to our form of government.”
– Joseph Sobran, http://www.sobran.com/articles/tyranny.shtml.
Like or Dislike:
2 
0
Lewis: To discuss US v. Aukai may be an exercise in futility for you, but the points laid out by the 9th is very telling. You may not want to discuss it, but it’s been upheld. That’s the bottom line.
As for secure cockpits and pilots possessing guns are two very critical security features to prevent hijackings. But those two features do not prevent planes from exploding 33,000 feet caused by terrorists strapped with C4, TATP or PETN.
Did you think of that?
Like or Dislike:
0 
1
My point was and remains that anything the courts decide is not worthy of discussion unless we are discussing how the government is using the courts to further erode the constitution and pretend legitimacy in the abuse of our lives. To pretend they have legitimacy is to give them legitimacy.
C4 is a wonderful thing. One can only suppose your objection is that it might be used against you instead of some Afghan tribesman. Every day brings risks. I am not so afraid of terrorists as I am my own government. Without fail it abuses me, steals the products of my work, limits my freedom and pays, with my money, those it chooses. You advocate a continued loss of freedom for ‘safety’s’ sake. I advocate freedom and personal responsibility.
And this: After living under our government, why should I possibly be afraid of the occassional terrorist? Read Kafka, The Trial. I have friends in jail now who fill the description of the hero in that book. How many innocents have the police killed – just in Charlotte- and nothing happens to the police?
No, I’m not afraid. Sorry you live in fear.
Like or Dislike:
2 
0
Lewis: I can certainly understand your frustration with government and the way it spends the peoples’ money. I agree with you. I also agree the courts have been used to promote things we think are not constitutional. However, when it comes to national security, when it comes to the safety of the American people, I’m a realist.
Terrorism is a real threat, my friend. Islamic terrorism is not a joke and is something we must never take lightly. We have to be on top of it. I do not want to see Americans victimized by this terror. I do not want to see another airplane hijacked or explode miles above our heads.
You call this the occassional terror. Consider yourself lucky our brave men and women in the military, law enforcement and intelligence are doing all they can to prevent further acts of terror on the mainland.
Be well.
Like or Dislike:
0 
2
Terrorism by its nature is occasional. One of the purposes of terrorism is to cause government to become so onerous that the people turn against government. So by instituting more and stricter regulations and invasive procedures the terrorists have accomplished one of their goals.
What the military, intelligence and law enforcement do otherwise has not been a part of this discussion, nor should they be lumped together as if part of the same group. The military is generally of honorable tradition and action, and deserve the people’s thanks for doing things we might find distasteful. Those of intelligence, less so. Law enforcement – they are part of the problem and too often prove to be only friends to themselves and their patrons, not the people.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0