Checkpoints and Borders Policy Debate - Gallup: "Americans' Views of TSA More Positive Than Negative"

Read it (http://www.gallup.com/poll/156491/Americans-Views-TSA-Positive-Negative.aspx) and weep...

PRINCETON, NJ -- Despite recent negative press, a majority of Americans, 54%, think the U.S. Transportation Security Administration is doing either an excellent or a good job of handling security screening at airports. At the same time, 41% think TSA screening procedures are extremely or very effective at preventing acts of terrorism on U.S. airplanes, with most of the rest saying they are somewhat effective.

And...

Just over half of Americans report having flown at least once in the past year. These fliers have a slightly better opinion of the job TSA is doing than those who haven't flown. Fifty-seven percent of those who have flown at least once and 57% of the smaller group who have flown at least three times have an excellent or good opinion of the TSA's job performance. That compares with 52% of those who have not flown in the past year.

There is little difference in opinions about the effectiveness of TSA's screening procedures by flying status; between 40% and 42% of non-fliers, as well as of those who have flown at least once and those who have flown at least three times, believe the procedures are at least very effective.

Buried beneath everything - you have to open the pdf attachment - are the statistics of the self-reported flying records of the 1,014 adults actually polled: :rolleyes:

How many air trips, if any, have you taken on a commercial airliner in the past twelve months — counting each round trip as one trip?

None 48%
1-2 – 27%
3-4 – 13%
5 or more – 12%

Badly flawed poll.

Is it so hard to limit the poll to folks who have actually flown within the last year? Better yet, to folks who have flown at least twice in the last year?

Badly flawed poll.

Is it so hard to limit the poll to folks who have actually flown within the last year? Better yet, to folks who have flown at least twice in the last year?

Indeed! Let me try out my rusty math on my trusty calculator to translate the % into the numbers of the 1,014 adults polled:

How many air trips, if any, have you taken on a commercial airliner in the past twelve months — counting each round trip as one trip?

None 48% = 487
1-2 – 27% = 274
3-4 – 13% = 132
5 + – 12% = 122

The total is very slightly off due to rounding but it's easy to get the idea. Even if you include those who claim they flew three flights or more, the results are based on a total number of about 254 "experienced" air travelers.

And Gallup's statement that "These fliers have a slightly better opinion of the job TSA is doing than those who haven't flown" shows there were few if any FTers polled.

Any guesses how soon Blogdad Bob will be shouting from the mountaintop?

So, only 57% of people who don't fly often enough to even call themselves travelers think TSA is just great?

That's about like me saying that I think that some local sheriff in the middle of North Dakota is doing a fabulous job.

So again, how many acts of terrorism has TSA thwarted in it's entire history?

Even then, 54% is hardly a ringing endorsement. A majority; just.

To quote Big Dick (Cheney): "So?"

I agree, the poll is extremely flawed. If they only polled people who have flown multiple times somewhat recently and had to go through body scanners, I think the results would be a lot different.

I agree, the poll is extremely flawed. If they only polled people who have flown multiple times somewhat recently and had to go through body scanners, I think the results would be a lot different.

Except that, they did, and it wasn't. Did you see these two paragraphs?


Just over half of Americans report having flown at least once in the past year. These fliers have a slightly better opinion of the job TSA is doing than those who haven't flown. Fifty-seven percent of those who have flown at least once and 57% of the smaller group who have flown at least three times have an excellent or good opinion of the TSA's job performance. That compares with 52% of those who have not flown in the past year.

There is little difference in opinions about the effectiveness of TSA's screening procedures by flying status; between 40% and 42% of non-fliers, as well as of those who have flown at least once and those who have flown at least three times, believe the procedures are at least very effective.


Gallup is saying that people who have flown between 1 and 3 times in the past 12 months have a better opinion of TSA than those who have never flown.

They also specifically say there is little difference in opinions about the effectiveness of TSA's screening between non-fliers and fliers.

Disagreeing with the results of the poll does not meet the qualification of "flawed."

Yes, they didn't report on the results of those who flew 5+ times a year, and I would've liked to have seen those results. But their study was not "What do people who fly an abnormally high amount think of TSA?" It was "What does the average American think of TSA?"

Personally, I find the poll extremely useful. If you want to convince average Americans that TSA needs to be changed, this poll is a pretty good place to start figuring out how to do it.

The poll asked the wrong questions.

How effective do you think the TSA’s screening procedures are at preventing acts of terrorism on U.S. airplanes – extremely effective, very effective, somewhat effective, not too effective or not effective at all?

There have been no successful attacks on planes since the TSA was formed, so yes, by tautology, its procedures have been effective. Just as I can say that daily prayers for safe flights have been effective, or that my pet rock has been effective at keeping planes safe.

The better question would have been: "Would you feel safe flying if the security checkpoints were like those pre-TSA, with just metal detectors and bag x-rays? If not, do you feel that the changes the TSA brought to the checkpoints have thwarted attacks that otherwise would have been perpetrated?"

But that's a lot of words for a phone survey, and requires some, well, thought.

I agree, the poll is extremely flawed. If they only polled people who have flown multiple times somewhat recently and had to go through body scanners, I think the results would be a lot different.

Maybe they should just do a poll of the 1% (a total guess) of the people that opt out and then you will all see results that you agree with.

In my company there are at least 25 people that I talk to weekly that have over 50 segments already this year....not one single person opts out.

I often talk to people on planes (I have 110 segments already this year) about opting out, I have yet to talk to anyone that does.

Based on my flying this year plus almost 200 segments last year I have seen a total of two people opt out in security lines with me and both were pregnant.

Bottom line is the members that post here are minuscule percentage of the people that actually fly and if you want to opt out, go for it, I personally don't and will never do it.

Bottom line is the members that post here are minuscule percentage of the people that actually fly and if you want to opt out, go for it, I personally don't and will never do it.

You go through backscatter scanners as well as millimeter wave?

The continuing uncertainties about the former's cumulative health effects don't faze you?

You go through backscatter scanners as well as millimeter wave?

The continuing uncertainties about the former's cumulative health effects don't faze you?

Not a bit...just like the uncertainties in cumulative health effects on using a cell phone, or eating red meat or for that matter driving my car to airport to catch a flight.

I respect anyone's rights to opt out if they want...my point is the number of people that actually believe there is a problem is very small compared to the total population that gets on airplanes...to totally slam a poll because the 100 or so people here disagree with it is kind of ridiculous

All the questions are based on the respondents "perception" and "opinion of effectiveness". Perception and effectiveness of what? Making you feel safe or actually being safe? Terrible poll.

Not a bit...just like the uncertainties in cumulative health effects on using a cell phone, or eating red meat or for that matter driving my car to airport to catch a flight.

I respect anyone's rights to opt out if they want...my point is the number of people that actually believe there is a problem is very small compared to the total population that gets on airplanes...to totally slam a poll because the 100 or so people here disagree with it is kind of ridiculous

Big difference: You choose to eat red meat and to talk on a cell phone without a headset. Here the government is forcing you do be exposed to radiation in order to travel around your country (or else face a very invasive frisking).

Besides, this poll was not about AIT. It was about perceptions of "effectiveness" of TSA procedures. What is someone supposed to say, "No, the procedures are ineffective," even though there have been no attacks since the TSA was formed?

Polls can be funny things, and slight wordings in questions can make all the difference. No one is saying that Gallup intentionally worded the questions to evince a positive view of the TSA. But change the wording somewhat and you might get some very different results.

I talk to so many people accross the world.
A lot of them thinks TSA security with all the "personal" oatdowns are ok They feel safe.

When I ask the same people how they would feel if they got groped/touched and screamed at. Or their family.

SUPRISE !

They all say that they will get offended, upset, angry, hurt.
Why!

Cause they are not a terrorist. And that TSA and co. then would be nasty/molesters.
:confused:

With so many Americans not flying and so many Americans paranoid and/or bigoted along one or more lines, the results showing support for the TSA are what I consider to be in the expected range.

As I said before, the real problem with the TSA is rooted in problems with the American public.

I see people opting out all the time, it's rare that I go through a checkpoint where at least one person is opting out in the very brief time that I'm there. I think it's very widespread, at least in the Northeast.

As for the poll, here is the basic question - why did they ask people who haven't flown at all what they think about airport security? They have zero first-hand knowledge, so all they know is what they see in the media or as second-hand information from people who do fly. Again, that is like asking me what I think about some subject that I know nothing about and doesn't affect me in any way, like my opinion on local Indian restaurants or opera or ballet or something. I don't partake in those things, so I couldn't tell you where to go or provide any usable input on you're decision.

Basically, asking people who don't fly what they think of airport security is as useful as asking those same people about heart surgery procedures or quantum physics.

I see people opting out all the time, it's rare that I go through a checkpoint where at least one person is opting out in the very brief time that I'm there. I think it's very widespread, at least in the Northeast.

I honestly can't quite tell what you meant here. Based on this and your other posts, I think you're trying to say "A lot of people are opting out. I see at least one every time I walk through a checkpoint." But what you actually said was "It's rare that I go through a checkpoint and see someone opting out." I'm assuming you meant "It's rare that I go through a checkpoint where I don't see at least one person opting out in the time I'm there."


As for the poll, here is the basic question - why did they ask people who haven't flown at all what they think about airport security?


As I said earlier in the thread, the goal of the poll was not to prove the hypothesis that "frequent fliers hate TSA." The goal was to answer the question "What do *average* Americans think of the TSA?" It's an election year. Average Americans decide on what the major issues are and on who gets elected.

As I imagine most people on FT know, "Average Americans" do not fly.

Again, that is like asking me what I think about some subject that I know nothing about and doesn't affect me in any way.

Congratulations! Now you understand the democratic process.

As for the poll, here is the basic question - why did they ask people who haven't flown at all what they think about airport security? They have zero first-hand knowledge, so all they know is what they see in the media or as second-hand information from people who do fly. Again, that is like asking me what I think about some subject that I know nothing about and doesn't affect me in any way, like my opinion on local Indian restaurants or opera or ballet or something. I don't partake in those things, so I couldn't tell you where to go or provide any usable input on you're decision.
This was my first thought, too, but it depends on the purpose of the poll. Equally, the question being asked: "do you think TSA is effective" vs some of the other options discussed in this thread also depends on the purpose of the poll.

Someone in the gov't who [wishful thinking] wanted to gauge whether TSA was actually effective/popular/reasonable/etc [/wishful thinking] would only poll flyers and give more weight to frequent flyers. (Where, btw, 3x a year is not frequent.) (They would probably ask a different question.)

Someone at the airlines who [wishful thinking] wanted to gauge whether TSA was affecting people's choice of airports/airline/air-vs-train-vs-driving[/wishful thinking] would poll current flyers as well as those who have flown in the past decade but no longer do. (They would certainly ask a different question, too.)

Someone who wanted to figure out whether TSA is an important election issue would poll the general public, regardless of flying experience. And they would ask exactly the question cited in the article. You do the math.

In other words, your local gov't might well ask your opinion - and that of all your neighbors - on Indian restaurants and opera and ballet if they were planning to force out the big Indian restaurant on Main Street to build a civic venue for opera and ballet. ;)

But clearly, the results of this poll - and the implications of its purpose - does not bode well for those who think that TSA can be reformed by changes in the federal gov't. :(

I am a professional analyst. No, not as in Analyze This, but in the generic sense. Many people are, they just do not realize it.

In basic terms what an analyst does is take data, examine the relationships, draw conclusions, check the validity of the conclusions against new data, and in the long term develops a more precise understand of that being analyzed.

At the onset of the formation of the TSA, I supported both its mission and its procedures based on the limited information I had at the time. It was a naive and uniformed opinion, based mostly on faulty information, but it was the view of a lot of people. Yes, some saw through the farce from the start. I was not one of them.

As I traveled and experienced the system, my analyst brain began to take data and process the relationships comparing what I thought to be true to what I found to be true. I was forced to change my understanding of the process little by little as the analysis of real data led to different conclusions. I have slowly come to the conclusions I now have based on a continuous process of taking data and comparing the reality of what I was "measuring" and finding that the relationships only made sense in an understanding that is vastly different than my initial naive and uninformed opinion.

Many people are not analysts and their perceptions continue to be the naive and uninformed ones that were created by the information campaign that was used to inform us of the TSA and its processes when the system was first created. Even people that experience the system over and over will continue in their naive perceptions as they are not analyzing their surroundings while experiencing them.

Frequent flyers knew, prior to 9/11, that airport security wasn't particularly good. Low paid folks at the metal detectors and x-rays, and airline counter people basically asking you if you have a bomb with you. Yet, with all of this, there were no terrorist attacks as a result.

Now, with 9/11, the idea was that if you had better security, it would have stopped the 19 guys from traveling. That's very incorrect, since none of those 19 guys brought anything illegal with them onto those four planes. The public somehow equated box cutters to AK-47s, C-4 explosives, freaking dolphins with freaking lasers on their freaking heads. People could not accept the fact that the box cutters aren't what enabled those guys to hijack the planes. What enable the hijackings was the idea at the time that flight crews and passengers should not resist a hijacking. Let the crazies take over, the pilots fly to Cuba or wherever, and you go from there.

The box cutters allowed the initial violence that led to the flight crews giving up control of the planes, but the solution to that problem wasn't to ban box cutters. The solution was to not give up control of the plane under any circumstances.

That problem has been solved by two things. One, the pilots won't give up the plane, and the cockpit doors have been fortified to give them time to take action to prevent their plane from being taken over. Two, passengers now know to step up and take action if needed.

Now, I don't think box cutters should be banned today, since there are dozens of other things that are perfectly legal to take on a plane that can do as much damage or more. Banning box cutters, and bottle of water, and making people take their shoes and belts off, and checking IDs two times, none of this has prevented a hijacking attempt. What has prevented any attempts there might have been over the last 131 months has been the 180 degree change in attitudes in pilots, flight attendants and passengers as to what will happen if a hijacking attempt is made on a plane.

What enable the hijackings was the idea at the time that flight crews and passengers should not resist a hijacking. Let the crazies take over, the pilots fly to Cuba or wherever, and you go from there...

More precisely, the so-called Common Strategy (http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/911/staff_statements/staff_statement_4.pdf) was promoted by an arm of the federal government, the FAA, based on previous experience.

One of the FAA officials most involved with the Common Strategy in the period leading up to 9/11 described it as an approach dating back to the early 1980s, developed in consultation with the industry and the FBI, and based on the historical record of hijackings. The point of the strategy was to “optimize actions taken by a flight crew to resolve hijackings peacefully” through systematic delay and, if necessary, accommodation of the hijackers...

That would be the same federal government that now demands us to submit ourselves to X-Ray scanners and/or invasive custodial-style searches in order to fly.

1. When did you start commercial air travel?
a. One year ago
b. Five years ago
c. Ten Years ago
d. More than 10 years ago
e. Have never flown

This question would have helped understand satisfaction/dissatisfaction based on when they started. There's no way to determine if any of the respondents have ever experienced the change in intrusiveness that has occurred since Sept 12, 2001. If all you've ever experienced is the post-Cancer Box/grope TSA, you would tend to be satisfied because you've never experienced anything else.

2. Has the TSA had a direct influence on your decisions to travel by air?
a. No -- I fly as much or more than before the TSA came into existence
b. Yes -- I have significantly reduced my annual air travel by using another form of transportation when possible
c. I have stopped flying completely
d. I changed my departure airport to an airport without body scanners
e. I have never flown commercially

This question would have been a good control question because I would expect these answers to correspond to the overall level of satisfaction with the TSA. It would also have disclosed the percentage of respondents who don't fly anymore because of the TSA.

But, I didn't develop the poll.