O.K., I'll bite.
The logic doesn´t quite work for me: "...the US government decided to charge this homeland security cost on incoming tourists, even if they don’t benefit from that at all."
The benefit to the tourist is being allowed to visit the U.S.
No one is forcing the tourist to go there. No one is forcing them to buy an airplane ticket, hotel room, rental car, or food, either. If a tourist chooses to visit a place, it is reasonable that they should pay for all that the visit entails.
Cosidering the huge number of illegal aliens already in the U.S., it seems appropriate to try to make some determination about whether a person is likely to overstay their tourist visa prior to allowing them in.
The U.S. is far from the only country doing this, but as the biggest tourist destination, it gets the most attention.
There are plenty of other examples of fees with no apparent immediate benefit. How about airport departure fees? Many times you don't find out about it until you get there, there is no choice in the matter, and it is often to fund future improvements, which you may not benefit from.
Such is the cost of gallivanting about the globe...