I agree with Rahn, but I think his article is too inflammatory to make a difference. I think we need more articles that propose solutions. How can screening be more effective, more efficient, and less degrading? What scientific and statistical evidence do we have to support one approach versus another?

The TSA can take the upper hand with any journalist. They can always claim that they have access to secret information that can never be made public. Just like other failures of government secrecy, we need journalists to break down this secrecy and demonstrate that the Agency is not operating with sensible management, intelligent policymaking, or the use of logic.

There is one point, however, that doesn't require such a scientific analysis. Rahn talks about "former drill sergeants." Although this is an exaggeration, he touches upon a question I often ask myself, "Why must many screeners be on a 'power trip?'" This behavior predates the TSA but that doesn't make it excusable. How is that screeners in other parts of the world can remain polite, using a normal tone of voice, and a friendly, personable demeanor?