Chris Hayes: "I would eliminate the Department of Homeland Security"
Dec 13, 2011, 12:27 pm
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: NW Fla. - VPS, PNS
Programs: DL, NW, HH
Posts: 333
Chris Hayes: "I would eliminate the Department of Homeland Security"
Very interesting video interview with Chris Hayes, host of "Up With Chris Hayes" on MSNBC on Mediaite. The interview consists of some so-called "gotcha" questions that have (according to the article) "famously tripped up some famous conservatives."
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/inside-up...up-weekends/2/
Around 5:30 he is asked "What government agencies would you eliminate?"
In my opinion, he succinctly nails what many of us believe about TSA as well as many of the functions of DHS as a whole. I did my best to transcribe his answer, but it's worth the watch. The first line says it all:
"You know I actually think I would eliminate the Department of Homeland Security. I don't think we need it. I think it was, well, I think it was the wrong reaction to 9/11. (bolding mine)
A lot of the Department of Homeland Security is a reorganization of agencies that exist anyway, things like that have been over disparate agencies. INS, Treasury Department that oversaw Secret Service, etc. ATF, who was also in Treasury, ended up engaged. So there is a certain degree in which is was kind of an org chart move, but what it does is it creates another entrenched bureaucracy that produces more demand for dollars to be spent fundamentally on security, and it contributes to the rapidly escalating amount of resources our country devotes to "security and war" writ large." (bolding mine again)
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/inside-up...up-weekends/2/
Around 5:30 he is asked "What government agencies would you eliminate?"
In my opinion, he succinctly nails what many of us believe about TSA as well as many of the functions of DHS as a whole. I did my best to transcribe his answer, but it's worth the watch. The first line says it all:
"You know I actually think I would eliminate the Department of Homeland Security. I don't think we need it. I think it was, well, I think it was the wrong reaction to 9/11. (bolding mine)
A lot of the Department of Homeland Security is a reorganization of agencies that exist anyway, things like that have been over disparate agencies. INS, Treasury Department that oversaw Secret Service, etc. ATF, who was also in Treasury, ended up engaged. So there is a certain degree in which is was kind of an org chart move, but what it does is it creates another entrenched bureaucracy that produces more demand for dollars to be spent fundamentally on security, and it contributes to the rapidly escalating amount of resources our country devotes to "security and war" writ large." (bolding mine again)
Last edited by breny; Dec 13, 2011 at 12:30 pm Reason: clarification
Dec 13, 2011, 7:19 pm
#3
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 259
Dec 13, 2011, 8:54 pm
#4
Original Member
Join Date: May 1998
Location: PDX
Programs: TSA Refusenik charter member
Posts: 15,978
So there is a certain degree in which is was kind of an org chart move, but what it does is it creates another entrenched bureaucracy that produces more demand for dollars to be spent fundamentally on security, and it contributes to the rapidly escalating amount of resources our country devotes to "security and war" writ large." (bolding mine again)
Thanks for posting, breny. We'll take that glimmer of hope. ^
Dec 13, 2011, 10:22 pm
#5
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Programs: AA Gold AAdvantage Elite, Rapids Reward
Posts: 38,322
Dec 14, 2011, 9:44 am
#6
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 57,583
"You know I actually think I would eliminate the Department of Homeland Security. I don't think we need it. I think it was, well, I think it was the wrong reaction to 9/11. (bolding mine)
A lot of the Department of Homeland Security is a reorganization of agencies that exist anyway, things like that have been over disparate agencies. INS, Treasury Department that oversaw Secret Service, etc. ATF, who was also in Treasury, ended up engaged. So there is a certain degree in which is was kind of an org chart move, but what it does is it creates another entrenched bureaucracy that produces more demand for dollars to be spent fundamentally on security, and it contributes to the rapidly escalating amount of resources our country devotes to "security and war" writ large." (bolding mine again)
Most everyone I know in DC who works for a DHS agency agrees with the above - we need to eliminate the growing DHS HQ bureaucracy, and send the agencies within back to the Departments they came from. That would be huge reduction in the nation's budget deficit, and stop many of the mindless, stupid and ineffective policies that eminate from the Nebraska Avenue Complex.
TSA? shut it down entirely, and build a new, lean and effective supervisory apparatus in Transportation.
Dec 14, 2011, 11:36 am
#7
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 642
^^ x 1000
Most everyone I know in DC who works for a DHS agency agrees with the above - we need to eliminate the growing DHS HQ bureaucracy, and send the agencies within back to the Departments they came from. That would be huge reduction in the nation's budget deficit, and stop many of the mindless, stupid and ineffective policies that eminate from the Nebraska Avenue Complex.
TSA? shut it down entirely, and build a new, lean and effective supervisory apparatus in Transportation.
Most everyone I know in DC who works for a DHS agency agrees with the above - we need to eliminate the growing DHS HQ bureaucracy, and send the agencies within back to the Departments they came from. That would be huge reduction in the nation's budget deficit, and stop many of the mindless, stupid and ineffective policies that eminate from the Nebraska Avenue Complex.
TSA? shut it down entirely, and build a new, lean and effective supervisory apparatus in Transportation.