TSA is not the problem...
Nov 30, 2010 | 11:17 pm
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Denton County, TX
Programs: AA Executive Platinum, Hilton Diamond
Posts: 737
TSA is not the problem...
I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that a lot of us probably feel that TSA per se is not the problem. The problem is that we have a renegade agency that was created hastily as a knee-jerk reaction to 9/11 and is being administered in a dictatorial way and by leaders who are not in touch with the balances between security and freedom. This agency has not been held to proper channels of accountability and that is why there is now pushback on them.
I will speak for myself here:
I have nothing against security. I would like to know that when I board a plane, that I can expect a reasonable amount of screening has been done to ensure that we are safe. I certainly don't want anarchy and I hope that we never see another 9/11. But at the same time, we cannot have an agency that is unchecked by the balances of power that exist in this country. TSA and DHS must be held accountable to the American people and there must be strict Congessional oversight with harsh penalties for failure to comply with pre-agreed upon standards. Without this, you have a terrific recipe for abuse of power which is exactly what is occuring.
*Note: I specifcially use the word "agreed-upon". This is not a dictatorship. TSA cannot be allowed to make up the rules as they go and foist them upon us without proper review and oversight. Again, this is what has happened and this is why we have more and more people saying, "wait a second, someting smells fishy here".
I will speak for myself here:
I have nothing against security. I would like to know that when I board a plane, that I can expect a reasonable amount of screening has been done to ensure that we are safe. I certainly don't want anarchy and I hope that we never see another 9/11. But at the same time, we cannot have an agency that is unchecked by the balances of power that exist in this country. TSA and DHS must be held accountable to the American people and there must be strict Congessional oversight with harsh penalties for failure to comply with pre-agreed upon standards. Without this, you have a terrific recipe for abuse of power which is exactly what is occuring.
*Note: I specifcially use the word "agreed-upon". This is not a dictatorship. TSA cannot be allowed to make up the rules as they go and foist them upon us without proper review and oversight. Again, this is what has happened and this is why we have more and more people saying, "wait a second, someting smells fishy here".
Dec 1, 2010 | 12:33 am
#2
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: S24
Posts: 106
I've had a ringside seat Inside the Beltway on policy development ever since 9/11, and I've never been more concerned for the future of our free society than I am today.
For the first few years after 9/11, we were all on a mission to make sure the loopholes in our legal, regulatory and operational structure could not be easily pierced. For those first few years, we collectively acted in good faith as we tried to balance the need to provide better security with the Constitution. It is a little known fact (known only inside DOJ, in fact) that when one post 9/11 proposal was sent to the AG, Ashcroft rejected it, saying, I told you to be creative, but within what the Constitution allows.
Somehow, around 2007-8, we started to lose focus, and I'm not sure why. The only thing I can put my finger on is that was about the same time that the DHS HQ structure reached critical mass, along with their budget. Congress was throwing money at them, and they were hiring permanent staff and contractors by the bushel, and all of that money had to produce something. Starting in 2007, and continuing onto today, the DHS leviathan churns out policy proposal after policy proposal. Most of them are harmless, but many of them are misguided "WE MUST DO SOMETHING ABOUT THE _____ THREAT OR PEOPLE WILL DIE" variety. The rest of us in the interagency push back, but frankly, we're on the defensive. I routinely attend meetings at the EEOB where DHS will send a half dozen people to harangue us on the issue du jour, leaving the rest of us who staff meetings with but one or two people to fight back.
Not everyone inside DHS is a security fanatic, but there is no lonelier person in Washington than a DHS employee who tries to remind his/her colleagues that there is this small item called the Constitution to consider.
Roger Cohen, writing in the NYT said it best.
For the first few years after 9/11, we were all on a mission to make sure the loopholes in our legal, regulatory and operational structure could not be easily pierced. For those first few years, we collectively acted in good faith as we tried to balance the need to provide better security with the Constitution. It is a little known fact (known only inside DOJ, in fact) that when one post 9/11 proposal was sent to the AG, Ashcroft rejected it, saying, I told you to be creative, but within what the Constitution allows.
Somehow, around 2007-8, we started to lose focus, and I'm not sure why. The only thing I can put my finger on is that was about the same time that the DHS HQ structure reached critical mass, along with their budget. Congress was throwing money at them, and they were hiring permanent staff and contractors by the bushel, and all of that money had to produce something. Starting in 2007, and continuing onto today, the DHS leviathan churns out policy proposal after policy proposal. Most of them are harmless, but many of them are misguided "WE MUST DO SOMETHING ABOUT THE _____ THREAT OR PEOPLE WILL DIE" variety. The rest of us in the interagency push back, but frankly, we're on the defensive. I routinely attend meetings at the EEOB where DHS will send a half dozen people to harangue us on the issue du jour, leaving the rest of us who staff meetings with but one or two people to fight back.
Not everyone inside DHS is a security fanatic, but there is no lonelier person in Washington than a DHS employee who tries to remind his/her colleagues that there is this small item called the Constitution to consider.
Roger Cohen, writing in the NYT said it best.
I dont doubt the patriotism of the Americans involved in keeping the country safe, nor do I discount the threat, but I am sure of this: The unfettered growth of the Department of Homeland Security and the T.S.A. represent a greater long-term threat to the prosperity, character and wellbeing of the United States than a few madmen in the valleys of Waziristan or the voids of Yemen.
Dec 1, 2010 | 6:09 am
#3
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: BWI, PHL, IAD
Programs: Marriott LT Titanium; Mileage Plus 1K, 1 MM; Global Entry
Posts: 1,544
I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that a lot of us probably feel that TSA per se is not the problem. The problem is that we have a renegade agency that was created hastily as a knee-jerk reaction to 9/11 and is being administered in a dictatorial way and by leaders who are not in touch with the balances between security and freedom. This agency has not been held to proper channels of accountability and that is why there is now pushback on them.
I will speak for myself here:
I have nothing against security. I would like to know that when I board a plane, that I can expect a reasonable amount of screening has been done to ensure that we are safe. I certainly don't want anarchy and I hope that we never see another 9/11. But at the same time, we cannot have an agency that is unchecked by the balances of power that exist in this country. TSA and DHS must be held accountable to the American people and there must be strict Congessional oversight with harsh penalties for failure to comply with pre-agreed upon standards. Without this, you have a terrific recipe for abuse of power which is exactly what is occuring.
*Note: I specifcially use the word "agreed-upon". This is not a dictatorship. TSA cannot be allowed to make up the rules as they go and foist them upon us without proper review and oversight. Again, this is what has happened and this is why we have more and more people saying, "wait a second, someting smells fishy here".
I will speak for myself here:
I have nothing against security. I would like to know that when I board a plane, that I can expect a reasonable amount of screening has been done to ensure that we are safe. I certainly don't want anarchy and I hope that we never see another 9/11. But at the same time, we cannot have an agency that is unchecked by the balances of power that exist in this country. TSA and DHS must be held accountable to the American people and there must be strict Congessional oversight with harsh penalties for failure to comply with pre-agreed upon standards. Without this, you have a terrific recipe for abuse of power which is exactly what is occuring.
*Note: I specifcially use the word "agreed-upon". This is not a dictatorship. TSA cannot be allowed to make up the rules as they go and foist them upon us without proper review and oversight. Again, this is what has happened and this is why we have more and more people saying, "wait a second, someting smells fishy here".
Dec 1, 2010 | 7:53 am
#4
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 30,952
If TSA is not the problem then what is?
It is the whole of TSA, the way they operate, the secrecy, the lack of concern for travelers that is the problem.
TSA leadership and the workers at the airport all comprise TSA and the whole organization is a problem.
It is the whole of TSA, the way they operate, the secrecy, the lack of concern for travelers that is the problem.
TSA leadership and the workers at the airport all comprise TSA and the whole organization is a problem.
Dec 1, 2010 | 8:01 am
#5
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2001
Location: MSY; 2-time FT Fantasy Football Champ, now in recovery.
Programs: AA lifetime GLD; UA Silver; Marriott LTTE; IHG Plat,
Posts: 14,813
But at the same time, we cannot have an agency that is unchecked by the balances of power that exist in this country. TSA and DHS must be held accountable to the American people and there must be strict Congessional oversight with harsh penalties for failure to comply with pre-agreed upon standards. Without this, you have a terrific recipe for abuse of power which is exactly what is occuring.
I'd probably agree with that. TSA certainly seems unlikely to fix itself, and neither Bush nor Obama have done much of anything to rein them in.
Dec 1, 2010 | 8:31 am
#7
Join Date: Jun 2009
Programs: SSSSS
Posts: 867
1. No SDs longer than 6 months without an NPRM
2. No hiding behind SSI for will-o-the-wisp procedures and rule making.
The administrative procedures act, while not perfect, forces agencies to justify to the public, their actions and rules. They have to respond to comments and some agencies have amended or dropped rulemaking when opposition was too great, including the TSA (witness the ill-considered LASP).
This means they operate in the clear light of day. Not behind secret directives, based on secret information, by rules largely hidden from the view of those directly affected.
I heard on NPR this morning one commenter on the wiki-leaks release that the State Department and the US government has apparently been permeated with elevated concerns about security and that has been a focus of some of the data in foreign policy. While they didn't say it, the commenter almost implied there was a tone of national security paranoia in the revealed documents.
I expect front line security managers to be paranoid. I also expect their masters to be bring balance, which is clearly not happening in DHS/TSA.
Dec 1, 2010 | 8:36 am
#8
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: where the chile is hot
Programs: AA,RR,NW,Delta ,UA,CO
Posts: 48,880
TSA (the current organization) is the problem.
I think it would be more accurate to say 'concern for rational aviation security is not the problem'.
I think it would be more accurate to say 'concern for rational aviation security is not the problem'.
Dec 1, 2010 | 11:38 am
#9
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: LAS
Posts: 1,279
The implication that there is one problem and one organization that is "the" problem is incorrect, IMO. TSA is certainly A problem, but they are not alone. The current and previous Administration are also problems because they created and continue to feed this monster and use fear to grow more powerful and spend more money. Congress is a problem because they fail to provide essential oversight. The airlines don't care about our rights as long as the theater doesn't hurt profits.
But, most importantly, the American public is to blame. Currently about 80% of the TSA subjects believe the theater is necessary and effective based on NOTHING but trust in the government (FT really needs a puking smiley). They allow themselves to be manipulated with fear and believe what they believe based on emotion rather than logic. They believe the doom and gloom boogieman stories. They believe TSA is effective, even though they think every other government agency is not. They dismiss the disgusting behavior. They don't care that the TSA has essentially no oversight. They ignore the backroom and insider deals making people rich. They don't care how much it costs. They don't care how degrading it is. In short, they want to feel safe and will give up their essential liberties and all of their money to achieve the safe feeling (sounds kinda like a drug addict, doesn't it?). Yet, they won't think twice about driving.
But, most importantly, the American public is to blame. Currently about 80% of the TSA subjects believe the theater is necessary and effective based on NOTHING but trust in the government (FT really needs a puking smiley). They allow themselves to be manipulated with fear and believe what they believe based on emotion rather than logic. They believe the doom and gloom boogieman stories. They believe TSA is effective, even though they think every other government agency is not. They dismiss the disgusting behavior. They don't care that the TSA has essentially no oversight. They ignore the backroom and insider deals making people rich. They don't care how much it costs. They don't care how degrading it is. In short, they want to feel safe and will give up their essential liberties and all of their money to achieve the safe feeling (sounds kinda like a drug addict, doesn't it?). Yet, they won't think twice about driving.
Dec 1, 2010 | 11:51 am
#10
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 70
I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that a lot of us probably feel that TSA per se is not the problem. The problem is that we have a renegade agency that was created hastily as a knee-jerk reaction to 9/11 and is being administered in a dictatorial way and by leaders who are not in touch with the balances between security and freedom.
snipped for space
snipped for space
Dec 1, 2010 | 12:42 pm
#11
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: BWI, PHL, IAD
Programs: Marriott LT Titanium; Mileage Plus 1K, 1 MM; Global Entry
Posts: 1,544
I read the OP to suggest that there has to be some level of security at the airport, and that security will be the responsibility of an agency called TSA. So, I think he was suggesting that the existance of TSA is not the problem, the way it is being run (or, more correctly, allowed to run amok) is the problem.
Dec 1, 2010 | 10:46 pm
#13
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,051
I read the OP to suggest that there has to be some level of security at the airport, and that security will be the responsibility of an agency called TSA. So, I think he was suggesting that the existance of TSA is not the problem, the way it is being run (or, more correctly, allowed to run amok) is the problem.
Dec 2, 2010 | 12:37 am
#14
Original Poster
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Denton County, TX
Programs: AA Executive Platinum, Hilton Diamond
Posts: 737
Hi folks,
Yes, actually I agree with everyone so far. What I meant to say was that "security procedures" in and of themselves are not the problem. TSA *could* be a productive and important agency if it were administered and supervised appropriately and within the legal context of the laws of our nation.
Yes, actually I agree with everyone so far. What I meant to say was that "security procedures" in and of themselves are not the problem. TSA *could* be a productive and important agency if it were administered and supervised appropriately and within the legal context of the laws of our nation.