[QUOTE=RichMSN]I have mixed feelings on this one. I don't believe it'll change the leadership of the TSA now.

Down the road, say after 2008 -- especially if a lot of the incumbants are removed from office and we have a non-GOP Executive Branch, there'll be new politicians in office which may go a different direction.

It's possible to have effective security without the dog and pony show, which is largely political - and being exported to other nations.

The problem is, no one can afford to look soft on terror. You could still be "tough' on terror, but not have the dog and pony show we have now. However, The GOP would attack the Democrats for being soft.

Chertoff and Hawley would be replaced in 2008 provided we have a change in the executive branch which would mean new leadership then. Will there be any changes at some point if this happens? Only time will tell, but I would sincerely hope things can only get better.

SDF_Traveler

Just wait for the system to break down over the holidays. I suspect there's going to be a lot of problems between Thanksgiving and Christmas.

Combine the following together:

1) Long Lines for check-in because reduced airline staffing
2) Full Flights / Delayed Flights / Missed Connections
3) Many travellers unfamiliar with the baggie / liquids rule
4) Long Lines at security
5) Poor Service by the airlines
6) Travellers in a hurry

With respect to #2: ORD, ATL, and the NYC area airports are well beyond capacity as-is. LAX is not only short a runway at the moment, but the TSA is severely understaffed there. Many holiday travellers will be using these airports either for O/D plus connections.

I don't know that all hell will break lose, but I expect there's going to be a lot of problems this holiday season.

[QUOTE=VideoPaul]Vote for who!! The Republicans insisted on creating the TSA screening process and the Democrats insisted on making them federal employees so they could be part of the federal employee union. Were stuck with them forever now. Let's just hope we can keep them from being given control over the lines at the market.

Unfortunately, the TSA is not going away. Those of us on FT are a self-selecting group and have far more interaction with the TSA than the average voter, who sees them as a necessary evil that he/she only interacts with a couple of times per year. It doesn't matter whether the security is for real or for show; the issue of the TSA is way down the priority list of the vast majority of Americans.

Now if we were all to vote Libertarian...

Mike

From a capacity standpoint, there isn't going to be any change. Every flight that I've been on lately has been at least 90% filled to capacity.

That's the thing I laugh and shake my head when I see the TV news doing cutaways from the airports days before Thanksgiving and Christmas. Because there really is little to no difference in capacity around the holiday versus any other time of the year.

There might be one slight difference in that 75% to 80% figure of an average plane's load being Ma and Pa Kettle might be moved up to around 80% to 90%, I would imagine.

I sincerely hope the travels through the "security" lines are hellish. It's about the only way the general public and the TSA MIGHT get it through their heads about this inane policy.

Just a quick note for the OP here.

Don't even bother with the TSA HQ. IF they send you a reply, it's going to be a boilerplate response, complete with as much sympathy that you can draw from a doorknob.

Here's what I would recommend doing: I would find out the name of the FSD and the AFSD at JFK. Complain about your treatment, but BE BRIEF, do not go into a long-winded tangent. Limit the experience to one page if possible.

If you can stomach sinking to their level, include a fib about the screener refusing to identify him or herself. All TSAers at checkpoints are sposed to wear nameplates. Report which lane you went through, and give a physical description of the screener AND supervisor. Remember which date and time you went through as well.

Why do all of this? TSA front-liners do NOT like getting extra attention from management. With the cards stacked completely against the passenger, this is about the only way you can return a favor to them.

Agree, although I would definitely err on the side of accuracy -- i.e.: don't lie. The screener and supervisor will have to do plenty of that themselves to explain this situation away. If you felt too scared or intimidated to ask for names and badge numbers, state that fact. Even if you don't have names, pinning things down to date, time, location (if known) and physical description should be enough. Based on your post, I suspect that this screener and the supervisor who obviously condones and/or rewards this type of behavior are pretty notorious to the FSD.

Added note: This is also the time of year that most government agencies are finalizing yearly evaluation, including bonuses and salary increases, for their employees. Your complaint could be very timely.

Not quite
 

[QUOTE=OneSteve]
Actually, it was the democrats who insisted on creating the TSA including
former South Dakota Senator Tom Daschle and his "you don't professionalize unless you federalize" :rolleyes: comment.

The republicans, unfortunately, went along with the democrats lock, stock and barrel and signed on to the creation of the TSA. In other words,
both major parties share the blame.

You mean the blanket 4% COL increase plus a 4% raise that goes to all but the 0% of TSA folk judged by their superiors to be anything other than "excellent?"

A letter isn't going to do a damn thing. The only thing that might help is to make public the names of the TSA agents and hope that the embarrassment factor is high. How to make the names public is the problem.

[QUOTE=GeneralAviation]No one is blameless .... but some are more to blame than others. That is, one-party domination of the Executive and Legislative branches has, in effect, provided cover for the DHS/TSA idiocy peddled post-DHS/TSA-creation by the appointed leaders of DHS/TSA closely tied to the ruling party. If there was effective political friction (i.e., not single party domination of two branches of government involved in this nonsense), then political "gotcha-ya" would come into play and that would translate into slower change (i.e., less rapid acceptance of further nonsense) and tighter budgets (i.e., DHS/TSA can't afford to engage in the current scale of nonsense).

I wouldn't say it's a Democrat or Republican thing. I don't care. It's a "Lawmakers" thing. They all voted for the TSA and until we all found out how stupidly it was implemented, we might have even agreed with the votes.

I'm thinking that in the next election (too late for this one tomorrow) we should be asking the national candidates what they would do about the problems with the TSA. If the candidates don't understand the question we should say, "Wrong answer, you just lost my vote..."

I get so sad when I hear of people learning to put up and shut up rather than getting the TSA angry with us. The implication that misbehavior will go on our "permanent record card." That sounds very Nazi-ish to me. (and all other world dictators who rule via fear).

Rita

This absolute, unquestioning obedience to anything an "agent of authority" decides to decree IS WHAT IS CALLED "DEFACTO" MARTIAL LAW FOLKS.