Ever get the feeling you’re being followed? If you’re in an airport or on a flight, you might be.
The Transportation Security Administration’s program Quiet Skies has come under scrutiny after Rep. Michael Capuano, D-Mass., with the support of other lawmakers, requested a review. Now Quiet Skies isn’t being kept so quiet.
The program began in 2012 as just additional screening of domestic fliers. But, in March, they announced the undercover surveillance happening in addition to the screening.
In this program, federal air marshals track unknowing citizens through the airport. About 35 citizens are tracked every day. Every U.S. citizen entering the country after foreign travel is automatically screened for qualities that would allow undercover surveillance. These criteria include fidgeting, staring, and even sleeping on the plane.
This has been shown to be ineffective. Out of the roughly 5,000 passengers selected for surveillance, none have shown any serious threat. Even air marshals themselves are calling it a waste of time, pulling them away from more serious tasks. Furthermore, while the TSA claims that air marshals do not surveil ordinary citizens, many disagree.
Last month, Courtney Vandersloot was returning home to the U.S. after playing professional basketball in Turkey on a work visa. Still, she was subjected to the air marshal following her throughout the airport solely because she was coming from Turkey.
[Opinion: Quiet Skies shows just how much privacy the government thinks you give up when you fly]
This is far from being the TSA’s only issue.
Last year, the Department of Homeland Security ran tests through the TSA and found that their screeners failed to detect explosives, weapons, and drugs about 80 percent of the time. In 2015, the screeners failed 95 percent of the tests.
Just last month, a man managed to get through TSA security at BWI Marshall Airport with a knife and no boarding pass. TSA reports it has no idea how this man got through their security. But, isn’t it their job to know?
The TSA’s failure to efficiently and adequately provide airport security is soaring to new heights. We need to clear the runway for innovative solutions, solutions that exist in the private sector.
Within the private sector, TSA’s responsibilities can be contracted to a third party. Many European airports already do this, as well as Canadian airports and even 22 U.S. airports. This method of providing airport security isn’t fully out of federal control, but it’s a step towards privatization with a lot of precedence.
European cities with airports that have contracted security include big cities like Amsterdam, Brussels, Florence, London, and Madrid. Rules and regulations for the airports are created by a government agency, but the actual screeners are employees of private companies.
There are 22 U.S. airports with private contract security. These airports are in the Screening Partnership Program run by the TSA. The biggest airports in the program are San Francisco and Kansas City, with Orlando possibly following next year.
The common denominator here is a profit-driven incentive for excellent performance.
While some disagree on the grounds that private and government-run airport security operate at similar rates, it is important to remember that those reviewing the private agencies have a vested interest.
At the other side of the research terminal, in 2011, the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee conducted research on two airports in the highest security level: the LAX airport (TSA) and SFO airport (contracts). In the data, the SFO airport processed “on average 65% more passengers per screener.”
Likewise, contracted security is much more cost-efficient. If LAX acquired this system, it would save more than $38 million in the cost of employees. This would make a huge difference on a national level as the TSA has a annual budget of $7.58 billion, as of 2017, which is a higher budget than Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
U.S. airports joining the Screening Partnership Program would be a step in the right direction, but there are other improvements to be made. As of now, the TSA selects which security companies can join the program, as well as managing the contract of the company and its airport. To ensure security efficiency, each airport should be selecting its own security company and managing its own contract — this way airports can mold security to their particular size and needs.
One thing’s for sure: The TSA needs change. And when you’re already running to your gate with minutes to spare, it will be too late.
Zach Brown is studying chemistry at Tennessee Technological University. He is also a media ambassador for Young Americans for Liberty.
