In Focus delivers deeper coverage of the political, cultural, and ideological issues shaping America. Published daily by senior writers and experts, these in-depth pieces go beyond the headlines to give readers the full picture. You can find our full list of In Focus pieces here.
When it comes to America’s airports, the terrorists have already won. You know, those ludicrous edifices where we collectively lose all our dignity just so they’ll let us out of the building? If we really wanted to slow the influx of illegal immigrants, we wouldn’t build walls — we’d build Transportation Security Administration checkpoints.
As far as I’m concerned, airports were a massive nuisance before the pandemic. Afterward, however, I’ve done virtually everything in my power to avoid being sucked into those snaking lines that would be considered an illegal interrogation technique under the Geneva Conventions. I would rather drive an entire day than watch a TSA agent demanding another septuagenarian take off his belt.
On top of that, for 42 days, congressional Democrats cut off funding to the TSA to try to compel Republicans to pass a bill handcuffing the ability of the Trump administration to deport illegal immigrants. In many places, the partial defunding caused even more havoc.
Whatever you make of the Democrats’ political cause, American consumers should not be held hostage to the stupid partisan jockeying of Congress. The TSA shouldn’t even exist.
The agency is part of the Department of Homeland Security, a Cabinet department formed after 9/11 to ensure that numerous federal agencies could coordinate their incompetence. And, no doubt, most Americans will surrender basic comforts to government agents and increasingly unreliable airlines, under the notion that it’s the only way to ensure safe travel.
It’s something of conventional wisdom to note that governments are too obsessed with trying to stop previous threats while failing to focus on emerging ones. Which isn’t exactly right. The TSA is terrible at both.
The agency has one job: security screening for passenger air transportation. Back in 2015, the TSA sent out investigatory units called “red teams” to airports around the country to attempt to sneak explosives and weapons through the screening process and on to planes. They were successful 67 out of 70 times.
Though I’m not a professional security specialist, even a 20% failure rate seems inexplicably high to me. A 95% failure rate? You might as well just let me hold on to my water bottle.
We only knew about these failures, incidentally, because they were leaked. Another report from 2017 found that the failure rate was “in the ballpark” of 80%. Tests go on all the time, but the numbers are classified.
If criminals were bypassing a security system of private entities at an 80%, 70%, or even a 40% rate, would that company still be in business? In an even marginally merit-based, profit-driven world, there would be mass terminations and a complete overhaul of the system.
Yet, the TSA employs around 65,000 people, 50,000 of whom work front-line jobs at airports. The agency barely fires anyone, despite — it needs to be stressed — a 80%-90% failure rate, upholding the existing security measures meant to stop the most low-tech security threats.
As far as I can tell, there is no record of the TSA agent ever foiling a terrorist attack or apprehending a terrorist via the screening process. Obviously, security measures also act as a deterrent and cannot always be properly measured. Surely that brand of prevention could be done far cheaper and more efficiently. But as numerous people have pointed out over the years, the TSA is fixated on stopping bad things from being brought onto airplanes rather than stopping bad people.
Last year, when the Trump administration laid off 243 probationary TSA workers who had already been cited for “performance and conduct issues” during their trial period, the union called it a “politically driven mass firing spree.”
And to be fair, TSA workers have been thrust into a system that was hurriedly installed after 9/11 and has yet to really be reformed. Because of the partial shutdown, agents were working without pay. Even normally, agent salaries aren’t great. And the work must be mind-numbingly monotonous and probably feels like a giant waste of time on most days. As with most union government jobs, pay hikes are automatic and contingent on time served rather than quality of work. Performance-based rewards, as far as I can tell, are virtually nonexistent.
What incentive does a TSA worker have to take initiative in proposing better ways to make consumers comfortable or increase security? “None” is the answer.
Risk-averse management, the people who should be replaced first, largely come and go with the tides of partisan appointments.
When it comes to airport security, we’re an outlier, and not in the usual positive ways. Most European airports, for example, use private firms for security, and the process of boarding a plane is unsurprisingly faster and far less invasive.
There are 24 airports in the U.S. that already use private contractors under the federal Screening Partnership Program in conjunction with the TSA. The largest, in cities such as San Francisco and Kansas City, offer far faster screening times than any major airport run by the TSA. But even if they didn’t, cities could find new providers that would improve performance. You can’t fire the TSA.
SHUTDOWN SHOWS WE NEED TO PRIVATIZE AIRPORT SECURITY
Private companies benefit from having the flexibility to experiment with innovations that would take a decade to get through the red tape of government contracts and permissions. Different airports with different populations and different needs would have the flexibility to expedite travel. It’s inexplicable that we aren’t moving toward privatizing security.
Because right now, TSA’s greatest accomplishment is inconveniencing around 2.1 million people every day.
