Write your elected officials about the TSA.

Derg. There's an untold backstory here that changes everything, everything about what people think they know about the TSA. And it answers the "alternative" question you pose.

I keep waiting for someone to post the story. Unfortunately it's one of those Tl;dr type stories. And controversial. Right now it's a PM topic.
.MikeD[/USER]

Well that was nothing if not obfuscatingly intriguing.

What do we replace them with? The same thing that happens in much of the government. You replace them with private industry. Does that mean that private industry makes the decisions or sets the standards? Of course not. Government needs only to set the standard and monitor the operation. The execution can be done better and with less cost than when done by the government. Nobody can argue that America's security is more at risk than Israel's or that we do a better job than they do. Their airport screeners are private contractors, not government employees. We should move up to their standard, not stay down at ours.

Remember, the reason box cutters got through security on 9/11 was because the government told the private industry screeners to allow box cutters through security.

There is a provision for private industry taking over airport security on a per airport basis. TSA has thrown up every roadblock imaginable to ensure that doesn't happen. However, for those few airports that have managed to run the gauntlet of TSA's bureaucratic roadblocks and install private security, the performance is as good or better than TSA's and the cost is greatly reduced.

One of my coworkers, who considers GWOT to be a massive victory for 'merica, doesn't fully understand why I think the American people are the true losers in this deplorable police action.

I for one do not want to give up liberty for security, but apparently the rest of the public does not share this point of view.


Sent from Seat 3D

Since the Obama administration announced "the war on terror is over", many have posed the question of why replace TSA with anything. Why not just eliminate it. Unfortunately, what the Obama administration says and the facts are two different things. There are still terrorists and there are still garden variety crazies in this world. We do need a measure of security. What we don't need is a top heavy bureaucracy with little knowledge of either security or transportation wasting money doing a job that could be done both better and more efficiently by private industry.

Private screens have already been put in place at a cost of only 58% of the cost of using TSA. It may make sense to some people to pay more and get less. It certainly makes sense to TSA.

I rather TSA than private security/contractor. IMHO

1. Better HR, screening & background checks, and integrity checks.
2. Cheap is not always better. Cheap employees and guards = higher chances of criminal activities, and bribery, especially with a private for profit security/contractor. (#Get this passed security, u know how to get around it. Meet me at Gate 35; call your wife, she'll be alive.... or call your wife, she'll have the money).
3. "The Gov't" can get away with more in regards to searches or confiscating personal items than a private contractor.... (#Lawsuits).

P.s.
4. TSA is made up of U.S. nationals. I'm not sure, but I assume it's illegal for a private corporation to require U.S. citizenship of it's employees. I may be wrong.

What make you think that?

Following that logic, why don't we pay TSA more?

That is outside my experience area, however, any contractor would factor the cost of litigation into their bid for the contract.

Assuming for the sake of discussion that U.S. nationals are in some way better, there isn't any reason contractor could not be required to hire only U.S. citizens. I'm very familiar with contractors whose contract stipulates that everyone has to hold a Top Secret clearance.

I think Scorpio is correct on this point.

States Secrets Doctrine and other immunity privileges
http://topics.nytimes.com/topics/reference/timestopics/subjects/s/state_secrets_privilege/index.html

The Government has several advantages shielding it from effective civil litigation.

1) The States Secrets Doctrine gives the Fed Govt the right to have a civil suit dismissed (even traffic violations for friends) without even being heard, by claiming that there are facts in the case which, if divulged, would threaten National Security. The Bush and Obama Administrations have taken liberal advantage of this. In fact, they've abused it, using it to hide illegal activities like torture flights.

2) Immunity - Law enforcement officials and agencies are ordinarily granted liberal immunities from lawsuits anyway based on actions they take that are within their jurisdictional authority. It's not absolute protection from all misdeeds, but it's pretty effective.

3) Legal Fees - Few plaintiffs can afford the legal fees required to sue the Federal Govt. Lawyers who work on contingency will frequently reject cases against the Federal Govt out of fear it will bankrupt the law firm.

4) Other Criminal Charges - Plainitiff/victims are sometimes facing the additional pressure of criminal charges when they lock horns with the TSA. (Resisting arrest, etc.) This places psychological pressure on the plaintiff to settle a civil lawsuit as they tire of the long drawn out legal process.

A civilian 'TSA Inc.' would not enjoy the same 800 lb. gorilla status to escape lawsuits, intimidate plaintiffs and their attorneys, and use Govt money to pay its legal defense fees, unless Congress granted it special privileges. So the Govt's TSA does enjoy an advantage in this area.

.

Screening the passengers is worth little no matter who does it. Ramp agents don't go through security. Most cargo goes through very little screening. If someone wants to get something on a plane, there are much easier ways than trying to sneak it through a passenger checkpoint. We might as well save the money if we're not going to actually protect every aspect.

First I'd back way up and look at the available data that was used to justify, form and expand TSA to begin with. Those who have investigated those stats have discovered that TSA's cheerleaders cooked the books to create threat data and incidents that did not exist, or were greatly exaggerated. That justified TSA's existence and rapid growth, as well as the cost of the equipment they wanted to buy, like backscatter scanners. This fake/exaggerated data (Tl:dr) information came out in Congressional hearings and was covered on C-Span, but was barely mentioned in the general media.

In other words, before discussing the changes to be made, I'd make sure that the underlying facts that your discussion is based on are correct. Otherwise, we're trying to fix things that never actually needed fixing. Wasted effort. In many cases, we're chasing ghosts that don't exist, but created great theater for TSA's backers. That's why insiders (and a recent Congressional Report) frequently call this whole thing "TSA Theater."
.

My employer demands only US citizens due to military contracts.

TSA was born of 911, but most people are not aware that the 911 Commissioners have been systematically trying to walk-back their support for their own 911 Report. They claim documents were concealed from them, testimony they received was perjured, and that their Commission was engineered to fail. It's a story the US media does not want to cover. The Commissioners now hold their press conferences in media Siberia these days. Instead, we're continually reminded by the US media that the TSA is absolutely necessary, based in large part on the lessons we learned from 911. What lessons? The lessons that the 911 Commissioners now say were stage managed theatrics.

I realize that lots of folks don't want to go back that far. But if we're going to honestly evaluate the TSA, we need to start at its inception, and the reason for its existence. 911. Then we need to review the C-Span covered Congressional testimony where Govt witnesses testified that other stories (post 911 terrorist attempts) broadcast by the US media were partly fabrications.

Commission Chairmen Kean and Hamilton - "We were set up to fail."


Commissioner (& Senator / Viet Nam Veteran) Max Cleland quit the Commission when he discovered that requested documents were being withheld from most Commissioners..... "A disgusting Scam."


Commission Chairman Hamilton - "Public opinion was manipulated......the President wanted to go to war..... the media became cheerleaders....the American people are the target of outside forces."


.
The TSA was born of 911 and the Commissioners' Report. I suggest that we back up and begin by finding out why the 911 Commissioners are now trying to disavow the evidence they cited in their own report, and warn the public that we're being manipulated. That's just the start. There is lots more of this rarely seen video evidence indicating TSA's mandate was built partly on Govt disinformation and media manipulation, not actual terrorists threats.

.

TSA is bloated with mgmt
Hires less than ideal candiates for the job.
Takes away any discretion from TSA grunts
One size fits all security measures
Fails to use common sense
TSA has failed to catch a lot of contraband from getting into airports.

TSA needs to revamped from the inside out reducing mgmt types
TSA needs to be randomly checked entering the airport as well.
Get rid of the badges, they are not law enforcement nor do they have any law enforcment powers.
Raise the hiring and training standards
Empower their employees to use discretion
Train the employees in customer service. If you treat the traveling public with the respect, dignity, and professionalism they deserve, the TSA will get the same in return in most cases.
Hold employess accoutable who make errors instead of a slap on the wrist and retraining
Modify the one size fits all security and use resources more effectively - screen passengers, and employess based on threat
-Get KCM up and running ASAP
-Modify security of airport personnel including better back ground checks
-Get the know traveller program up to speed
This now leaves you more time to more effectively screen the "unknown" travels or those who set off other red flags.

my .02 worth...

Bandit Driver's take is pretty much spot on. To his post I would add the following:

The TSA has grown into yet another government bureaucracy. As with most government bureaucracies, turf building becomes more important to management than doing the job assigned to the agency. And as such, the problem with TSA (as with other bloated government bureaucracies) resides almost entirely at the top. TSA agents are for the most part performing as they have been ordered to perform, and in the manner designated by their management.

Unfortunately, the lowly TSA agent at the checkpoint is the face the public sees and interacts with, and thus becomes the target of everyone's ire. Once again, this is typical of nearly every government agency—the underpaid, overworked grunt who does the actual work gets all the anger directed at him or her, while the political appointees and career bureaucrats who direct that he/she act in the manner they prescribe, direct, and train wind up before congress just nodding their heads and covering their butts while they go off on GSA-style cross country team-building and self-congratulatory presentation exercises on the taxpayer dime.

Trust me, with decades of government service behind me I can say with assurance that many of you are blaming the wrong individuals here. Get rid of political appointments; strip management of the ability to spend any monies on anything that does not pertain solely to their agency's job function; put in a real, agency-independent review of management with real consequences for failure up to and including termination or even jail time; stop self-serving "mission creep" from occurring without specific Congressional approval; prosecute government managers who perjure themselves during congressional hearings (and believe me—I've seen outright perjury performed NUMEROUS times with no consequence for having gotten caught at it). Do all that and you will have solved much of the problem with ALL government agencies, TSA included.

And, no, eliminating TSA and using contractors will not solve the basic problem as long as some government bureaucrat still has "regulatory" authority over how the contractor performs his job—and don't for one minute think in a post-9/11 world that Congress is going to give up regulatory enforcement. Ain't gonna happen. The current push led by Congressman John Mica of the Florida 7th Congressional District has nothing to do with increasing efficiencies or eliminating outrages and everything to do with rewarding corporate campaign sponsors. Period. End of story. Any changeover to contractors will wind up driving up the cost to the taxpayer (always has every single time it's been tried) and result in the same or even worse service since somebody in Washington will STILL retain oversight and dictate the parameters under which security checkpoint personnel operate.