Just thinking of Brussels-Zaventem. Why trying to smuggle any explosive device on any plane? Just look at the picture with masses of people in one huge room, standing in line... What would YOU do if you were a terrorist and want to create as much chaos, fear, mayhem as possible? Isn't this the perfect target, created by "security"?
20
In a world where political correctness is not an issue, passengers that fit certain "profile" are picked off for more scrutiny. In our world now, that would be illegal due to racial profiling. What does that give us? Subject EVERYONE to the same treatment and inconvenience simply to avoid lawsuits and complaints that the one-in-a-million chance (or one-in-a-few-thousands) that fit the profile should have gone through, for no better reasons other than all-men-are-equal.
I might sound totally bigoted but I'm not. Fact of the matter is, all those in ISIL are muslims, all the 9/11 attackers were muslims, all the past bombers were muslims. It only makes sense that the additional security regimens should be more focused on muslims in order to be effective. And I'm even saying this out of hatred or even dislike of muslims, but rather, it's a sensible thing to do. Surely those innocent muslims would feel slighted (to put it slightly), but I'm sorry to say, they have those other islamic terrorists and fundamentalists to blame, not western governments or fellow citizens in the western countries.
I might sound totally bigoted but I'm not. Fact of the matter is, all those in ISIL are muslims, all the 9/11 attackers were muslims, all the past bombers were muslims. It only makes sense that the additional security regimens should be more focused on muslims in order to be effective. And I'm even saying this out of hatred or even dislike of muslims, but rather, it's a sensible thing to do. Surely those innocent muslims would feel slighted (to put it slightly), but I'm sorry to say, they have those other islamic terrorists and fundamentalists to blame, not western governments or fellow citizens in the western countries.
10
Mullainathan and Thaler state :We have no way of knowing whether the current procedures are optimal.", but we do. The TSA regularly conducts screening tests, attempting to bring contraband through checkpoints. Reportedly, in 95% of the tests, TSA checkpoint agents fail to detect prohibited items brought in by other TSA agents. We also know that despite the failings of the TSA, actual terrorist incidents on airplanes are exceedingly rare.
The traveling public deserves a less expensive, more efficient process. What are we waiting for?
The traveling public deserves a less expensive, more efficient process. What are we waiting for?
15
Newt Gingrich points out a serious problem with his inane comment about "socialist bureaucracy". Rightwing politicians are so anxious to blame 'government' they have no real solutions to real problems.
16
It's time for profiling in the name of efficiency.
6
Newt Gingrich tweeted a complaint about lines at the Atlanta airport, which he curiously blamed on Bernie Sanders’s “socialist bureaucracy,” perhaps forgetting that the Department of Homeland Security, of which the T.S.A. is a part, began in the administration of George W. Bush.
This is the same man who accused President Clinton of lieing about having extra marital sex, while Gringrich himself was having an affair on his second wife with his soon to be third wife!
Nice job.
This is the same man who accused President Clinton of lieing about having extra marital sex, while Gringrich himself was having an affair on his second wife with his soon to be third wife!
Nice job.
17
The issue of long lines is the culmination of many factors, in which there are three major participants, TSA, airlines, and passengers. I will agree there needs to be an extensive overhaul how to keep passengers safe and speed up the lines. The technology exists that could determine if that bottle of water or tube of toothpaste contains something else. Likewise with shoes. As much as we would like to have the airlines eliminate the baggage fees, it will not happen. The airlines only have to pay attention to their boards and stockholders. Though it would be nice if they had "specials" such as only paying the fee once on a round trip. Others have said much more eloquently than me that passengers could help speed things up by getting ready prior to going through the line. Having the boarding pass and ID ready prior to going through, getting off the cell phone while going through, are just a couple of items that could speed things up.
The person in the TSA uniform is an easy target for our traveling frustration but they should not be the only target.
The person in the TSA uniform is an easy target for our traveling frustration but they should not be the only target.
3
Another thought.
Let us look at a calculation of how comparatively effective spending money screening is.
(In what follows below feel free to substitute numbers that you feel are more appropriate).
What if we spent only, say, 25% as much on airport security screening as we do now. How many premature deaths could we expect as the result?
Now, take that 75% and spend it on healthcare. How many premature deaths could we prevent as the result?
Now let us compare the two resulting numbers.
Let us look at a calculation of how comparatively effective spending money screening is.
(In what follows below feel free to substitute numbers that you feel are more appropriate).
What if we spent only, say, 25% as much on airport security screening as we do now. How many premature deaths could we expect as the result?
Now, take that 75% and spend it on healthcare. How many premature deaths could we prevent as the result?
Now let us compare the two resulting numbers.
10
1. "added administrators in Chicago"
Administrators?? How about adding workers, instead of useless paper pushers?
2. I am not surprised when commenters mention that TSA people miss 90-95% of dangerous items they are supposed to catch.
A couple of years ago a friend of mine was flying home to Europe from NYC.
She by mistake packed a 9" pointed kitchen knife into her carry-on. The screening in NYC never noticed it. When she transferred in Vienna the security screening there did.
Administrators?? How about adding workers, instead of useless paper pushers?
2. I am not surprised when commenters mention that TSA people miss 90-95% of dangerous items they are supposed to catch.
A couple of years ago a friend of mine was flying home to Europe from NYC.
She by mistake packed a 9" pointed kitchen knife into her carry-on. The screening in NYC never noticed it. When she transferred in Vienna the security screening there did.
5
I would apply this "free" stuff to jobs. Consultants build into their fees the cost of marketing and resources including their time looking for and netting work. Workers on the other hand have been forced into jobs that pay not only below the cost of living, but make the worker foot the bill and effort of looking for and finding work. Wen low paid temp jobs pay only every two weeks with a lag week, the worker foots the bill up front three weeks of the month of a salary that won't ever cover the month's expenses so all their workers are permanently behind.
Employers are taking all of this for free from workers for the same reasons the TSA is accused of here. The cost of having to permanently be on the search for work needs to be built into wages rather than allowing employers to pay only for part of the cost of being an employee to workers employers now get for free.
I want to see a detailed analysis of THIS free stuff business is exacting from everyone in addition to corporate welfare that does not seem to mind about all the regulations placed on individuals seeking welfare.
Employers are taking all of this for free from workers for the same reasons the TSA is accused of here. The cost of having to permanently be on the search for work needs to be built into wages rather than allowing employers to pay only for part of the cost of being an employee to workers employers now get for free.
I want to see a detailed analysis of THIS free stuff business is exacting from everyone in addition to corporate welfare that does not seem to mind about all the regulations placed on individuals seeking welfare.
2
The TSA has this security theater script worked out very well indeed. The point of the play is to project the illusion that the Feds are doing everything in their power to keep "us" safe.
To do that they have enlisted "us" as actors in their play. It's brilliant theater. Most of us are extras. We plan ahead. We learn our lines, which decidedly do NOT include wisecracks related to violence of any kind. We queue up , we wait. We take off our shoes and belts. We star for a brief moment in a vaguely pornograhic gee-whiz sci-fi full-body inspection.
Some of us play bigger roles in the drama by protesting all this. Those are the surrogate villain roles. They serve to keep people interested in the drama.
There are real villains of course: the underpants and shoe bombers and the Sept 11 hijackers. But these are rare, and defeating them requires what security people call "defense in depth."
In the meantime, our bit parts in the drama of transport security enlist us in the illusion that the government can keep us from all harm. If, Heaven forbid, another real villain appears, the government will have the entire traveling public as witnesses that they spare no inconvenience or expense to keep us safe. And that will keep their bureaucracy safe.
Let's hope they're using the same ingenuity on the rest of their security measures.
To do that they have enlisted "us" as actors in their play. It's brilliant theater. Most of us are extras. We plan ahead. We learn our lines, which decidedly do NOT include wisecracks related to violence of any kind. We queue up , we wait. We take off our shoes and belts. We star for a brief moment in a vaguely pornograhic gee-whiz sci-fi full-body inspection.
Some of us play bigger roles in the drama by protesting all this. Those are the surrogate villain roles. They serve to keep people interested in the drama.
There are real villains of course: the underpants and shoe bombers and the Sept 11 hijackers. But these are rare, and defeating them requires what security people call "defense in depth."
In the meantime, our bit parts in the drama of transport security enlist us in the illusion that the government can keep us from all harm. If, Heaven forbid, another real villain appears, the government will have the entire traveling public as witnesses that they spare no inconvenience or expense to keep us safe. And that will keep their bureaucracy safe.
Let's hope they're using the same ingenuity on the rest of their security measures.
7
If after fighting two expensive wars that have lasted more than a decade, spending billions more on airport security and spending more money on the military and domestic security than education, welfare, law enforcement and regulatory functions, infrastructure, R&D and environmental protection COMBINED, Americans still do not feel safe, they never will. It is a delusion that they can solve the problem with money and manpower.
9
From the beginning, it's always been Security Theater" instead of actually finding any bad guys. Now masses of people are so ticked off that they might, in a rare show of defiance among sheep, tell their legislators that a massive overhaul of everything that TSA imposes on people at airports is required.
Once you clear TSA "security" the airlines pack travelers like canned sardines, packed this time in stale air instead of oil.
Since retirement, I need neither TSA nor airlines in my life. I take road trips because I have the time, and that allows me to actually see the country on the ground. It's A Good Thing.
If you must communicate with other drones in other places, how about using internet-based meeting technology? Your company saves money, you avoid the dumpster fire that is all what all airports are now, and you get to spend time with your family or doing whatever in down time pleases you.
Once you clear TSA "security" the airlines pack travelers like canned sardines, packed this time in stale air instead of oil.
Since retirement, I need neither TSA nor airlines in my life. I take road trips because I have the time, and that allows me to actually see the country on the ground. It's A Good Thing.
If you must communicate with other drones in other places, how about using internet-based meeting technology? Your company saves money, you avoid the dumpster fire that is all what all airports are now, and you get to spend time with your family or doing whatever in down time pleases you.
10
The biggest problem is that none of this will win the long game for us. It's too bad we're being distracted by all this, when the short game is but a skirmish that will be forfeited to us as long as the enemy can keep making progress in the areas (whatever they may be) that they have targeted for the long game.
Make all congressmen and their staff go to the regular line and the problem would be solved tomorrow.
24
Not only does this agency waste the passengers time, they are also incompetent as noted by the 95% failure rate they racked up during a recent 'test' of their capability to find weapons and bombs being smuggled on board aircraft. The true incompetence though belongs to a congress that voted for this waste without any evidence that it does any good to protect us. Kick the bums out and get some leaders that can think and oversee what they vote for. Vote in November.
9
Well, actually, I remember when it was voted in. It wasn't well thought out, that is true. Senator Robert Byrd famously said it had ben designed on a cocktail napkin. But I also remember that it replaced - the National Guard. Now that was scary, airport security being manifestly a job they had never been trained to do (and the whole crowd of them being so young it was hard to believe they brought any life experience to their task - I remember being so relieved the day I saw a New Hampshire sheriff with grey at the temples standing amongst the young guardsmen). Prior to the National Guard, we had private sector security firms who also failed to find contraband (and failed to detect the 9/11 hijackers), generated long lines of frustrated people, and varied in their behavior to us from cheerfully kind to severely professional to bored to rude.
I agreed with Sen. Byrd about the Department of Homeland Security, but I was quite relived when TSA started operations. And they were super polite / professional when they started, and it was a pleasure to deal with them.
I agreed with Sen. Byrd about the Department of Homeland Security, but I was quite relived when TSA started operations. And they were super polite / professional when they started, and it was a pleasure to deal with them.
Usual nonsense of economic 'theories"; tell you what everyone knows but is about as boring as watching paint dry. If the NYT ever decides to hire journalists and stop giving us puff pieces, one would not see such nonsense.He generates some examples, such as supposedly leaving food at buffets that is without any empirical evidence at all, the usual lack of economic analysis. Pathetic use of newspaper space.
My most recent trip out of Narita Airport:
Took train to airport. Went through security with shoes on, no lines. Went through passport control. Went to gate.
Total time from train doors opening to me sitting at departure gate: 22 minutes.
That's right, I timed it; 22 minutes, train to gate. Narita International Airport.
Flying in America is miserable. But it doesn't have to be. Other countries do things right.
Took train to airport. Went through security with shoes on, no lines. Went through passport control. Went to gate.
Total time from train doors opening to me sitting at departure gate: 22 minutes.
That's right, I timed it; 22 minutes, train to gate. Narita International Airport.
Flying in America is miserable. But it doesn't have to be. Other countries do things right.
22
Good heavens, do not blame this idiocy on GOVERNMENT! Blame it on the rapaciousness of the so called representatives of the people who make and pass these laws which ignore the people and totally benefit the the wealthy who pay their wages, and no, I am no talking about their actual wages for being a Congressman or Senator.
These positions, licences to get rich jobs,--which are bought and paid for by the totally aware of what they are doing Super wealthy, and a number of the not yet qualified for super class, but eaten alive with desire for that glorious role--financed by the Tax Payers are bought and paid for the "Donner" class.
The kings used to pay for their lackeys and toadies by giving them things like Earldoms and other chunks of their lands. Today, although they no longer use the old names of king and emperor, the .1%ers give them positions in the Senate and Congress where they can cultivate other forms of greed and gluttony.
This is certainly not government of for and by the people. It is rulership by a new name of the same old kings we were trying to get rid of."
These positions, licences to get rich jobs,--which are bought and paid for by the totally aware of what they are doing Super wealthy, and a number of the not yet qualified for super class, but eaten alive with desire for that glorious role--financed by the Tax Payers are bought and paid for the "Donner" class.
The kings used to pay for their lackeys and toadies by giving them things like Earldoms and other chunks of their lands. Today, although they no longer use the old names of king and emperor, the .1%ers give them positions in the Senate and Congress where they can cultivate other forms of greed and gluttony.
This is certainly not government of for and by the people. It is rulership by a new name of the same old kings we were trying to get rid of."
4
Maybe you should pass commenting about the "Donner Class". They seem to be eating at you....
2
For what it's worth, consider that the TSA has done a perfect of achieving it's primary goal. There have been no airline related terrorism incidents under it's watch. Pretty good I'd say.
The free bag argument is appealing, but bear in mind those bags have to be screened and at some airports there is limit to how many checked bags can be screened. Not a magic bullet.
The free bag argument is appealing, but bear in mind those bags have to be screened and at some airports there is limit to how many checked bags can be screened. Not a magic bullet.
I didn't get bitten by a lion today in my neighborhood. This must mean the local lion police are doing an amazing job?
TSA has never in 14 years caught a terrorist, has a 95 % failure rate when tested by undercover officers and is a complete barn door operation - 'protecting' against plots from a generation ago - long ago moot once cockpit doors were reinforced (the single most important improvement made after 9/11).
Most airports are porous - workers come and go from all kinds of entrances and exits and are rarely put through the debasing Security Theater that the now-criminalized customer must endure, primarily for show. 4th Amendment be damned.
There are so many holes it's ludicrous. That a major incident has not occurred owes to all kinds of factors. But none of them have much to do with TSA, an agency staffed mostly by folks who appear to be otherwise-unemployable.
These aren't highly trained security experts as in Israel. These people are not trained law enforcement officers. They are government clerks, no different than the staff at the DMV.
How could anyone who has seen this circus in action think they are "securing" anything? I wouldn't trust this agency to guard my boombox at the beach.
TSA has never in 14 years caught a terrorist, has a 95 % failure rate when tested by undercover officers and is a complete barn door operation - 'protecting' against plots from a generation ago - long ago moot once cockpit doors were reinforced (the single most important improvement made after 9/11).
Most airports are porous - workers come and go from all kinds of entrances and exits and are rarely put through the debasing Security Theater that the now-criminalized customer must endure, primarily for show. 4th Amendment be damned.
There are so many holes it's ludicrous. That a major incident has not occurred owes to all kinds of factors. But none of them have much to do with TSA, an agency staffed mostly by folks who appear to be otherwise-unemployable.
These aren't highly trained security experts as in Israel. These people are not trained law enforcement officers. They are government clerks, no different than the staff at the DMV.
How could anyone who has seen this circus in action think they are "securing" anything? I wouldn't trust this agency to guard my boombox at the beach.
16
So there are no problems like this in the private sector? And all externalities are factored in at McDonalds, or Exxon, or Ford?
Only a disciple of the business does everything better school of life could write an entire story about the TSA and make it all about customer convenience. Is the TSA perfect? Far from it. Whats its job ? Safety.
Only a disciple of the business does everything better school of life could write an entire story about the TSA and make it all about customer convenience. Is the TSA perfect? Far from it. Whats its job ? Safety.
1
Perhaps the TSA could cut corners on specific safety protocols but the real issue is not enough revenue, a too-small tax that is partially seized by Congress for other purposes. That means not enough open inspection stations. It's like the four man construction crew that is more "efficient" than the eight man one but ties up traffic for thousands for an extra hour. Levy the appropriate tax, pay the inspectors a decent wage so they stay on the job and know their job and save everyone time and also anxiety.
2
Fundamentally, the problem is politics, not economics. If your political mantra is small government - government is bad, then you have no problem underfunding any public program and watching it fail.
And don't worry - economists will explain why the public agency wanted to do a bad job.
And don't worry - economists will explain why the public agency wanted to do a bad job.
10
Everyone in the Country, citizen, long and short time visitor, needs to be vetted and issued non-forgeable IDs, perhaps based on fingerprints, dna, etc. THEN, using "profiling" and DISCRIMINATION, we could have both improved security and improved travel expedition for most of us, and there would be other benefits as well, including monitoring of visitors, their purposes and their "duration".
4
Summary of article: "Opportunity Costs" exist, and the government doesn't care about yours unless you're in Congress.
14
Correction to end of article,. George W Bushed wanted a Private Airport Screening and the Democratic Senate would only pass the Bill if more government workers were added thus the TSA bureaucracy was formed.
4
Incorrect. TSA is a part of DHS which was railroaded through a shell-shocked Congress.
2
The entire TSA process is neither efficient nor safe. It is a joke, disguised as something we must do. Time to think differently!
15
Waiting in Line for the Illusion of Security - Heck, forget the airports. How about in the hood? In our homes? In our bank accounts? On the streets? Across the world? Oh, I'm sorry, I wasn't being PC.
The problem is not just the TSA it is the travelling public as well. Inconsistent identification (using passports would help), not paying attention to the process because the person is online or texting, carrying objects that are banned (guns, knives, etc. - come on folks think a bit), or attitude problems also contribute to slowing down the lines. Travellers play a big part in the screening process and contribute a lot of challenges to TSA staff and protocols. However, the public seems to want to blame the TSA for all the frustration.
Perhaps if people treated the TSA security check as of equal importance to crossing international borders, things could improve.
Perhaps if people treated the TSA security check as of equal importance to crossing international borders, things could improve.
5
I do not feel safer with TSA, and if I really stamp my feet and make a fuss the response is usually retaliatory. 'Sir we have to take you over here and perform a full search since you have stood up for yourself and pointed out that I'm standing around waiting for my break."
Give me a break USG, you are the one slowing down the economy, not me.
Give me a break USG, you are the one slowing down the economy, not me.
10
Instead of tightening up on passengers, tighten up on employees, ALL of them
2
Sheer insanity based on paranoia. Worse yet, they let us carry bombs on the planes: lithium battery, magnesium case laptops. If the battery overcharges, it ignites and starts the magnesium case on fire. The crew does not have anything that can extinguish a magnesium fire. Any magnesium case electronic device is a potential bomb. If you don't believe me, ask Heisenberg or Walter White.
Planes are good for a body count of 200-400. A cruise ship, which can be taken out with a torpedo or an offshore racing boat, has a potential body count of 4,000 - 6,000 or two 9/11's. Great Britain is launching the world's largest cruise ship, potential body count of 7,500 to 8,000. Titanic...Iceberg....ISIS?
Planes are good for a body count of 200-400. A cruise ship, which can be taken out with a torpedo or an offshore racing boat, has a potential body count of 4,000 - 6,000 or two 9/11's. Great Britain is launching the world's largest cruise ship, potential body count of 7,500 to 8,000. Titanic...Iceberg....ISIS?
4
We tie people up for hours but 95% of planted banned articles in recent tests were not discovered. Security theater!
Lets at least make congress people and senators and cabinet members eat their own cooking by requiring them NOT to use pre-check.
Lets at least make congress people and senators and cabinet members eat their own cooking by requiring them NOT to use pre-check.
9
If there were ever a task for robots to perform this is it. The.n we can focus on the real threat which is the inside job.
3
I am more concerned about terrorists gaining jobs on ground crews than I am fellow passengers. THAT seems to be the m.o. of those bringing down planes now.
8
One word: Monopoly. This is the behavior of an entity that has captured the customer, and we have no reasonable alternative. Thank you, government.
7
The comedian George Carlin coined the phrase, "illusion of security," in regards to airport screening in a comedy routine twenty years ago. Good to see the NYT borrow freely!
He also warned that not only was airport screening a waste of time and money ("they haven't found one bomb in one bag..."), but also that airport security was one more way of, "the government reducing your liberties and reminding you that they can **** with you any way they want."
People should bear that quote in mind when they consider HRC or Trump for President. Both candidates want the government to be very "active."
He also warned that not only was airport screening a waste of time and money ("they haven't found one bomb in one bag..."), but also that airport security was one more way of, "the government reducing your liberties and reminding you that they can **** with you any way they want."
People should bear that quote in mind when they consider HRC or Trump for President. Both candidates want the government to be very "active."
4
The security lines actually create the biggest hazard I can think of. By definition no one knows if someone inline has guns and bombs - they haven't been checked yet. The bottleneck creates a huge gaggle of potential victims and it could be easily salted with terrorists toting carry-ons filled with guns, ammunition and bombs. Just think of the Brussels airport attack only his time with a much bigger and more densely packed crowd. It's so obvious that I've always thought TSA is more about show than effect.
9
Requiring bags to be checked would reduce lines and safer for the traveling public. The Air lines should not be charging for checked bags it probably cheaper anyways.
And thus we see why the government should only perform functions that can't be performed in any other way,
1
Albert Hirschman was not a political scientist.
Let's take a look at the "costs" in the system imposed by the airlines continuation of baggage fees, which is the unnamed culprit here. TSA could cut its budget and shave off plenty of wait time if passengers weren't hauling all their luggage to avoid outrageous baggage fees while cargo holds go empty.
Airlines pocketed millions of additional dollars in profits once the fuel prices plunged. And the impact? Passengers are stuck in TSA lines far longer than necessary, flight crews are constantly struggling to meet on-time departures while cramming too many bags into too few overhead compartments and all of us are deplaning SO much slower because we're dragging our luggage with us.
Let's point the finger where it belongs- airlines padding their bottom lines at everyone else's expense.
Airlines pocketed millions of additional dollars in profits once the fuel prices plunged. And the impact? Passengers are stuck in TSA lines far longer than necessary, flight crews are constantly struggling to meet on-time departures while cramming too many bags into too few overhead compartments and all of us are deplaning SO much slower because we're dragging our luggage with us.
Let's point the finger where it belongs- airlines padding their bottom lines at everyone else's expense.
3
Fifteen yeas later, it's clear we let terrorists win. Security theater disrupts our travel, wastes our time and degrades our public spaces, with little evidence that we are safer. Every time we take off our shoes, plop our liquids in a zip lock bag or raise our arms in a glass box, it's a living reminder that the terrorists won.
10
A ridiculous procedure which is a total waste of time and money. Bring back the metal detectors(...and body scanners and pat-downs for those who seem suspicious). These screeners miss the truly dangerous items while torturing families and little old ladies.
Meanwhile, the TSA 'fat cats' lining their pockets with big salaries and undeserved bonuses can all go straight to hell.
911 was 15 years ago...Get over it, people. This failed screening system offers us no real security.
Meanwhile, the TSA 'fat cats' lining their pockets with big salaries and undeserved bonuses can all go straight to hell.
911 was 15 years ago...Get over it, people. This failed screening system offers us no real security.
7
The TSA charges people to go through the Pre-check process. So few people do and they stay in line.
Airlines charge people to check bags, so people bring everything on board, slowing down security.
So how about a wild two-fer?
Have the TSA cut the cost of pre-check in half-- or make it free!
Make the airlines carry one (or even two) bags for free!
If the airlines want to make up the money they lose from the bag fees, they can raise their prices, and fewer people would fly...
Altogether, fewer people in line with less stuff.
Problem solved.
Of course, people would prefer to pretend that we can't do anything...
Airlines charge people to check bags, so people bring everything on board, slowing down security.
So how about a wild two-fer?
Have the TSA cut the cost of pre-check in half-- or make it free!
Make the airlines carry one (or even two) bags for free!
If the airlines want to make up the money they lose from the bag fees, they can raise their prices, and fewer people would fly...
Altogether, fewer people in line with less stuff.
Problem solved.
Of course, people would prefer to pretend that we can't do anything...
2
While we all concentrate on TSA theatre, there are many 1,000's of cabin cleaners and food/beverage caterers let on board daily to commercial jets.
Not to forget baggage handlers.
Who is screening them?
Not to forget baggage handlers.
Who is screening them?
3
Perhaps they've done this but it seems like a good idea to study how other countries handle security for the airports and try and emulate them. It seems that a country like Israel, who must be serious about security should have good knowledge of what it takes to truly have security at airports. Perhaps they have a model we should follow.
3
Three comments
1. They allow weapons and other dangerous items on airplanes, but God forbid you try take a 4 ounce bottle of shampoo.
2. None of us will ever have to worry about long lines, 'cause none of us will be able to afford a ticket
3. Bring back trains. It is a much better way to travel.
1. They allow weapons and other dangerous items on airplanes, but God forbid you try take a 4 ounce bottle of shampoo.
2. None of us will ever have to worry about long lines, 'cause none of us will be able to afford a ticket
3. Bring back trains. It is a much better way to travel.
Isn't it all just for show anyway? What's the practical difference between missing 95% of something and not bothering to look at all? And at the risk of being politically incorrect, finding a needle in a haystack is very difficult but at least we should be looking in the right haystacks. A mom, dad, and two kids traveling together should not receive the same level of screening as a young Muslim male with a one-way ticket. So perhaps TSA could start using all the data the NSA has collected about us to assess threat potential before travelers arrive at the airport and then channel passengers through different levels of security screening commensurate with their individual assessed risk.
2
'Heathrow tracks such data, and American Airlines has asked the T.S.A. to do likewise.'
The TSA could learn a great deal from practices in Heathrow and Gatwick. I fly in/out of Heathrow multiple times per month and Gatwick several times per year, and both airports are dramatically more efficient than the TSA. Even at the busiest times I have not queued more than 30 minutes in either one.
Arguably Heathrow is the transit point for flights from many more high-risk countries into Europe and North America than any US airport, and Britain is no slacker when it comes to security. Both airports collect the data and track metrics on the security lines.
TSA needs to do likewise and focus on security and efficiency rather than elaborate security kabuki.
The TSA could learn a great deal from practices in Heathrow and Gatwick. I fly in/out of Heathrow multiple times per month and Gatwick several times per year, and both airports are dramatically more efficient than the TSA. Even at the busiest times I have not queued more than 30 minutes in either one.
Arguably Heathrow is the transit point for flights from many more high-risk countries into Europe and North America than any US airport, and Britain is no slacker when it comes to security. Both airports collect the data and track metrics on the security lines.
TSA needs to do likewise and focus on security and efficiency rather than elaborate security kabuki.
3
I am sure the authors understand this analysis can be used elsewhere. How about your two hour commute on inadequate infrastructure. So you ask yourself why is this so. Could it be that that some of our elected pols could care less. In fact non working government is to their liking. They talk as if they care about us but they really don't.
1
Wouldn't it be great if the first words of our next president's inaugural address were,"TSA, you're fired!"
Nobody is going to be able to hijack and pilot an airplane into a building again -- how many times after Pearl Harbor did Japan successfully sneak attack America? Besides, airline passengers around the world are now attuned to the prospect of overpowering annoying people, crazy people, and hijackers on their own.
We would save more time, money, and effort by simply accepting more risk. We who live within a few miles of the nation's capital have always understood that any given day may include a nuclear fireball consuming everything from the capitol dome to the beltway. Anything less seems like we've come out ahead.
We would save more time, money, and effort by simply accepting more risk. We who live within a few miles of the nation's capital have always understood that any given day may include a nuclear fireball consuming everything from the capitol dome to the beltway. Anything less seems like we've come out ahead.
2
I have flown all over the world and experienced the joys of the TSA many times. If you think they provide security, you are delusional. Yes, they catch Billy Bob who accidentally left his 45 in his travel bag, but he was never going to use it on the plane. Real terrorists aren't going to sneak past the TSA, they are going to bypass them in other areas of the airport. When you consider the millions of wasted hours we spend in TSA lines and the cost, it is clear the terrorists have won. Look what the have us doing to ourselves. ..and willingly no less. I would feel just as comfortable if there was no TSA line and instead there were agents scattered throughout the airport profiling potential dangers. Take a page from the Israeli playbook. Profiling is rational, not evil. The TSA is a farce we cannot afford.
3
If only the MTA would calculate the hours lost waiting at the toll booth! As for PreCheck, maybe they could make the sign up process a little easier and keep the interview sites open evenings and weekends when people can really go!
You haven't begun to understand the costs. We spend 100 billion dollars to reduce the number of planes hijacked, from say two a decade to zero. That saves 100 lives. That's one billion a life. Get people to wear seat belts and save 3,000 lives a year. Or give people health insurance and save 100,000 lives a year. Either prospect saves more lives for less outlay. Isn't a life a life, and why spend a billion to save one when you could do it for a few thousand?
We have more people sifting through our underwear in the Tampa airport than we have studying the ocean. A lot more. I thought about this standing in line there, of asking the screener- here is how the conversation would have gone-
"So catch any terrorists today?"
"Nope."
"Yesterday?"
"Nope"
"Last month?"
"No"
"Last year?"
"No."
"Ever?"
"No"
"Wow, somebody here has caught one, right?"
"Nope"
We are idiots.
Not to mention the whack a mole problem. Stop aircraft terrorism? They will just pick a softer target. There are too many to list. It's theater, nothing more.
We have more people sifting through our underwear in the Tampa airport than we have studying the ocean. A lot more. I thought about this standing in line there, of asking the screener- here is how the conversation would have gone-
"So catch any terrorists today?"
"Nope."
"Yesterday?"
"Nope"
"Last month?"
"No"
"Last year?"
"No."
"Ever?"
"No"
"Wow, somebody here has caught one, right?"
"Nope"
We are idiots.
Not to mention the whack a mole problem. Stop aircraft terrorism? They will just pick a softer target. There are too many to list. It's theater, nothing more.
2
To summarize this article: we are important Harvard professors, and we think waiting in line is a waste of our time. However, we have no data of any kind as to which procedures, for example shoe removal, are or are nor useful in improving safety. Hence, we have no concrete suggestions to make. So we'll just write an editorial in the NYT whining about the problem without attempting to fix it. Not exactly the role we might hope a public intellectual fuel to play...
3
The crowds that are created by the TSA are perfect launching platforms for suicide bombers. Why should they wait to get to the screeners?
Does anyone else worry about the security of the security line itself? It seems to me this is when travelers are most vulnerable, having not been through the check yet and easily accessible by any bad actor who walks in from the airport drop-off lanes. I never feel very secure waiting in these lines, and never see many security guards monitoring them. Is this a concern or am I overly worried?
1
I work for the fed govt so I can speak first hand about their lack of caring about your time or money. A private company, as the article pointed out, has to become efficient or die. Without unlimited resources and with other companies vying for your business, they shape up pretty quickly or they won't survive.
But the gov't? Nah. With an unlimited budget (your money) they spend countless hours reorganizing, even though the last re-org was lousy, didn't work, and wasn't fully implemented. So why not upheave everything again to make your mark on an Agency. Witness the countless reshuffling of management. In my agency we supposedly have 1,000 jobs open and desperate to fill them, yet there are people sitting around reading books all day with nothing to do. We have 5-8 people that do nothing but write policy. And there's no pressure on how long it may take to write a policy; just something they work on. Huge amount of times wasted on unnecessary processes that take up a lot of time but yield nothing. not to mention the people put in charge of these processes have little training or background in whatever they're supposed to administer or fix.
Of course it's going to be a disaster
But the gov't? Nah. With an unlimited budget (your money) they spend countless hours reorganizing, even though the last re-org was lousy, didn't work, and wasn't fully implemented. So why not upheave everything again to make your mark on an Agency. Witness the countless reshuffling of management. In my agency we supposedly have 1,000 jobs open and desperate to fill them, yet there are people sitting around reading books all day with nothing to do. We have 5-8 people that do nothing but write policy. And there's no pressure on how long it may take to write a policy; just something they work on. Huge amount of times wasted on unnecessary processes that take up a lot of time but yield nothing. not to mention the people put in charge of these processes have little training or background in whatever they're supposed to administer or fix.
Of course it's going to be a disaster
1
Right. Sure. Private company is the answer. So then we would have "your time is important to us" instead of " your call is important to us."
It's going to be a monopoly contract, and, we are not the customer- the government is. And the winning company will be the lowest bidder, whose main purpose would be to cut costs. Awesome.
It's going to be a monopoly contract, and, we are not the customer- the government is. And the winning company will be the lowest bidder, whose main purpose would be to cut costs. Awesome.
"It is an illusion to think that, by waiting in line, we are buying complete safety."
Agreed. In fact, another article in today's NYT points out that "a leaked report from the Department of Homeland Security showed that auditors were able to get fake weapons and explosives past security screeners 95 percent of the time in 70 covert tests." So it's a wonder if this whole charade is making us safe at all.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/28/us/politics/tsas-long-lines-were-avoid...
Agreed. In fact, another article in today's NYT points out that "a leaked report from the Department of Homeland Security showed that auditors were able to get fake weapons and explosives past security screeners 95 percent of the time in 70 covert tests." So it's a wonder if this whole charade is making us safe at all.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/28/us/politics/tsas-long-lines-were-avoid...
You could not have put it better: "An illusion of security." 9/11 never would have occurred, if locked doors separated the cockpit from the passengers. A no-brainer. But, humans have no brains. So now we stand in lines and remove our shoes, like imbeciles.
This American predilection to over-reaction I call the "soccer-mom phenomena." Soccer-moms are the biggest force for moving the panic-needle in this country. Officials wait to see what sets the soccer-mom's hair on fire, and over-react accordingly. Sorry girls, but it is a gender-based trigger.
This American predilection to over-reaction I call the "soccer-mom phenomena." Soccer-moms are the biggest force for moving the panic-needle in this country. Officials wait to see what sets the soccer-mom's hair on fire, and over-react accordingly. Sorry girls, but it is a gender-based trigger.
1
Random passenger inspections at 50% would immediately cut the workload of TSA in half and improve the passenger flow through airports.
By cutting the workload in half for TSA, they may actually have more time to conduct proper checks and won't miss 95% of the prohibited items.
By cutting the workload in half for TSA, they may actually have more time to conduct proper checks and won't miss 95% of the prohibited items.
A while back I was doing a Houston to Seattle to Phoenix hen back to Houston run with two week stops in each city. Once I went to Alaska and caught some nice salmon and I thought I would bring the salmon back home with me. I had then put on dry ice in a Styrofoam container and on the way to the airport I realized I would need to seal the container for shipping. I purchased some heavy duty tape and a box cutter and sealed container. Then I casually tossed the extra tape and the box cutter into my carry-on luggage. Several months later I was cleaning out my luggage and found the tape and box cutter -- after numerous flights and worthless waste-of-time TSA checks.
1
It isn't just physical time wasted in line. Economists should take into account the time/brain power utterly wasted these last 14 years as Americans "prepare" for trips with endless "decisions."
Will TSA find an excuse to confiscate my costly moisturizer even if it is in a 3.4 ounce bottle? Should I pour it into an even tinier bottle? Will that be enough for my trip? Wait, where do I get a teeny bottle? Should I make an extra stop at CVS to find a teeny bottle or should I just hit Macy's when I land? Will I have time when I land? I'll need a lunch en route. But is peanut butter a gel? What will the wait be like on Tuesday? Will 4 hours in advance be enough? Better re-sked my meeting and the babysitter.
Preparing for unknowable abuse is draining.
And trying to guess how an uneducated gov clerk will react to things they've never seen before- or don't understand- aka the things in your bag- is a time-consuming, fool's errand.
This all may sound trivial, but cumulatively this time-suck takes a toll and is particularly punitive for businesswomen, who must look their best while running this gauntlet of absurd requirements. Will this underwire set off the machine? Can I wear just a cami underneath if I'm w colleagues?
Nursing mothers have had 100s of hours stolen from them as they conform to Fellini-esque 'policies' on breast milk- sometimes only to have their liquid gold callously taken by TSA anyway.
NONE of this makes anyone "safe." Global security experts laugh at us.
Will TSA find an excuse to confiscate my costly moisturizer even if it is in a 3.4 ounce bottle? Should I pour it into an even tinier bottle? Will that be enough for my trip? Wait, where do I get a teeny bottle? Should I make an extra stop at CVS to find a teeny bottle or should I just hit Macy's when I land? Will I have time when I land? I'll need a lunch en route. But is peanut butter a gel? What will the wait be like on Tuesday? Will 4 hours in advance be enough? Better re-sked my meeting and the babysitter.
Preparing for unknowable abuse is draining.
And trying to guess how an uneducated gov clerk will react to things they've never seen before- or don't understand- aka the things in your bag- is a time-consuming, fool's errand.
This all may sound trivial, but cumulatively this time-suck takes a toll and is particularly punitive for businesswomen, who must look their best while running this gauntlet of absurd requirements. Will this underwire set off the machine? Can I wear just a cami underneath if I'm w colleagues?
Nursing mothers have had 100s of hours stolen from them as they conform to Fellini-esque 'policies' on breast milk- sometimes only to have their liquid gold callously taken by TSA anyway.
NONE of this makes anyone "safe." Global security experts laugh at us.
8
Security screeners in other countries allow passengers to keep their shoes on.
Screening at Tokyo's Narita Airport is fast, courteous, and efficient, and the lines are short. Perhaps our TSA should figure out what the Japanese are doing right.
In addition, we need to remember that the ban on liquids came about because the British police infiltrated a gang of idiots who were planning to mix potentially explosive liquids to blow up planes. However, they had never gotten beyond the talking stage, and more importantly, none of them even possessed the passports that are required for any international travel.
The only result that I can see of the ban on liquids is increased demand for "travel size" toiletries.
Screening at Tokyo's Narita Airport is fast, courteous, and efficient, and the lines are short. Perhaps our TSA should figure out what the Japanese are doing right.
In addition, we need to remember that the ban on liquids came about because the British police infiltrated a gang of idiots who were planning to mix potentially explosive liquids to blow up planes. However, they had never gotten beyond the talking stage, and more importantly, none of them even possessed the passports that are required for any international travel.
The only result that I can see of the ban on liquids is increased demand for "travel size" toiletries.
2
As usual, the economists miss the political forest for the economic trees. What TSA screens for is a political decision, and the budget they are provided is due to a political decision. The simplest solution to long lines is: hire more TSA inspectors. Long lines and the pressure this puts on the inspectors to speed up undermines the stated purpose of inspection. (Whether inspection actually makes flying any safer is another matter.)
4
If your only tool is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail. If you are an economist, a government agency looks like a profit seeking, independent organization and you want to apply the same thinking. Only it's not. Government agencies, if there is an parallel to the private sector, are more like wholly own subsidiaries. Government agencies don't set their own missions or determine their own resources. And for government agencies, "mission" involves as many prohibitions and limits as it does powers and authority. The Congress and the Executive, working through the legislative process, tell government agencies what they should do and how they should do it and how much money they can spend in the process. Federal agencies then seek to carry out their mandates with whatever tools and dollars they are given.
Nearly all the decisions the authors discuss and attribute to TSA were not made by TSA or its executives. They were made by the Congress and the White House with generous assistance from the airlines. Counter to what the authors have written, these have to be seen as political decisions.
Nearly all the decisions the authors discuss and attribute to TSA were not made by TSA or its executives. They were made by the Congress and the White House with generous assistance from the airlines. Counter to what the authors have written, these have to be seen as political decisions.
2
I didn't feel any safer after my carry on and I went through the x-Ray process at Logan, only to learn that my toothpaste tube was too long. After waiting ten minutes a "supervisor" came and tolled the tube more compactly and sent me on my way.
1
Why not use available data from credit reports, police records, flying history, etc. to rate passengers for less or more screening? Anything that will help remove the presumption that we are all terrorists would help ease the seemingly unnecessary and excessive "screening". In short, an intelligent system is badly needed. The benefit of a pre-screening system is that energy could then be applied more efficiently to that very small fraction of people whose background signals potential for terrist acts.
7
TSA - the ultimate inefficient, under-performing government org, based on irrational fears that we must put up with bad service to be safe, the ultimate fallacy.
There are so many ways to increase efficiency and reward results - both in increased safety and efficient lines. This is a not a hard problem to hard to solve. Hopefully this summer's ridiculous lines will finally break the logjam of common sense plaguing Congressional budgets for TSA. Maybe. I am not holding my breath.
There are so many ways to increase efficiency and reward results - both in increased safety and efficient lines. This is a not a hard problem to hard to solve. Hopefully this summer's ridiculous lines will finally break the logjam of common sense plaguing Congressional budgets for TSA. Maybe. I am not holding my breath.
3
By not having a properly targeted system for assuring security at the passenger end of the system, massive costs and disruption are being incurred, which is exactly what the terrorists want and they are achieving. Rather than letting terrorists win by contorting our way of life, more intelligent and practical approaches are needed to handle this matter.
3
Despite having Global Entry, I was branded with the dreaded SSSS for secondary screening recently on a flight to Mexico. I was put through secondary screening not once, first leaving Tampa, and then again, in Houston, before connecting to Mexico. I was concerned about missing my connecting flight and asked one of the screeners the time, to which the agent doing the screening responded, "It doesn't matter, it's not going to make me move any faster." When I asked why I had been selected, TSA responded the airlines were responsible for deciding who is selected for screening. While I appreciate the agents are not at fault for the mess of a system, it is a joke.
5
Global Entry is useless when "the system is down". Actually, the whole federal government is "down".
I think the whole process is a scam that does very little in improving security, and it only benefits the corporations that have sold all the useless equipment to TSA and the TSA employees, who use to work for Wackenhut, now enjoy civil servarnt jobs with a nice pension and insurance plan. And the writer is right, the recent report that TSA failed to identify 95% of "illegal" items brought on board by the "independent testers"
10
You mean to tell me that in July, passengers will be charged $7 per flight segment by the TSA and the agency can't provide enough screeners?
You are right, no U.S. citizen should have jobs with "a nice pension and insurance plan". Anything you don't have, no one else should get either.
We need to do a full analysis of what we are doing and what we are trying to accomplish with these security procedures.
We screen 100% of airline passengers to interdict the very small percentage of them who want to be terrorists. However, we do not find all of them. How many we actually deter is not known. The screening process has spawned a new industry and employed tens of thousands of people in the US alone, many of whom are otherwise not employable. Many screeners have unionized and have become a permanent fixture of many aspects of daily life. They are not going away, and, as the screeners ramp up their costs through increased wages and benefits, they start to see the people they screen as existing for their benefit. It should be the other way around.
There has to be an end of screening some day, not only in entering buildings, sports events, courthouses, government offices, etc., but in air travel as well. All this screening cannot become any more of a way of life than it already has as it will continue to grow and take over more and more of our daily lives. We need to ramp it down aggressively. Doing that is not going to be easy, but it must be done before we all become prisoners once we leave our homes.
We screen 100% of airline passengers to interdict the very small percentage of them who want to be terrorists. However, we do not find all of them. How many we actually deter is not known. The screening process has spawned a new industry and employed tens of thousands of people in the US alone, many of whom are otherwise not employable. Many screeners have unionized and have become a permanent fixture of many aspects of daily life. They are not going away, and, as the screeners ramp up their costs through increased wages and benefits, they start to see the people they screen as existing for their benefit. It should be the other way around.
There has to be an end of screening some day, not only in entering buildings, sports events, courthouses, government offices, etc., but in air travel as well. All this screening cannot become any more of a way of life than it already has as it will continue to grow and take over more and more of our daily lives. We need to ramp it down aggressively. Doing that is not going to be easy, but it must be done before we all become prisoners once we leave our homes.
23
Sorry... It has already become our way of life.
Yes, this has "employed tens of thousands of people", and must be stopped! And too, the "otherwise unemployable" must be kept that way, at all cost.
The TSA does not really make decisions about what has to be included in screening - they are made by Congress and the public. Every time there is an incompetent plot involving some new supposed threat, such as the plan to smuggle explosive on in bottles, the public and the media go crazy and there must be a new screening to try to eliminate the threat completely. Of course Congress does not mandate new funds when this happens.
As the authors say, people are paying for this with time instead of money. Obviously, given the level of supposed security demanded the fees and/or taxes are inadequate. Unfortunately there is a national phobia against raising taxes and fees and many areas of life in addition to airport traffic are deteriorating because of it. This is a case of pseudo-conservative politics mandating bad economics.
As the authors say, people are paying for this with time instead of money. Obviously, given the level of supposed security demanded the fees and/or taxes are inadequate. Unfortunately there is a national phobia against raising taxes and fees and many areas of life in addition to airport traffic are deteriorating because of it. This is a case of pseudo-conservative politics mandating bad economics.
6
Sorry, but we do pay for this, the TSA charge is included in our ticket - $7 per flight segment beginning in July.
The government's disregard for people's time is on display this construction season, with never-ending displays of orange cones left to constrict traffic with no apparent purpose. And one need only commute into the Chicago from the west on the Eisenhower to experience the greatest bottleneck in this part of the world, owed to the incredibly stupid design of the freeway exits as it passes through Oak Park. I've been driving it for nearly 20 years, and every time, I cannot help but recognize how some short-sighted and selfish politics of the past continues to penalize travelers today. Government and economists obsesses about worker productivity. How much is wasted sitting in needless traffic?
4
The authors' point is entirely valid. Wasted time has a value. For example, if TSA had to pay each person in line that persons' hourly salary for a wait longer than 15 minutes, their budget would skyrocket.
Modern accounting should include what are considered "hidden costs", not just operating expenses. For example, the cost of mining companies' and frackers' destruction of fresh water. The additional costs and dangers incurred by global warming from the amount of jet fuel exhaust in the air from transport of goods, produce, arms and people.
If companies, and the government, were legally bound to report their hidden costs, a couple of things would happen. All inefficiencies and negative impacts of services provided would have to be paid for. The price of air travel and both imported and exported goods would go up.
But, perhaps transport powered by sunlight or wind would suddenly find a new market, people would not change their clothing styles so frequently and would buy eat home grown food.
Taxes would be increased to cover the various inconveniences caused by government inefficiencies--from filling out tax returns to dying in a V.A. hospital due to inadequate care.
Accounting for the "real" cost, of everything, could reset the global marketplace, but, it is much more realistic to account for global and specific costs, hidden and evident, to understand the exact economic consequence of human decisions.
Modern accounting should include what are considered "hidden costs", not just operating expenses. For example, the cost of mining companies' and frackers' destruction of fresh water. The additional costs and dangers incurred by global warming from the amount of jet fuel exhaust in the air from transport of goods, produce, arms and people.
If companies, and the government, were legally bound to report their hidden costs, a couple of things would happen. All inefficiencies and negative impacts of services provided would have to be paid for. The price of air travel and both imported and exported goods would go up.
But, perhaps transport powered by sunlight or wind would suddenly find a new market, people would not change their clothing styles so frequently and would buy eat home grown food.
Taxes would be increased to cover the various inconveniences caused by government inefficiencies--from filling out tax returns to dying in a V.A. hospital due to inadequate care.
Accounting for the "real" cost, of everything, could reset the global marketplace, but, it is much more realistic to account for global and specific costs, hidden and evident, to understand the exact economic consequence of human decisions.
4
We don't even get the illusion of security. The lines bring extra awareness and anxiety to a low probability risk. It is unlikely that the 9/11 attacks would have been prevented by the screening. The most effective response after 9/11 may have been the cockpit doors, which might well have been effective.
While standing in line, we have lots of time to think about the various vulnerabilities that have not be covered. Moreover, it makes the experience of airline travel far less pleasant. No wonder those who can afford it fly private.
Fortunately, we have not had a recent attack in this country. I believe the results would have been the same without the extra screening.
While standing in line, we have lots of time to think about the various vulnerabilities that have not be covered. Moreover, it makes the experience of airline travel far less pleasant. No wonder those who can afford it fly private.
Fortunately, we have not had a recent attack in this country. I believe the results would have been the same without the extra screening.
12
With locked and resistant cockpit doors, is my corkscrew a security risk?
The FAA tried to require the airlines to install hardened cockpit doors for years prior to 9/11, but were stymied by Congress which forbid the requirement - in response to Airline lobbying (and campaign contributions.)
Security experts regard the hardened doors the only cost-effective measure we have taken since 9/11.
The number of terrorists stopped by TSA screening: zero.
Security experts regard the hardened doors the only cost-effective measure we have taken since 9/11.
The number of terrorists stopped by TSA screening: zero.
The 'gate keepers' have every incentive not to let people pass less the wrong person gets in. The TSA will respond to bad publicity and react, but that will not change long term behavior. unless the enabling legislation is amended to make efficiency part of their mandate and is funded accordingly. It ultimately is a political problem in so far as politicians of all stripes want to look good but not pay for it.
1
No terrorist has ever been caught in a security line. Terrorists have gotten through. Therefore we must conclude that the security line is 0% effective.
5
Not correct. If terrorists know that there will be screening they will not try to get through with a particular method. The effectiveness must be judged by the frequency of successful attacks. These are so infrequent that valid statistical tests are essentially impossible.
2
For a terrorist, it is easier to come in as an "illegal" by other means.
In referring to airlines on-time departures, the planes do pull away from the gate on-time. But the planes sit on a holding area of the runway until their landing time is available. It is often a 20 to 30 minute wait.
3
The total lack of respect for their customer's precious time, energy, money, dignity etc is outrageous. Business is supposed to serve people, people do not exist simply to produce revenue for corporations....which btw are not people. When will we build our high speed train alternative to the airlines?
8
Exactly...emphasis on dignity.
"For example, suppose the agency finds that shoe removal does very little to improve safety but is one of the biggest sources of airport delay.
In the current system, the benefits of eliminating shoe removal would be felt by passengers but would not affect the T.S.A.’s budget."
I believe TSA already knows this but why remove good theater? Last year I traveled through six countries in Asia and never once had to remove my shoes. In Japan they required laptops removed from bags. In Singapore, a very strict country where chewing gum is a crime, and where the cat o' nine is used to flog prisoners as punishment there is no shoes removal. Ever since the failed British shoe bomber Richard Reid pulled a stunt that by trying to ignite his shoe TSA believes that everyone is capable of planting bombs in our shoes. Some people need orthopedic shoes. Not everyone can bend down and readily remove their shoes then easily put them back on. The shoes removal is both unsanitary and is more fit for a traveling carnival with clowns.
In the current system, the benefits of eliminating shoe removal would be felt by passengers but would not affect the T.S.A.’s budget."
I believe TSA already knows this but why remove good theater? Last year I traveled through six countries in Asia and never once had to remove my shoes. In Japan they required laptops removed from bags. In Singapore, a very strict country where chewing gum is a crime, and where the cat o' nine is used to flog prisoners as punishment there is no shoes removal. Ever since the failed British shoe bomber Richard Reid pulled a stunt that by trying to ignite his shoe TSA believes that everyone is capable of planting bombs in our shoes. Some people need orthopedic shoes. Not everyone can bend down and readily remove their shoes then easily put them back on. The shoes removal is both unsanitary and is more fit for a traveling carnival with clowns.
24
At a small airport, I still had to remove my shoes even though I was Pre-Check. At least the TSA should be consistent.
State antiterrorism security is a classic case of diminishing marginal returns. Every incremental increase in money and power allocated to the TSA yields ever decreasing increases an actual security. Ultimately, the TSA could have infinite money and power and ordinary citizens live in a virtual prison cell, yet we would still be at risk of terrorist attack.
The practical reality is terrorism poses only a marginal threat to America and, despite what government officials and self-proclaimed terrorism experts claim, terrorism does not pose an existential threat to our way of life or form of government. The greatest threat of terrorism is how government responds to it. TSA's long lines are an example of the real cost of terrorism in America today.
The practical reality is terrorism poses only a marginal threat to America and, despite what government officials and self-proclaimed terrorism experts claim, terrorism does not pose an existential threat to our way of life or form of government. The greatest threat of terrorism is how government responds to it. TSA's long lines are an example of the real cost of terrorism in America today.
16
As a several million miler traveler over a period of years, I obviously saw the introduction of Homeland security after 9-11. Like many I was uneasy and quietly racial profiled fellow passengers, and gave thought to how I would react if something happened. When that calmed down, it then occurred to me the place terrorism will be implemented is on the tarmac, or in the bowls of the airports. We of over course have no check points at curb side, only cops walking around who well meaning, would be after the fact if we get blown away. Point is, we are now conditioned to expect bombs in subways , entreatment events, or wherever people congregate, like what occurred in Paris. Our rail system so far must be difficult, or not worth the effort to blow up.I would imagine on the other hand large Railroad stations are on the list as they are crowed with innocents. Avoiding travel to Europe is always being discussed should I go or pass if allowed.
The story behind the story that seems to be missed is this huge bureaucracy was established for a problem stemming from 9/11 that did not exist. The terrorists that passed through security passed through legally at the time. There are many examples of better ways to do this type of thing, such as something more partnership with airlines and airports than imposing a big centralized bureaucracy. Many successful examples exist of where this type of partnership places the solutions closest to those that know the circumstances. It seems that TSA is a solution looking for a problem and there is a better way to address it.
14
Just flew from JFK to Heathrow and back on Virgin Atlantic for an 11 day vacation. We had no problems getting through security in either place, about 8 minutes at JFK, less at Heathrow despite the start of their bank holiday weekend. The agent did say that the wait varies as to time of day and it had been much busier earlier. We have T.S.A pre-check but that was not a factor as we were ticketed on Virgin Atlantic and that airline is not included in the program. I guess it is the luck of the draw.
3
So you wasted your $100 for Global Entry because Virgin doesn't participate in the program.
Waited 2 hours yesterday for United flight in Paris CDG in security line for "all other" passports, US included, undermanned with unopened checkpoints, with no AC in hot conditions, the elderly, babies carried in parents arms, women in covering coats and scarves headed for Turkey practically swooning from heat, men with canes, limps, heavy bags, soldiers in French uniform, high ranking government officials and traveling college kids, all in amazingly good humor. No advance notice given at checkin, no attempt to group people waiitng by destination or takeoff time, no water, no bathroom breaks. Subhuman conditions which better organization, efficiency, adequate staff could have prevented.
13
That was not the security line, but passport control. It is a mess if you are flying out of Paris, and has been the all the times I have been though over the last 5 years. Flying into Paris is easy. Flying out is a nightmare. If you are connecting in Europe, avoid Paris like the plague. Schipol is much better.
1
Plus the unaccounted for cost of the loss of dignity from being subjected to such a humiliating experience.
I travel at least 6 times a year, and have never had more than 15 minutes wait at TSA. Reading the predictions for the summer travel season, and the experiences of others, I have made my appointment for TSA screening, which has not received nearly as much publicity as it should -- otherwise I would have known about it long before now.
It seems to me that the "time cost" for travelers can be paid by the $85 and time invested in pre-screening to avoid waiting in such long lines.
It seems to me that the "time cost" for travelers can be paid by the $85 and time invested in pre-screening to avoid waiting in such long lines.
4
This is true only to a point. If you fly internationally on foreign carriers, Pre-Check does nothing - it is available only on specific American flag carriers, at participating airports. So unless I am willing and able to book only American flag airlines, I am stuck in security lines on most international flights.
9
@ A (NYC)
One would be nuts to choose a US carrier over a European or (especially) an Asian carrier. US carriers don't compare in accommodations and treatment to most premium foreign carriers.
One would be nuts to choose a US carrier over a European or (especially) an Asian carrier. US carriers don't compare in accommodations and treatment to most premium foreign carriers.
6
Sorry, but pre-check and global entry don't work much of the time.
It speaks to a fundamental understanding of what terrorists are targeting; planes are attractive as a way of packing many casualties in a confined space. If the TSA are generating the same thing by way of long queues, all before the people are being checked for devices, it won't be too long before the first attack within the terminal rather than the fuselage.
24
See, here, Brussels.
Yep, a suicide bomber in a crowded security line could kill a lot of people. Isn't that what happened in Brussels?
I wouldn't mind the cost of my time in line, if I thought for one second that the TSA's security theater really improved safety. Yet their own audits and testing reveal that fake bombs and fake weapons pass through a disturbingly high percentage of the time. And the recent actual terrorist attempts all got through, while those that were interrupted were all due to the passengers on the planes. TSA, and the massive government surveillance efforts, the tens of Billions in direct spending and the hundreds of Billions more in economic lost time costs provide at best a weak mirage of security, an illusion that the bureaucracy and politicians are -doing something- and therefore deserve money and votes. Were 'air flight security' a market, the TSA would be out of business immediately. As a government bureaucracy it is probably eternal. As in so many other areas, politicians cannot be rational about 'security', so we spend Billions preventing a handful of terrorists from attacking airplanes while doing nothing at all about gun violence that kills thousands of US citizens every year. Our government's perception of where the real dangers and risks to American's safety is badly misdirected.
41
The TSA has succeeded in both providing a target-rich environment for those inclined to do harm and in likely producing more "backlash voters" who will pull the lever for Trump because there are few more personally felt examples of government incompetence than standing line for hours to get screened for a plane trip. Quite an accomplishment and yet another example of how a Republican congress which cut TSA funds also, in the process, helped to destroy its own party.
18
TSA, another useless and wasteful government agencies, with no incentive to perform, as jobs are guaranteed regardless whether the agents perform their job well. Here again, you could privatize this function, cut 25% of the people, and probably perform at 50% greater efficiency.
Again, another example of why we are so fed up with the bloated government bureaucracy and the lackeys who run the various agencies. We need to sweep the whole system clean, get rid of 25% of the personnel, and add someone privatization to their functions. Certainly, the 'crook' can never hope or even want to change the system. Let's give 'the Donald' a chance to see if he can take this horrendous government mess, and make some sense out of it. Make the government worker useful, instead of simply overhead.
Again, another example of why we are so fed up with the bloated government bureaucracy and the lackeys who run the various agencies. We need to sweep the whole system clean, get rid of 25% of the personnel, and add someone privatization to their functions. Certainly, the 'crook' can never hope or even want to change the system. Let's give 'the Donald' a chance to see if he can take this horrendous government mess, and make some sense out of it. Make the government worker useful, instead of simply overhead.
10
The TSA tax on airline tickets is substantially more than the $2.50 mentioned in this article: "The fee is currently $5.60 per one-way trip in air transportation that originates at an airport in the U.S., except that the fee imposed per round trip shall not exceed $11.20."
Even economists should get their facts straight.
Even economists should get their facts straight.
12
Continuing on the theme of getting facts right, the government does consider the cost for the time to prepare taxes. The IRS goes through a rule making process when making changes to tax forms that includes considering the burden of preparing returns.
7
And the TSA fee will go up in July. With this much income, the TSA should function like a precision watch.
Ok, these long lines are creating new very tempting soft targets. Just look at the photo of all those people just standing there. Exactly what security is in place to stop somebody from entering that line with a bomb in their backpack? None. Or parking a car bomb outside the airport windows at drop off? Very little I suspect. The security is all the way in the back of the airport at the front of the line. This is what unfortunately happened in Belgium.
The best place for security would be right at the gate with bomb sniffing dogs checking each passenger in the jetway as they stand there waiting for people to stow their bags. This would limit the number of people impacted by a terrorist event through dispersal of the potential targets thoughout the airport instead of concentrating them in a massive pool of humanity against a backdrop of a wall of glass windows.
Can somebody tell me why we are spending our tax dollars to move the target from the sky to the lobby?
Nobody has explained why we don't go through the same securitheatre to board a subway.
Best to let the NSA do its thing and let it do it well.
The best place for security would be right at the gate with bomb sniffing dogs checking each passenger in the jetway as they stand there waiting for people to stow their bags. This would limit the number of people impacted by a terrorist event through dispersal of the potential targets thoughout the airport instead of concentrating them in a massive pool of humanity against a backdrop of a wall of glass windows.
Can somebody tell me why we are spending our tax dollars to move the target from the sky to the lobby?
Nobody has explained why we don't go through the same securitheatre to board a subway.
Best to let the NSA do its thing and let it do it well.
28
Was with you on 'illusion' of safety creating other 'soft targets' but you lost me at NSA
The TSA screening is said by the agency to try to reduce risk but that risk cannot be eliminated entirely. I f that is true we should concentrate screening on the population most likely to be a risk. I know a 92 year old lady, the widow of a decorated career Air force officer. She is not a risk. No need to examine her. The only result of that is slowing down the line. Neither is the business person who flies three times a week and has done so for twenty years.
I am a retired surgeon, practiced in the same place for thirty-five years, the same checking account and address for 40 years, have two married children and 2+(one on the way) grtrandchildren. I am not going to blow up a plane.
No risk.
I am suggesting profiling. I know that's not politically correct but every other country does it because it is the only thing that makes sense. I know about Pre-Check but the US government has enough information on us to send half of us straight to the gate after we check in and check bags.
I am a retired surgeon, practiced in the same place for thirty-five years, the same checking account and address for 40 years, have two married children and 2+(one on the way) grtrandchildren. I am not going to blow up a plane.
No risk.
I am suggesting profiling. I know that's not politically correct but every other country does it because it is the only thing that makes sense. I know about Pre-Check but the US government has enough information on us to send half of us straight to the gate after we check in and check bags.
28
If you become separated from your bag (allow your Uber driver put it in her car's trunk, let it be put in the hold of an airport transfer bus or tour group baggage vehicle, or leave it on the cart of an inattentive skycap) even your bag (or mine) might have something nefarious added to it. The 92-year-old widow might carry a "gift" for an acquaintance's grandchild, or lithium-ion batteries for her children's electronics. So I am inclined to keep hold luggage screening.
But I would be delighted to return to pre-9/11 security measures, which I do not think would raise my risk significantly: long security lines offer an easy target; And yesterday two people were hit (one killed) by cars while crossing Lake Shore Drive while trying to escape an armed robber; one day earlier a teenage girl was shot to death and the driver wounded on Lake Shore Drive at the Fullerton on/off ramp. And of course Joan Rivers died from a carelessly-performed medical procedure. Life comes with risks.
But I would be delighted to return to pre-9/11 security measures, which I do not think would raise my risk significantly: long security lines offer an easy target; And yesterday two people were hit (one killed) by cars while crossing Lake Shore Drive while trying to escape an armed robber; one day earlier a teenage girl was shot to death and the driver wounded on Lake Shore Drive at the Fullerton on/off ramp. And of course Joan Rivers died from a carelessly-performed medical procedure. Life comes with risks.
Pre-Check and Global Entry have many flaws. Try coming back into the US and being told that the Global Entry "system is down". You wait like all of the masses who didn't give the government $100 for facilitated entry.
The corporate business model is all about internalizing benefits while passing off as many costs as possible onto others. An externalized costs no longer exists, for a particular corporation, so it makes more money.
But what do corporate 'externalities' have to do with TSA, a government agency? In an ideal world, nothing. The mission of TSA should be keep the traveling public safe as effectively and efficiently as possible. Costs like excessive wait times are not external to TSA's mission.
But congress clearly thought otherwise when it cut TSA's budget instead of increasing it, even though congress had projections that air travel would increase this summer. As a result government now collects more TSA fees from increased traffic while incurring smaller costs due to TSA's budget cuts. That is exactly what fiscal conservatism - - - corporate thinking applied to government - - - demands.
But what about the travelers standing in TSA wait lines for hours on end? The corporate business model says they are invisible. They are externalities.
But what do corporate 'externalities' have to do with TSA, a government agency? In an ideal world, nothing. The mission of TSA should be keep the traveling public safe as effectively and efficiently as possible. Costs like excessive wait times are not external to TSA's mission.
But congress clearly thought otherwise when it cut TSA's budget instead of increasing it, even though congress had projections that air travel would increase this summer. As a result government now collects more TSA fees from increased traffic while incurring smaller costs due to TSA's budget cuts. That is exactly what fiscal conservatism - - - corporate thinking applied to government - - - demands.
But what about the travelers standing in TSA wait lines for hours on end? The corporate business model says they are invisible. They are externalities.
18
Outstanding article. The cumulative cost of passengers' time/lost productivity is undoubtedly staggering. When I fly for business (80% of my travel), my company pays for this. Perhaps if there were a corporate write-off for lost time, the message would resonate with the federal government.
13
One way to get action towards a solution: eliminate priority at TSA for first class passengers, and make everyone go through the same waiting lines. Congress would have to solve the problems to speed up their own travel, and those wealthy enough to fly first class would have a strong incentive to pressure Congress to get a faster system. Moreover, it could easily be much more effective than our present system.
28
A better suggestion would be to ban children and most elderly people from flying. They take forever in the security lines and are most often the ones who fail to remove metal objects prior to being scanned.
Frequent fliers are not the problem with the TSA waits.
Frequent fliers are not the problem with the TSA waits.
6
No, a better suggestion would be to exempt children and the elderly from the security requirements because they pose such a low risk.
6
Better to exempt them (children and seniors) from same scrutiny (all get TSApre for free)
The total lack of revenue from a sudden, widespread boycott of public airline travel should resolve this problem rather quickly.
Besides that, I've been truly surprised that no one has spent their time waiting on line to develop an app for this problem. There is a fortune to be made by converting public airline traffic, or at least a part of it, into a customer financed, membership only, system of private planes that could avoid the TSA and its ludicrous expense.
If I knew what an app is, and how to create one, I would have done it myself. However, since I have only flown a handful of times since 2001, and not once since 2009, I haven't had any standing on line time to dedicate to such a project, regardless of the likely reward.
But I do get a chuckle from the frustrated faces who continue to accept all this abuse directed at them by the man... so, thanks for that.
Besides that, I've been truly surprised that no one has spent their time waiting on line to develop an app for this problem. There is a fortune to be made by converting public airline traffic, or at least a part of it, into a customer financed, membership only, system of private planes that could avoid the TSA and its ludicrous expense.
If I knew what an app is, and how to create one, I would have done it myself. However, since I have only flown a handful of times since 2001, and not once since 2009, I haven't had any standing on line time to dedicate to such a project, regardless of the likely reward.
But I do get a chuckle from the frustrated faces who continue to accept all this abuse directed at them by the man... so, thanks for that.
7
The long lines are a very visible sign that government doesn't function when Congress doesn't. The Republican Congress has diverted much of the funds earmarked for the TSA to the deficit, so presumably they're happy with the results. After all, politicians don't fly with peons like us, but they do like to bestow contracts to their friends. It's a twofer! The GOP can rail against inefficient government workers without suffering the consequences and then make sure the bribes -- I mean donations-- they've received benefit their friends who own private security firms.
27
Don't just blame the Repubs, the Demos are responsible too. But the Demos believe tax and spend is the solution for everything.
The other night I attended a high-powered gala in LA. 100s of guests, lotsa stars, famous hotel. While I don't doubt 'security' personal were somewhere, neither did I notice it.
No bags were opened, no lines, nobody forced thru carcinogenic scanners operated by dull-wits.
No one ordered to place valued possessions outside of view- and not dare touch them until deemed allowable by some clerk. No shoes were removed.
Our fixation on airplanes and ballparks is ruining us; is a global embarrassment- and the Security Theater for the now pre-criminalized customer, is mostly pointless, particularly once cockpit doors were reinforced and passengers learned not to acquiesce.
We are all losing countless hours to utter madness. (And this does not include the nonsense of measuring liquid essentials into magical tiny bottles and baggies- or re-buying necessities upon arrival. Unproductive busywork is not the mark of a great society).
TSA has never caught a terrorist and fails 95% of tests, while only airlines have a stake in anyone's safety.
With the outsized importance we place on planes (not the 1000s of ppl stacked in queues) a visitor to this planet might wonder: How come these Earthlings don't "protect" themselves everywhere?
I must ask all the alarmists- how ever do u 'feel safe' in a restaurant unless every last bag-n-brastrap is 'inspected' by an otherwise-unemployable? Or is it that you're only willing to grind society to a halt at the airport because, logic?
No bags were opened, no lines, nobody forced thru carcinogenic scanners operated by dull-wits.
No one ordered to place valued possessions outside of view- and not dare touch them until deemed allowable by some clerk. No shoes were removed.
Our fixation on airplanes and ballparks is ruining us; is a global embarrassment- and the Security Theater for the now pre-criminalized customer, is mostly pointless, particularly once cockpit doors were reinforced and passengers learned not to acquiesce.
We are all losing countless hours to utter madness. (And this does not include the nonsense of measuring liquid essentials into magical tiny bottles and baggies- or re-buying necessities upon arrival. Unproductive busywork is not the mark of a great society).
TSA has never caught a terrorist and fails 95% of tests, while only airlines have a stake in anyone's safety.
With the outsized importance we place on planes (not the 1000s of ppl stacked in queues) a visitor to this planet might wonder: How come these Earthlings don't "protect" themselves everywhere?
I must ask all the alarmists- how ever do u 'feel safe' in a restaurant unless every last bag-n-brastrap is 'inspected' by an otherwise-unemployable? Or is it that you're only willing to grind society to a halt at the airport because, logic?
79
Who was allowed into this gala? I'm sure it wasn't the general public. Wasn't it by invitation only, and didn't they check your name against a list if they didn't recognize you? Why are you comparing a party to an airport?
I don't doubt lines are long in part because the T.S.A. is grossly inefficient. But to assert that the problem isn't about politics, but rather is about economics, is a sign of the authors' implicit bias: they're economists, so they naturally see that at the heart of everything.
At the heart of our long lines, though, is our failure to respond rationally to the threat of terrorism. We demand perfect security and we applaud those who are adept at convincing us that security theater is the same as actual security. We also are absolutely intolerant of risk.
Want shorter lines? Give up on the fantasy of perfect security. As a bonus, we'll save a bunch of money: as the authors note, those lines are expensive.
At the heart of our long lines, though, is our failure to respond rationally to the threat of terrorism. We demand perfect security and we applaud those who are adept at convincing us that security theater is the same as actual security. We also are absolutely intolerant of risk.
Want shorter lines? Give up on the fantasy of perfect security. As a bonus, we'll save a bunch of money: as the authors note, those lines are expensive.
29
"We also are absolutely intolerant of risk."
'G person' from California, please speak for yourself, and leave "we" out of the sentence, paragraph, and comment.
'G person' from California, please speak for yourself, and leave "we" out of the sentence, paragraph, and comment.
TSA is typical of the government - inefficient and incompetent.
If our diabolical government weren't busy funding and creating terrorists the world over, interfering in other states affairs and spreading capitalism by gunpoint we wouldn't be paying the price in blood, treasure and wasted time in airports for a false sense of security. This useless, unaccountable government is the source of practically all the world's problems.
16
Disneyland posts expected wait times at their lines for rides. It's not too much to expect the government to do as much.
17
Disney is protecting its profit. The Government has no profit to protect.
A very interesting article and one I was happy to share, in spite of the fact I found its conclusion "It's economics," a bit too thin. Having just endured, in a matter of 12 days, punishing lines in Newark and in Los Angeles, I am tempted to insist the cost of security lines must not be measured solely in dollars wasted.
How does one value the damage to a person's dignity, which is to say, what is the psychic cost of having to accept humiliation added to humiliation? What is the price paid to to see fellow citizens lining up and fed into narrower and narrower spaces, as they move forward to meekly remove shoes, belts and empty their pockets of change.
Certainly the cost of seeing one's community reduced to angry but impotent drones must have some lasting negative repercussions, at the least visions of an inevitable dystopian future.
Finally, what will be the cost, future to be sure, but near future, too, of serious class conflict. I never resent, or wish to punish, the rich, powerful or celebrated as much as when I am compelled to wait in a line. In the unlikely event Warren Buffett or Bono, or Beyoncé or Oscar Munoz, had to removed his or her belt, sunglasses, and shoes, before boarding a commercial airline, I suspect that would be the last day any of us would be compelled to submit to this dehumanizing practice.
Toward that end, I recommend the following action: tax NetJet and its competitors out of the friendly skies.
How does one value the damage to a person's dignity, which is to say, what is the psychic cost of having to accept humiliation added to humiliation? What is the price paid to to see fellow citizens lining up and fed into narrower and narrower spaces, as they move forward to meekly remove shoes, belts and empty their pockets of change.
Certainly the cost of seeing one's community reduced to angry but impotent drones must have some lasting negative repercussions, at the least visions of an inevitable dystopian future.
Finally, what will be the cost, future to be sure, but near future, too, of serious class conflict. I never resent, or wish to punish, the rich, powerful or celebrated as much as when I am compelled to wait in a line. In the unlikely event Warren Buffett or Bono, or Beyoncé or Oscar Munoz, had to removed his or her belt, sunglasses, and shoes, before boarding a commercial airline, I suspect that would be the last day any of us would be compelled to submit to this dehumanizing practice.
Toward that end, I recommend the following action: tax NetJet and its competitors out of the friendly skies.
27
There are 3 things I do not understand:
1. Why does this piece not mention the well-publicized fact that the TSA has flunked 95% of tests involving investigators smuggling forbidden items onto commercial airplanes?
2. With over five billion passengers passing through its security portals since its inception, TSA has not caught a single terrorist.
3. The terror attack at Brussels airport took place before people passed through security. Passengers in congested lines waiting for the TSA could be sitting ducks. Many crowded places, like malls, are similarly potentially compromised. Why the fixation on airplanes? What about ticketing areas, TSA waiting areas, curbside drop-off areas at airports, and many other venues.
1. Why does this piece not mention the well-publicized fact that the TSA has flunked 95% of tests involving investigators smuggling forbidden items onto commercial airplanes?
2. With over five billion passengers passing through its security portals since its inception, TSA has not caught a single terrorist.
3. The terror attack at Brussels airport took place before people passed through security. Passengers in congested lines waiting for the TSA could be sitting ducks. Many crowded places, like malls, are similarly potentially compromised. Why the fixation on airplanes? What about ticketing areas, TSA waiting areas, curbside drop-off areas at airports, and many other venues.
192
And how much 'attitude' (I'm a dolt but I'll try my best to make you feel like one) was doled out to the 5 billion by TSA agents.
As I recall, TSA was created when many potential airline passengers who knew about the 9/11 attacks were afraid to fly and the airlines were afraid they might take in so little from paying passengers that they would go out of business. As I also recall, when TSA started screening the airlines' business recovered. We may not like TSA, but without it, the airlines might have gone out of business. We now need to figure out how to have the best possible situation when people want low taxes, low airline fares, and short wait time. Interesting little triangle (i.e., three variable) problem.
5
The airlines would have gone out of business? Probably not. They would have just made the planes standing room only and given extra bonuses to their executives.
No, the real problem is too many people flying who don't actually need to. If we had high-speed rail and/or luxury buses, like those in other countries, a lot of the air traffic could be siphoned off into other modes of transportation.
Instead, our government paid the airlines $35 billion as a lump sum in 2001 to compensate them for the losses from 9/11.
At that time, that was more than our government had paid Amtrak *in its entire existence.*
No, the real problem is too many people flying who don't actually need to. If we had high-speed rail and/or luxury buses, like those in other countries, a lot of the air traffic could be siphoned off into other modes of transportation.
Instead, our government paid the airlines $35 billion as a lump sum in 2001 to compensate them for the losses from 9/11.
At that time, that was more than our government had paid Amtrak *in its entire existence.*
2
As part of the problem is the fee for checked in luggage, one could say that the airlines are making money at the expense of the taxpayers who are paying for security and also wasting time.
Have airlines pay for added security personnel, or have them ask for payment for carry on luggage rather than checked in luggage.
The latter would shorten the security process drastically.
Have airlines pay for added security personnel, or have them ask for payment for carry on luggage rather than checked in luggage.
The latter would shorten the security process drastically.
44
Fees have, apparently, caused a four fold increase in carry on bags
I cannot agree with you more about fees for carryon baggage -let people check baggage for free and allow each passenger a handbag, briefcase or backpack for free - luggage, even if it fits in overhead gets a hefty fee. Checking the bags at the security lines and the additional wait time on board before take off / after landing as the luggage compartments are filled / emptied is nearly as tedious as the security line.
1
Reverse the baggage fee to carry on bags and increase security line efficiency by 30%. Neat.
An issue that no-one seems to want to address is selective screening to reduce lines...yes, I'm referring to profiling.
When I travel with my wife it seems ludicrous to put us through a full screen. We are both in our sixties and not a likely threat.
Let's apply common sense.
If you are a 25 year-old male on a passport from a mid-eastern country with a history of terrorism, and you are travelling by yourself, wouldn't you think you'd be more of suspect than the family of four off to a vacation in Disneyland?
Wouldn't you expect to be more highly scrutinized than the group of six young woman off to a bachelorette party in Las Vegas?
A bit more common sense would help us all.
If we really want to have a change, stop the special treatment of our governmental officials...let them line up like the cattle we have all become (even those of us with NEXUS cards). When President Obama or Prime Minister Trudeau, and all members of Congress or the House of Commons, are in the line with me than I will begin to feel they have some understanding of what the rest of us go through.
When I travel with my wife it seems ludicrous to put us through a full screen. We are both in our sixties and not a likely threat.
Let's apply common sense.
If you are a 25 year-old male on a passport from a mid-eastern country with a history of terrorism, and you are travelling by yourself, wouldn't you think you'd be more of suspect than the family of four off to a vacation in Disneyland?
Wouldn't you expect to be more highly scrutinized than the group of six young woman off to a bachelorette party in Las Vegas?
A bit more common sense would help us all.
If we really want to have a change, stop the special treatment of our governmental officials...let them line up like the cattle we have all become (even those of us with NEXUS cards). When President Obama or Prime Minister Trudeau, and all members of Congress or the House of Commons, are in the line with me than I will begin to feel they have some understanding of what the rest of us go through.
55
Remove the overhead racks and stipulate stiff fees for lost or delayed luggage.
20
You probably don't bring photographic or electronic equipment with you.
And loyalty.
2
How about calculating the true economic cost of flying on an airplane, cost of time wasted while sitting for hours in a seat just waiting for the plane to land so that everybody can get out of that aluminum tube in the sky.
And the carbon emissions and exhaust pollution filling up our perfectly blue sky, the source of oxygen and air that we breathe to live.
Travel is a luxury and air travel even more so. Time to tally up the real cost of of air travel and let passengers foot the bill.
Or perhaps stay at home and do some house cleaning, gardening or cooking for your friends and family.
And the carbon emissions and exhaust pollution filling up our perfectly blue sky, the source of oxygen and air that we breathe to live.
Travel is a luxury and air travel even more so. Time to tally up the real cost of of air travel and let passengers foot the bill.
Or perhaps stay at home and do some house cleaning, gardening or cooking for your friends and family.
4
Millions of air travelers are conducting business. Staying home and cooking won't get that done.
7
The tubes are now composites, not aluminum.
@Andrew
I did and I do. Instead of flying monthly, I flew only five times from 2001 to 2009, not once since.
Tune in and drop out?
I did and I do. Instead of flying monthly, I flew only five times from 2001 to 2009, not once since.
Tune in and drop out?
"which he curiously blamed on Bernie Sanders" because he is an idiot.
47
The Paperwork reduction act makes the IRS and others account for the time "filling in forms".
But yes the DMV "standing in line" is not accounted for, not is that of the TSA.
Perhaps we are all living here in Allentown now?
But yes the DMV "standing in line" is not accounted for, not is that of the TSA.
Perhaps we are all living here in Allentown now?
4
What the IRS does not account for is the time spent reading instructions to be able to properly fill in their forms (a mistake can be costly), or the time spent consulting your accountant to try and understand what it is exactly that the IRS wants from you (besides your money, of course).
Just returned from a week in Jamaica. Flew American Airlines and flying time was smooth and efficient. However, Customs and Immigration service in Charlotte was deplorable. We had 1 hour and 40 minutes between arrival at the airport and our departure flight for NJ. We spent 1 hour 25 minutes in Customs to answer 3 easy questions we had already written on a Customs form on the plane. No special check or investigation. Then had to pick up our luggage and drop it off at a recheck station 12 feet way (REALLY!).Made our flight by a few minutes after boarding was almost complete. This is not about security. It's about HORRIFIC service! TSA uses airline income providers to support their bottom line.
49
That is Customs and Border Protection that caused your delay, not the TSA.
Yes to everything but the pick up and deposit luggage, it is a way of making sure passengers only put bags in the plane, not ground crew somewhere outside the states. That is a good idea that won't go away.
I was on a plane in Germany where they pulled out the bags and had each passenger pick out his, when they were all picked they reloaded and we left.
I was on a plane in Germany where they pulled out the bags and had each passenger pick out his, when they were all picked they reloaded and we left.
May I refer anyone who is interested in improving the efficency of the TSA to Gail Collins's article of May 26, 2016, "I Have Met the Enemy, and It Is the Airlines." I'm surprised that Messrs Mullainathan and Thaler didn't mention it, and the fact, that as Ms. Collins' makes clear, failure to check luggage is a significant drag on the TSA. The upshot, perhaps passengers should be required to check their bags whether they pay for it or not.
24
I'm not checking my bag so the airlines can lose it.
7
The rules that do not allow for Israeli airport security tactics are the culprit.
10
I've never seen any evidence that the TSA is doing anything at all to keep us safer. The real security improvements were in cockpit door design.
Why has nobody suggested just getting rid of the screening process altogether? Knowing the actual screening failure rates, and the safety of air travel vs driving, I'd still choose to fly if there were no screening.
Why has nobody suggested just getting rid of the screening process altogether? Knowing the actual screening failure rates, and the safety of air travel vs driving, I'd still choose to fly if there were no screening.
25
Surrounded by virgins in paradise Osama bin Ladin reclines with a satisfied smirk
11
Why not just be direct? Tell the flying public to arrive at least 3 hrs early and bring a book.
4
Book? What's that? Why can't people just be satisfied with the TV screens int he waiting areas spewing for their pablum for the masses
11
I will do that with pleasure, if you pay my 3 hours worth of time. I am a lawyer who charges $350 an hour.
Sorry, fundamentally the problem IS politics. Republicans refuse to take externalities into consideration in virtually all policy matters as a matter of ideology and/or greed. If they did, more government agencies would be funded properly and more regulations would be more stringent, not less. The fundamental problem in this country today is the Republican party, the policies of which are not conservative (whatever that means) but usually libertarian -- by which I mean let's let everyone do anything they want (pollute, carry loaded weapons on college campuses to name just two), unless you're black, Hispanic, or poor in which case you can't do anything you want; rather we (the Republican led society) will do anything we want to you.
25
If the Republicans ever drop the ball, it's obvious that Democrats will pick it up.
The problem is that TSA is not self funding likes some other agencies that are supported by user fees. The have an annual appropriation from Congress that takes forever to change. Lead by GOP congressman John Mica, the GOP wants to to strangle TSA so it can make it fail and turn it back to the private security companies that failed so miserably on 9/11. Simply charge each passenger a screening fee and give the money to TSA. As passengers increase TSA can hire more screeners. Instead the opposite happened this year. Passengers increased and the GOP cut their budget.
7
The photo above this article shows thousands of people packed tightly into a totally unsecured area. This illusion of security is actually in open invitation to easy attack.
69
"When Congress cut the agency’s budget last year, it didn’t account for the value of passengers’ time"...the lines at Reagan National Airport are relatively well managed, especially the PreCheck lanes used by members of Congress".
Nice.
Nice.
10
Isn't the security fee $5.60 per segment? Where is the author getting the $2.50 figure? Or where is the additional $3.10 going from the 9/11 security fee?
3
The security chain is only as strong as its weakest link.
And there are too many of those apparently, with what 95% of weapons getting through in TSA screening testing?
Why would a poorly paid, overworked and resentful TSA employee not look the other way if they were paid a bribe. Or a hidden radical is hired? Too many possible scenarios. And in the rush to hire more people they may not be as thoroughly screened or vetted for these positions. So yes, it is a severely flawed operation from the get go. And those at the top know it.
And there are too many of those apparently, with what 95% of weapons getting through in TSA screening testing?
Why would a poorly paid, overworked and resentful TSA employee not look the other way if they were paid a bribe. Or a hidden radical is hired? Too many possible scenarios. And in the rush to hire more people they may not be as thoroughly screened or vetted for these positions. So yes, it is a severely flawed operation from the get go. And those at the top know it.
8
Pure kabuki - I'm TSA pre-check and face more security scrutiny going into Yankee stadium or a night club than going though the TSA security check. The metal detector and X-ray for carry on is all that's necessary, the rest is an illusion - the weakest link in aviation security was fixed when cockpit doors were installed.
23
Oh to think that at one time air travel was considered glamorous. Today, due to terrorism, airline greed, flying public ignorance of basic procedures, and just over-all inept TSA screening procedures, flying is now the equivalent of being loaded onto an ever diminishing cattle car. Unfortunately, cannot see any improvements until stupidity, greed, and violence are eliminated from the equation.
10
US airport security reminds me of my experience traveling to the USSR in the 80s. Even down to the uniforms. The Russians at least were efficient at crowd control, counting passengers off by fives as they did in the Gulag: Adene, dva, tree, sheeteery, pyatz. (hand chop).
5
"It is an illusion to think that, by waiting in line, we are buying complete safety."
-- the waiting line itself becomes an easy target for any terrorist.
-- the waiting line itself becomes an easy target for any terrorist.
17
You guys charge fees for checked in Luggage?
I thought that was what airline tickets were for...you know...charging people a price for flying to a destination, most of whom would take luggage.
Fees for checked in Luggage...another source of that thing called "PROFIT" that runs everything and controls everyone in America.
I thought that was what airline tickets were for...you know...charging people a price for flying to a destination, most of whom would take luggage.
Fees for checked in Luggage...another source of that thing called "PROFIT" that runs everything and controls everyone in America.
14
I am exactly the kind of person airlines would love to cater to. But TSA makes me feel like I am entering a prison run by devotees of Kafka every time I fly so I simply drive with my family.
Till airlines rise up in revolt we would have to endure the insanity
Till airlines rise up in revolt we would have to endure the insanity
14
If enough people stop flying, the airlines will clear up the problem in a flash. Flying is an over-rated convenience, often an optional luxury, and another example of how the drive for profit rapes the consumer. Feel victimized? Limit or eliminate your air travel.
1
Much of the time wasted in TSA lines could be eliminated with better logistics. In Moscow, there are chairs to sit in while taking off your shoes and bins to put them in. Thus people arrive at the line ready to be processed. In Boston, there are no chairs and the only place to put your stuff is on the conveyor belt for the x-ray. As a result, people wait until they are at the x-ray to start taking off their shoes and belts.
TSA has announcements, telling everyone to take stuff off before they get to the screening, but since there's no place to sit down and the screening line feeds directly from the boarding pass check, no one does.
TSA has announcements, telling everyone to take stuff off before they get to the screening, but since there's no place to sit down and the screening line feeds directly from the boarding pass check, no one does.
16
And the conveyer belts are too short for all the people who have to take all the things out of their bags. I'm an experienced traveler and know what I have to put on the belt (shoes, laptop, jacket, carry-on, purse), but I can't do it until I'm second to next in line. If the conveyer belt were long enough, perhaps five or ten people could get ready at the same time.
What you're talking about are externalities. The public's wasted time isn't accounted for in the TSA's budget any more than pollution is accounted for in a corporation's budget. Externalitise are the biggest reason why decisions based on financial considerations are so often wrong.
88
"Externalitise are the biggest reason why decisions based on financial considerations are so often wrong."
That may be true, but you're missing a point. Ignoring externalities, no matter which consideration you think important, is why so many decisions based on any single factor are so often wrong.
In this country many people will drive an extra mile or three, even in dense traffic that adds 10 minutes each way, simply to save 10¢/gal when they fill up their tank. In a typical vehicle with a 15 gallon tank, even if they are dead empty they would save $1.50. It all depends on how each person values their time, but I realized many years ago that my time is worth a lot more than that.
The danger here is that if you don't calculate costs properly you can easily reach the wrong conclusion. When that conclusion affects millions of people, this matters.
That may be true, but you're missing a point. Ignoring externalities, no matter which consideration you think important, is why so many decisions based on any single factor are so often wrong.
In this country many people will drive an extra mile or three, even in dense traffic that adds 10 minutes each way, simply to save 10¢/gal when they fill up their tank. In a typical vehicle with a 15 gallon tank, even if they are dead empty they would save $1.50. It all depends on how each person values their time, but I realized many years ago that my time is worth a lot more than that.
The danger here is that if you don't calculate costs properly you can easily reach the wrong conclusion. When that conclusion affects millions of people, this matters.
If we stop intervening in other countries' affairs we can scrap TSA altogether.
6
The Bush administration used the 9-11 attacks to cultivate a culture of fear and hate, invade privacy in the name of "security", and deter resistance to surveillance by many "security" agencies. This same fear has been promoted by far right groups, the Tea Party, and is being used by Donald Trump to appeal to the basest instincts of the American populace. While Middle Easterners have suffered from this culture of hate, so have we all as we stigmatize various groups (Middle Easterners, Hispanics, Blacks, LBGT, etc.) to blame for problems, and our country becomes more divisive.
The very idea of terrorism is that it is an unknown, and in that creates fear. We can no more win a war on terrorism than a war on drugs. What we can do is think critically about the causes of acts of terrorism and examine our own role as a country in creating the situations that have contributed to such violence both on the part of "homegrown terrorists" and others, no matter their ethnicity or country of origin.
The chances of dying from lack of medical care is far greater in this country than that of being killed by a terrorist. The money wasted on the TSA could be better spent elsewhere. I am not afraid of a terrorist being on a plane - I am afraid of the hatred I see in this country and a presidential candidate that wants to wall off borders.
The very idea of terrorism is that it is an unknown, and in that creates fear. We can no more win a war on terrorism than a war on drugs. What we can do is think critically about the causes of acts of terrorism and examine our own role as a country in creating the situations that have contributed to such violence both on the part of "homegrown terrorists" and others, no matter their ethnicity or country of origin.
The chances of dying from lack of medical care is far greater in this country than that of being killed by a terrorist. The money wasted on the TSA could be better spent elsewhere. I am not afraid of a terrorist being on a plane - I am afraid of the hatred I see in this country and a presidential candidate that wants to wall off borders.
76
I agree with the recommendations. It's been shown over and over that "What gets measured gets managed." With accurate wait times available to everyone, management at T.S.A. can be evaluated on their ability to manage staffing to increase efficiencies and reduce wait times.
8
The TSA was set up by Congress to frighten Americans into the War on Terror, and the long lines currently fit perfectly into the Agency's mission. It has nothing to do with safety or security, thus Congress can cavalierly cut their budget as they have often done. Major international airports, such as San Francisco International, use private screeners who are much more efficient than the TSA. Time to abolish the TSA and streamline Homeland Insecurity.
23
The authors miss to appreciate the value we put into our collective paranoia. The number of people killed by terrorism is totally negligible, even if you include 9/11. But paranoia is a powerful incentive to spend money well beyond what a rational economics would expect.
Ask a person if he/she prefers to be screened for another 5 minutes to prevent a bomb smuggled beyond the checkpoint. The answer will be "yes" even if bomb smuggling probability is minimal.
Ask a person if he/she is willing to reduce the average driving speed by 5 miles/hour the answer will be more likely "No" although there is a statistical relevant reduction in traffic death.
The difference: As driver we feel we are in control; As flyers we feel powerless.
Ask a person if he/she prefers to be screened for another 5 minutes to prevent a bomb smuggled beyond the checkpoint. The answer will be "yes" even if bomb smuggling probability is minimal.
Ask a person if he/she is willing to reduce the average driving speed by 5 miles/hour the answer will be more likely "No" although there is a statistical relevant reduction in traffic death.
The difference: As driver we feel we are in control; As flyers we feel powerless.
23
Let's not put a price on human life or safety. But, I am an engineer. And I like to put numbers to problems. Instead of money I can look at a human life as a matter of conscious time and compare it to how much time is spent everyday waiting in line at TSA check points in the USA. A human is conscious for 408,000 hours based on an average life expectancy of 70 years. There are 1,800,000 passengers daily in the US. If each person has to wait in line for 10 minutes at a TSA Checkpoint then we have wasted the equivalent of 4.5 persons lives every day or 1642 per year. In the 14 years since the TSA began, 23,000 people's lifetimes have passed waiting to feel safe. Do we feel any safer today than we did in before the TSA?
60
Let's not let the idea of tracking and posting wait times fool us into thinking that's a solution. One very obvious solution is to have more personnel, more machines, etc. The problem is the budget cutting mentality of Congress and the attitude of many Americans that they can get something for free from the government - airline security in this case.
The real cost of those lost hours would be tens or many tens of dollars for many of us. Let's just pay the tax and save the time.
The real cost of those lost hours would be tens or many tens of dollars for many of us. Let's just pay the tax and save the time.
9
You mean stuff costs money? and it needs to be repaired too?! Well gol-darn. That's news to most Americans. You mean that's why are bridges are falling down, people are about to get crowded off the subway platform onto the tracks, and the tunnels under the Hudson are about to give out?
13
TSA Pre- does nothing to solve the problem, it just moves some people to the front of the line, slowing the line for those behind. Taking off shoes is not the bottleneck, it's the x-ray baggage scanner conveyor speed, determined by luggage volume.
10
Which is affected by checked bag fees.
4
It is a separate line. So it doesn't slow the regular line down, at least at major airports.
3
The bottleneck appears to me to be the person staring at the luggage x-ray screen. That person controls the conveyor belt, which paces everything else and almost always has 3 or 4 people waiting in their socks before the body scanner. When a bag has to be x-rayed again, more conveyor backup.
And yet, this is the obvious point of failure for the 95% of fake items that got through on TSA random tests. And carry-on overhead luggage dramatically increases this load.
Kill the baggage fees for the first bag and in busy periods, require those who carry on their bags to go through a different line. Those with only a personal item that fits under the seat should have a faster line, like "12 items or less" at the grocery checkout.
The airlines have demonstrated utter disregard for passenger comfort or convenience so don't expect any action from them on baggage fees.
And yet, this is the obvious point of failure for the 95% of fake items that got through on TSA random tests. And carry-on overhead luggage dramatically increases this load.
Kill the baggage fees for the first bag and in busy periods, require those who carry on their bags to go through a different line. Those with only a personal item that fits under the seat should have a faster line, like "12 items or less" at the grocery checkout.
The airlines have demonstrated utter disregard for passenger comfort or convenience so don't expect any action from them on baggage fees.
127
Yes, this is the biggest problem in all areas of air travel now. People who carry on every possession in a bag that just barely fits in the overhead, and which many of them can just barely lift into the overhead, slow down every aspect of air travel.
I wonder what the airlines actual rate of lost baggage is? It seems to me to be one of those hypes that the business community often spins to make us buy more stuff. Or a spin by the airlines so that they do not have to hire as many people in the baggage areas and can make even more money!
In an era when we worry about people bringing explosives on planes, the airlines allow people to bring huge bags of junk that could easily hide an explosive. so bizarre
I wonder what the airlines actual rate of lost baggage is? It seems to me to be one of those hypes that the business community often spins to make us buy more stuff. Or a spin by the airlines so that they do not have to hire as many people in the baggage areas and can make even more money!
In an era when we worry about people bringing explosives on planes, the airlines allow people to bring huge bags of junk that could easily hide an explosive. so bizarre
1
What an excellent piece! And the logic is true not only in airports: Government officials are blamed if something terrible happens -- terror attack, train accident, nuclear incident -- but not for everyday hassle. So, understandably, they create huge and expensive systems to guard against catastrophic events, not considering the day-to-day cost.
I wouldn't like a speed limit of 10 miles per hour, even if this would eliminate all car accidents.
I wouldn't like a speed limit of 10 miles per hour, even if this would eliminate all car accidents.
11
Homeland Security was a bait and switch move from the beginning. Conservatives argue that government is the problem and if you don't believe them, they force their conclusions into reality. I remember when being a Republican suggested one believed in appropriate planning, efficiency and waste-cutting. Now, they are just a special interest group that wants to cut costs on anything other than force. This is a summary of a study on spending by
http://watson.brown.edu/costsofwar/costs/economic/budget/dhs. What level
Absent the wars, the US would have spent some money on the areas we now identify as homeland security in the last decade, but just not as much. Annual federal spending in this area grew at an average pace of 3 percent during the 1990s. Assuming a similar rate of growth during the first decade of the 2000s in the absence of 9/11, spending would have reached $23 billion by 2011. Homeland security appropriations are thus estimated to have been $369 billion higher than they would have been otherwise.
http://watson.brown.edu/costsofwar/costs/economic/budget/dhs. What level
Absent the wars, the US would have spent some money on the areas we now identify as homeland security in the last decade, but just not as much. Annual federal spending in this area grew at an average pace of 3 percent during the 1990s. Assuming a similar rate of growth during the first decade of the 2000s in the absence of 9/11, spending would have reached $23 billion by 2011. Homeland security appropriations are thus estimated to have been $369 billion higher than they would have been otherwise.
7
Very interesting. Of course, delays occur almost everywhere. Neglecting mass transit infrastructure causes delays for millions every day. Reducing education expenditures leads to a populace less well educated, and less productive, in the future. How the government, at every level, chooses to invest is political, and those already with more power disproportionately reap the rewards.
16
All true, but don't blame "government." Blame spineless elected politicians. Government is the answer, not the problem, or it would be if our elected politicians weren't afraid to lead -- that is, to raise taxes and to educate their constituents as to why it's necessary, even at the risk to their own jobs.
9
The authors assert passengers would certainly pay more than $2.50 to accelerate their wait, but most Americans have been unwilling to pay the $75 for five years of Pre-Check. TSA asserts part of the problem is that fewer passengers have registered for Pre-Check than expected. Either most Americans don't find their time as valuable or Pre-Check is just too cumbersome to sign up and register for.
5
I already pay for the tsa with my tax dollars...and they don't appear to be doing a good job with that, so now I should pay more? not sure this is what we should expect from our govt services...
3
Pre-Check is $85, which is an absurd amount for those of us who can afford to fly only fly once or twice a year.
5
That's $85 for 5 years, not per year. It's worth it. But it won't be if too many people get it and then the pre-check line gets as bad as all the others.
5
There will never again be another hijacking from the air like 9-11, 2001. An irresponsible statement? No, it is a careful, calculated one. The specific danger of several aircraft being taken over while in flight and being turned into flying bombs has been reduced to almost zero.
The barn door WAS locked. Specifically, the doors to the cockpit of commercial aircraft were hardened so that forced entrance from the outside is almost impossible. A hijacker would have to get on board with some type of weapon and then be able to employ that weapon the moment the door was opened for a pilot to use the restroom. On the flights that I have been on in recent years, the pilots tend to stay inside, so hijackers would likely have to try multiple flights in order to be successful at one.
So, what's all the TSA checking, x-raying, poking and prodding for? It is mainly to reassure a nervous public that everything possible is being done for safety, even though their 7+ billion dollar expenditures has less actual value than the cost of hardening the cockpit doors, a one time expense.
This statement from the op-ed sums up the biggest problem with "security measures": (if) "something bad happens, the T.S.A. might be blamed for speeding things up rather than keeping us safe."
Once in place, a security measure can almost never be removed. There is always a chance, no matter how small. Someone has to made the TSA backdown because they have no incentive, except complaints, to do so.
Doug Terry
The barn door WAS locked. Specifically, the doors to the cockpit of commercial aircraft were hardened so that forced entrance from the outside is almost impossible. A hijacker would have to get on board with some type of weapon and then be able to employ that weapon the moment the door was opened for a pilot to use the restroom. On the flights that I have been on in recent years, the pilots tend to stay inside, so hijackers would likely have to try multiple flights in order to be successful at one.
So, what's all the TSA checking, x-raying, poking and prodding for? It is mainly to reassure a nervous public that everything possible is being done for safety, even though their 7+ billion dollar expenditures has less actual value than the cost of hardening the cockpit doors, a one time expense.
This statement from the op-ed sums up the biggest problem with "security measures": (if) "something bad happens, the T.S.A. might be blamed for speeding things up rather than keeping us safe."
Once in place, a security measure can almost never be removed. There is always a chance, no matter how small. Someone has to made the TSA backdown because they have no incentive, except complaints, to do so.
Doug Terry
66
well said
2
"Fundamentally the problem isn't about politics. It's about economics."
No, the problem is solely about politics. Even our august economists admit that if "something bad" happened after the TSA dropped shoe removal, the public would blame them. More to the point, legislators would blame them as well as the administration, the opposing political party, and anyone else that it would be expedient for them to blame. The result is that we are locked into eternal security theater. Everyone knows that it's worthless, but no one can assume the political cost of eliminating it until the day comes when someone opens fire on one of those endless security lines, slaughtering scores of people.
No, the problem is solely about politics. Even our august economists admit that if "something bad" happened after the TSA dropped shoe removal, the public would blame them. More to the point, legislators would blame them as well as the administration, the opposing political party, and anyone else that it would be expedient for them to blame. The result is that we are locked into eternal security theater. Everyone knows that it's worthless, but no one can assume the political cost of eliminating it until the day comes when someone opens fire on one of those endless security lines, slaughtering scores of people.
72
...and that person who shoots up the waiting line might be a US citizen who goes "postal" simply out of frustration with the long waits and being treated with such disrespect.
Not just economics, but also marketing and sales. The promotion and implementation of the Pre Check program has been terrible. Application sites are often poorly located and have operating hours designed to precluse participation.
24
When I had Pre Check out pf Richmond, it was a breeze and the process was truely memorable. On the return from LaGuardia the process was really memorable, too. It was long, slow, take off shoes and belts, computers out of bags and non-Pre Check lines were moving more quickly.
As more and more people sign up for Pre Check, the lines are undoubtedly going to become longer and longer and slower and slower.
As more and more people sign up for Pre Check, the lines are undoubtedly going to become longer and longer and slower and slower.
The airlines profited 26 billion and tax payers are in the hook for the bill? Pathetic.
44
Waiting in line for a security system that had a 95%+ failure rate when tested by the TSA itself in 2015 is plainly not about actual security - waiting in line to put carry-on baggage through the same process that checked baggage goes through seems to be the way forward.
14
That's what economists would conclude, that it's about economics. Maybe it's about class. Maybe it's about having someone's neck under your heel.
10
Last November a tsa agent at midway advised everyone in line to buy the $85 precheck and stated that the random approvals would no longer be given out. Obviously this was a decision 7 months ago that is just catching up with the public now. It isn't based on security; it is based on forcing people to pay money, reducing screening for those who do pay, and creating revenue opportunities for private companies.
I tried to apply for global entry 6 months ago. Never got processed despite opening a file. Never got an answer when I tried to inquire about my application.
I did apply for precheck. One location in New York (a private company, not the government) was bedlam - overcrowded, understaffed (one person working, 50 people waiting in rooms with not enough seats). and after an hour they called out names and sent people home: sorry, come back again.
Another location in New York (also a private company, not the govt) was more pleasant. But I spent an entire weekday sitting for hours to get a walkin appointment. (Scheduled appointments were 2 months out). The appointment takes 7 minutes. Passport, digital fingerprints, credit card. It wouldn't deter a terrorist- all about the money.
This is the illusion of security and a revenue push.
I tried to apply for global entry 6 months ago. Never got processed despite opening a file. Never got an answer when I tried to inquire about my application.
I did apply for precheck. One location in New York (a private company, not the government) was bedlam - overcrowded, understaffed (one person working, 50 people waiting in rooms with not enough seats). and after an hour they called out names and sent people home: sorry, come back again.
Another location in New York (also a private company, not the govt) was more pleasant. But I spent an entire weekday sitting for hours to get a walkin appointment. (Scheduled appointments were 2 months out). The appointment takes 7 minutes. Passport, digital fingerprints, credit card. It wouldn't deter a terrorist- all about the money.
This is the illusion of security and a revenue push.
131
Spot on. Why don't they sign people up while waiting in the endless lines?
2
It's curious that most of the "remedies" proposed have to do with hiring more agents.
Go back to Deming's work on Quality Control. What's broken here may well be the process, not the personnel. Adding more people to a bad process simply does not work.
Recent tests indicate that current TSA processes missed 95% of their targets. Not at all acceptable, in any environment.
We are being subjected to nonsense, designed by amateurs, and judged by the ignorant (please include members of Congress among the judges).
Look at the good examples of airline security (Israel's El Al comes to mind), then throw out the current process, and design one that does find hazards. Then train and pay people qualified to make that process work (hint, the current wages being paid will not attract those people).
Go back to Deming's work on Quality Control. What's broken here may well be the process, not the personnel. Adding more people to a bad process simply does not work.
Recent tests indicate that current TSA processes missed 95% of their targets. Not at all acceptable, in any environment.
We are being subjected to nonsense, designed by amateurs, and judged by the ignorant (please include members of Congress among the judges).
Look at the good examples of airline security (Israel's El Al comes to mind), then throw out the current process, and design one that does find hazards. Then train and pay people qualified to make that process work (hint, the current wages being paid will not attract those people).
100
El Al knows a lot about terrorism and they would be a great model for the USA to follow rather then the hot mess joke we have that serves only to produce revenue for the airlines. Minimum wages w/ high employee turnover does not = professional security at all. Why do people put up with this treatment?
1
Several comments suggest the authors are stating this is not about politics. But the authors ARE explicitly making this point when they state, "But government agencies don't heed all voices equally, and members of Congress have very powerful voices..." Like many government agencies the TSA is attempting to fulfill its mandate, protecting the flying public, while trying to maintain their budget (provided by Congress). As such, TSA administrators have practically no incentive to discover more effective screening methods. I would imagine if the TSA went before a Congress that wants to cut their budget while claiming to have reduced passenger wait times by 10%, this would have little impact on the budgeting process. The incentive of TSA administrators is to balance their budget while maintaining the status quo. Innovation is difficult for even the best run public companies, it is far more difficult for a government run agency such as the TSA. This can only be solved when Congress demands the TSA start making the trade-offs suggested by the authors, the trade offs between procedures, passenger convenience and safety. Until then, we will never a screening process as innovative as we see at Heathrow.
11
It is useless to analyze this problem in economic terms. As economists have pointed out many times the money spent on security is way out of proportion to the risks. Taxing sugary drinks would not only raise money but save many more lives than ridiculous security theater. Here are a couple of ideas that might make economic sense. 1 subsidize train travel more getting people off planes. 2. Spend some of the TSA money eliminating check bag fees reducing the number of bags that have to be screened. 3. Don't charge for pre check getting more people in the pre check line. 4 have people apply for pre check at the airport. One more thing. You can't compare the U.S. To other countries procedures We have 40k domestic flights per day. Adopting more intensive screening will really slow things down
32
@sr: Yes, you CAN compare the USA to other countries' security procedures.
IF we were willing to profile, we could do something like what El Al Airlines does. But since this is America, we can't profile, because we're passionately committed to "equality" - at least when it relates to harassing people at the airports, even if we don't care about equality in other aspects of our lives! Thus the TSA treats everyone "equally" by presuming that an elderly person in a wheelchair or an infant is just as likely to be a terrorist as anyone else. This is madness!
IF we were willing to profile, we could do something like what El Al Airlines does. But since this is America, we can't profile, because we're passionately committed to "equality" - at least when it relates to harassing people at the airports, even if we don't care about equality in other aspects of our lives! Thus the TSA treats everyone "equally" by presuming that an elderly person in a wheelchair or an infant is just as likely to be a terrorist as anyone else. This is madness!
5
In he midst of this madness I flew round trip from Detroit to San Diego. I'm 83 and have both hips replaced. Following the scan, I usually hold up that line while a T.S.A. women is located to pat down my entire body, including groin. The time that takes could probably have scanned two or three metal-free passengers. It's demeaning, stressful, absurd and surreal. But I get to keep my shoes on in deference to my age.
1
As this paper reported in 2011, other agencies like the DOT, the EPA, and the FDA assign a value to the lives saved by their regulations and a true cost benefit analysis is performed when deciding if regulations are worthwhile. Why does the TSA get a pass?
13
Great question, and I suspect the answer is about imagery: the specter of people dying from cancer and even train wrecks lacks the sheer terror quotient, for reasons no doubt rooted deep in the human psyche, of being exploded out of the sky. So we are willing to put up with just about any nonsensical procedures to PERHAPS reduce our risk of such an occurrence by some infinitesimal degree. Profoundly irrational, I know—but there we are...
2
So it was Midway and not O'Hare that had the delays in "Chicago?" Is that what I'm reading here? If so, then I think there is a form of economic discrimination taking place....some folks time is worth more than others.
8
I think you're overapplying the general idea that North Side > South Side in Chicago. Midway is more of a domestic commuter airport, while O'Hare is domestic and international... it's like LGA v JFK in NYC. The commuter airport is always crappier (for no reason I can discern). It's not economic discrimination, it's just bad business by the respective transportation agencies that manage the airports.
2
Both airports had huge delays, over two hours. It wasn't just Midway, hundreds stood in line only to miss their flights and slept at O'Hare.
4
They both had crazy delays.
2
How can an article entitled "Waiting in Line for the Illusion of Security" not mention that the TSA missed 90% of the fake threats presented in the most recent random tests? This is the real story and it should appear in every article about the TSA.
162
A long lines are an invitation to a suicide bomber to wreck havoc... Brussels anyone?
2
It's worse than this: long TSA lines cause some people to drive to their destination instead of flying, which is much less safe and results in increased traffic fatalities.
41
The TSA is a joke, but not because of waiting times. If we had a genuinely effective airport security system, there would be far fewer flights and
tickets would be much more expensive than they are now.
The authors here ignore the true underlying economics of the situation:
the 9/11 disaster cost the US roughly $4 Trillion in outlays by the federal
government to retaliate, or to perform "pre-emptive" retaliation, against perceived terrorist and pro-terrorist enemies.
That's in addition to current operating budget commitments to anti-terrorist
efforts. Add those in, and we have likely spent $350-$450B per year on
dedicated anti-terrorist efforts.
So, do you brilliant economists REALLY think this is about waiting time at airports? A better issue to address is, what are we getting, or what have we gotten, for that $400B per year, more or less, and, how can we make the
expenditure more productive?
And, yes, current airport security measures are totally and illusion.
tickets would be much more expensive than they are now.
The authors here ignore the true underlying economics of the situation:
the 9/11 disaster cost the US roughly $4 Trillion in outlays by the federal
government to retaliate, or to perform "pre-emptive" retaliation, against perceived terrorist and pro-terrorist enemies.
That's in addition to current operating budget commitments to anti-terrorist
efforts. Add those in, and we have likely spent $350-$450B per year on
dedicated anti-terrorist efforts.
So, do you brilliant economists REALLY think this is about waiting time at airports? A better issue to address is, what are we getting, or what have we gotten, for that $400B per year, more or less, and, how can we make the
expenditure more productive?
And, yes, current airport security measures are totally and illusion.
82
The military-industrial complex is still strong and a terrible danger to this country, but a new outlaw has come to town; the security-industrial complex. Think of all the profits your numbers mean for the private companies making a killing off our fear of being killed. What a perverted system we have.
Yes, an illusion that allows the general public to be relieved of its money.
Travelers can only move through a TSA line at a slow rate with the current requirements. This is a typical run through the system: tickets are checked against identification, outer clothing is removed, carry on luggage is hoisted on to a scanner belt, and the passenger is passed through a metal sector or X-Ray. I usually see four TSA workers at each station but at JFK I have seen up to six workers per scanner wrangling and prodding the passengers through the scanning.
Inexperienced passengers are typically fouled up at some point - identification not ready, struggling with a clothing issue, forgetting to take off a belt with heavy metal buckle, forgetting about that water bottle (or small scissors) in purse - now repeat this thousands of times and the line is going to progress at a very slow rate.
My only suggestion for speeding up the process is to charge passengers for carry on luggage and reduce the fees for checked luggage. When the airlines are resistant to this aludes me. Passengers who carry on excessive items are the number one gripe of the frequent flyers.
Inexperienced passengers are typically fouled up at some point - identification not ready, struggling with a clothing issue, forgetting to take off a belt with heavy metal buckle, forgetting about that water bottle (or small scissors) in purse - now repeat this thousands of times and the line is going to progress at a very slow rate.
My only suggestion for speeding up the process is to charge passengers for carry on luggage and reduce the fees for checked luggage. When the airlines are resistant to this aludes me. Passengers who carry on excessive items are the number one gripe of the frequent flyers.
62
I totally agree with your second paragraph. The first checked bag should be free or only $10. Carryons above a backpack size should pay $15.
Note the part about Exit. You can exit a supermarket but not TSA or the government.
Liberals who want the government to do everything should consider this.
Over the years the cost of postage stamps has gone up and up. The cost of long distance calls has gone down and down!
Note the part about Exit. You can exit a supermarket but not TSA or the government.
Liberals who want the government to do everything should consider this.
Over the years the cost of postage stamps has gone up and up. The cost of long distance calls has gone down and down!
1
There should ALWAYS be a separate line for people who know how to do the drill. I've seen this before (I think at Midway?) and it's so much more fair for those of us who prepare for our trips to be able to jump ahead of Grandma who never flies and Courtney and Todd with their four small children...
3
Here's a novel idea - for the frequent traveler there can be an obstacle course test. You will be timed going through the mocked up TSA line and judged on your skills. If you receive a satisfactory score you are allowed to enter the fast lane with your TSA precheck boarding pass. Same rule for boarding airplanes when you fly in the main cabin - anyone with one small item boards first. The passengers with luggage board last. If you cannot lift the suitcase into the overhead by yourself that suitcase is immediately thrown onto the tarmac and left behind.
It is, in fact, about politics. Congress intends to so deeply annoy Americans who fly that they'll cry out for a change, and the TSA will be replaced by a private contractor.
Only ideologues like American Economists would insist that there are no politics involved as the oligarchs figure out yet another way to take more money from working Americans.
Only ideologues like American Economists would insist that there are no politics involved as the oligarchs figure out yet another way to take more money from working Americans.
146
You are so right. Everything seems to be fair game for those who want to privatize everything in this country. Our speeding tickets are handled, in many cities, by cameras and administration by private companies (for a share of tickets for profit of course), our wars are fought by private contractors (use to be called mercenaries), the state department personnel were protected, not by the government but by private contractors, and so on. The marketplace is not who should perform government functions. Adding profit to everything the government requires of us is wrong
6
Your insight is OK to a point. The TSA is being made to appear unworkable because "private sector" buzzards see an opportunity to make a killing and take it over.
We, of course would be paying them.
And the so called protection of a private, armed, for profit army would make who feel better? A private American military company and security consulting firm formerly called Blackwater Worldwide, made people dead not secure.
We, of course would be paying them.
And the so called protection of a private, armed, for profit army would make who feel better? A private American military company and security consulting firm formerly called Blackwater Worldwide, made people dead not secure.
1
I'm glad to read an article that finally mentions the lost value of passengers' time as they await their turn at TSA's security theater. The TSA does not appear to have any concept of what they're doing, nor of how to actually effectively do it. Their main motivation at this point is to keep themselves in business.
"we suspect that many policies amount to nothing more than barn door closing": I would say you are 100% correct - this is not just barn door closing, it is EPIC barn door closing. The TSA is fighting a rear guard action based on what one small group of terrorists did nearly 15 years ago.
The real security threat on 9/11 was the vulnerability of cockpit doors - and that was addressed long ago. I have no faith in the decisions made by the TSA, nor in its priorities, because in the complex calculus of "keeping us safe" the TSA is solving for the wrong variable.
But they have succeeded in creating a huge, costly, unwieldy and inefficient bureaucracy that exhibits the worst qualities of the DMV, minus any effective outcome.
"we suspect that many policies amount to nothing more than barn door closing": I would say you are 100% correct - this is not just barn door closing, it is EPIC barn door closing. The TSA is fighting a rear guard action based on what one small group of terrorists did nearly 15 years ago.
The real security threat on 9/11 was the vulnerability of cockpit doors - and that was addressed long ago. I have no faith in the decisions made by the TSA, nor in its priorities, because in the complex calculus of "keeping us safe" the TSA is solving for the wrong variable.
But they have succeeded in creating a huge, costly, unwieldy and inefficient bureaucracy that exhibits the worst qualities of the DMV, minus any effective outcome.
191
Talk about barn door closing. Yes, cockpit doors for 9/11 but bombs today.
What I have found most curious is that from one airport to the next the "rules" and "procedures" change for getting through the TSA gauntlet and screening. Although universally whenever there are longer lines there is some walking around acting as the "barker" ostensibly educating the standees on all the "rules". This practice in particular seems to be a huge waste of manpower.
TSA results are abysmal, as demonstrated by periodic failures to detect planted items on "passengers" and in carryons. Yet we insist on TSA's system, versus modeling ours after The global benchmark for effectiveness in passenger screening and passenger plane security: El Al. We have prioritized optics over efficiency and effectiveness in Designing our process. We opt instead to maintain Universal Screening, to appear unbiased (as if that were even possible -- another conversation...) I'm all for bias in screening, when it works -- as the system we refuse to use has been shown to, very well, over decades.
37
How many flights does El Al fly? You have zero idea what would happen to travel within US if we were to allow infinite questioning
2
Universal Screening seems un-Constitutional to me.
1
What I can't believe is how poorly the TSA squanders the low hanging fruit which could cut lines. I have Global Entry, which gives me TSA Pre Check when I am flying on a domestic airline, but strangely not when I am flying on an international airline. Why is my "trusted traveler" status tied to the airline I am on, rather than who I? Forgetting the line itself, the Pre Check throughput time is a third of that for the regular checkpoint, meaning the screeners working there are three times more productive in terms of passengers per hour. Without accounting for wait time, there is little incentive for the TSA to see what to streamline operational inefficiencies. Instead, congress just throws more money at the problem.
21
I believe the reality is that Congress has thrown LESS money at the TSA problem, diverting dollars to reduction of the national debt, forcing reductions in headcount and pressure on pay and benefits.
2
It isn't. You have a trusted traveler number that can be entered into any airline system that communicates with the TSA--foreign airlines may not be able / willing to do that (or you just need to put the number in your profile if they do).
2
As someone who managed security checkpoints before 9/11, I can tell you the economics of the screening process has little to do with the results. Before 9/11, the airlines were responsible for screening passengers as the government imposed an unfunded mandate to do so. The economics were this: the security screeners were paid minimum wage (with no benefits) to screen passengers and their baggage. On any given pre-9/11 weekday, the security lines for a winter flight from Ft. Lauderdale to JFK were very long because the mostly senior citizen passengers did not understand the physics of a metal detector and almost everyone was wearing an overcoat with enough metal for an alarm. Fast forward to now and very little has changed in the entire process despite the increase in cost. What is needed is better technology to move passengers along quickly including automated carryon baggage systems that allow screeners to keep the line moving in the event of an X-ray alarm. Metal detectors, which are ineffective for some forms of wearable explosives, should be phased out entirely and either explosive trace detection and/or millimeter wave technology should be utilized for screening the passenger's body. We must take out the human equation in the screening process as much as possible and this can only happen with investments in technology that allow us to do so. One only need to look at security improvements at Heathrow and Schipol airports where these changes have been made.
51
Another "exit"? Drive. With very little time off to take a vacation, we've turned to driving and staying closer to home. Sadly, it means not going to some of our family's homes. But, we're working on that one. Find a middle ground. The overwhelming time waiting in line and extra costs like baggage, isn't worth the tension, aggravation and infuriation that accompanies being squashed, sometimes in different aisles, into a seat. I hate the thought of adding more pollution, but I want to see my family, especially my parents who are close to 90 years old. Maybe if enough people stop or curtail their flying, real change may happen. But, I doubt it. So, I guess we'll just keep trucking, so to speak.
24
We cannot drive across oceans. We generally choose not to drive across the North American continent. We want to experience the world in a way that the driving vacation does not allow.
I am all for driving - my calculus is a 12 hour cutoff (if I can drive, door-to-door, in 12 or fewer hours, then there is no contest: I get into my car).
But I have business meetings in Japan and Europe. I live on the east coast, and love the Grand Canyon and Yosemite. Many of us must deal with the airlines and TSA in order to live our lives.
I am all for driving - my calculus is a 12 hour cutoff (if I can drive, door-to-door, in 12 or fewer hours, then there is no contest: I get into my car).
But I have business meetings in Japan and Europe. I live on the east coast, and love the Grand Canyon and Yosemite. Many of us must deal with the airlines and TSA in order to live our lives.
3