The TSA's Maginot Line
Philip Greenspun discussed the Fed.Gov in general, and the TSA in particular, marveling at the sheer cost of all the uselessness:
After World War I, the French were understandably nervous about a rematch. They built a hideously expensive set of fortifications from the Swiss border all the way to Belgium. Called the "Maginot Line", it was state-of-the-art for Trench Warfare. Unfortunately, les Boscheweren't interested in Trench Warfare, and France fell in 6 weeks as the Blitzkreig bypassed it.
The TSA spends truckloads of cash at every airport in the land - including, as Professor Greenspun points out, small, commercial ones. This is what they do. Their product is slowing passengers down. High-visibility security kabuki. Of course they haven't caught any terrorists. The terrorists are targeting other targets.
There are two things that have improved air safety since 9/11: real locks on the cockpit doors, and passengers who know they have to fight back. Nothing else has made any difference (with the possible exception of Air Marshalls, but they haven't stopped anyone so far). You may not have noticed, but baggage screening still isn't what it should be, and that problem would be solved if the TSA weren't allocating all their resources elsewhere.
Sort of like the French building forts instead of armored divisions.
None of this poor prioritization should come as a surprise. In other news, we hear that the California government is introducing new TV energy standards:
My budget at work periodically gets cut, as business gets better or worse. These cuts force me to prioritize. If you're clever, you can do anything - you just can't do everything. Cut government 10% across the board, and you'd make a good down payment on health care, you know? Plus you'd do 10% less damage to the economy, with higher employment and tax levels that result.
In “TSA: Taxes Spent Absurdly”, Becky Akers asks “How do you turn an industry that costs $700 million annually into one that eats $6 billion?” The answer turns out to be “Nationalize it, as Congress did airport screening after Sept. 11, 2001.” She goes on to note that “The TSA’s nearly 50,000 screeners have delayed, frustrated and harassed passengers at airport checkpoints from Maine to Hawaii. What they haven’t done after eight years and $48 billion is catch a single terrorist.”
Akers is certainly understating the cost of aviation security imposed after 9/11. At our little airport there is a state trooper employed to fingerprint student pilots. An average Massachusetts State Trooper, including pension, is paid over $200,000 per year. A couple of airport employees help with background checks, security education, and issuing badges. Until a student or renter gets a badge, which takes at least four weeks, the customer must be escorted by a flight school employee at a cost of perhaps $25 per hour. The customer who does a thorough pre-flight inspection of an airplane may take all of the profit out of the rental.It all reminds me of this:
After World War I, the French were understandably nervous about a rematch. They built a hideously expensive set of fortifications from the Swiss border all the way to Belgium. Called the "Maginot Line", it was state-of-the-art for Trench Warfare. Unfortunately, les Boscheweren't interested in Trench Warfare, and France fell in 6 weeks as the Blitzkreig bypassed it.The TSA spends truckloads of cash at every airport in the land - including, as Professor Greenspun points out, small, commercial ones. This is what they do. Their product is slowing passengers down. High-visibility security kabuki. Of course they haven't caught any terrorists. The terrorists are targeting other targets.
There are two things that have improved air safety since 9/11: real locks on the cockpit doors, and passengers who know they have to fight back. Nothing else has made any difference (with the possible exception of Air Marshalls, but they haven't stopped anyone so far). You may not have noticed, but baggage screening still isn't what it should be, and that problem would be solved if the TSA weren't allocating all their resources elsewhere.
Sort of like the French building forts instead of armored divisions.
None of this poor prioritization should come as a surprise. In other news, we hear that the California government is introducing new TV energy standards:
Energy regulators on Friday moved forward with a plan that could ban the sale of the most power-hungry televisions from California retail stores.The California Energy Commission released what it hopes will be the nation's first energy-efficiency requirements for the flat-screen TVs. A final vote on the regulation is expected in November.What's wrong with this picture? California is broke. But they still have enough money to issue new regulations that will make things more expensive. And this isn't the first time.
My budget at work periodically gets cut, as business gets better or worse. These cuts force me to prioritize. If you're clever, you can do anything - you just can't do everything. Cut government 10% across the board, and you'd make a good down payment on health care, you know? Plus you'd do 10% less damage to the economy, with higher employment and tax levels that result.
1 comment:
I used to work in proximity to TSA HQs in Arlington. Yes, they are clueless morons. They are all about the rules and regulations. Safety and effectiveness is not a measured metric of success.
Post a Comment