Out of Control Policy Blog RSS

Out of Control Policy Blog Archives: 12.9.12–12.15.12

Airport Should Ditch Agency to Provide Better Security at a Lower Cost

In the following Commentary which first ran in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution on December 11th, I discussed how Atlanta's Hartsfield-Jackson Airport could improve its airport security by directly managing the security process. Airports that manage security hire, train, and staff screeners comply with all regulations and provide substantially better service at a much lower cost.

The full commentary is available here

Atlanta’s Hartsfield-Jackson International Airport, the busiest airport in the world, has been honored for its efficiency. However, there’s one thing many travelers at Hartsfield-Jackson would like to see improved: airport security.  

In the wake of 9/11, then-President George W. Bush and a Republican-controlled Congress created the Transportation Security Administration (TSA). In doing so, they mistakenly made TSA both the provider of airport screening and the aviation security regulator. This conflict of interest makes the TSA answerable to no one.       

“Security screeners at two of the nation’s busiest airports failed to find fake bombs hidden on undercover agents posing as passengers in more than 60 percent of tests last year, according to a classified report,” USA Today reported in 2007.

ABC News reported another classified report found screeners in Newark failed to spot bombs in 20 out of 22 tests.

And it’s not just passenger and baggage screening that needs to be improved. Over the past 10 years, there have been 1,300 instances of people trespassing in supposedly secure airport areas. Hartsfield-Jackson is not immune. Last month, a woman threw a bag over the security fence to a man standing next to a luggage cart. This unscreened bag could have easily been placed on a plane. Last year, a whistle blower was able to sneak unscreened food and drinks from outside the airport onto a plane. 

TSA isn’t held accountable for these security failures, despite spending $3 billion of taxpayers’ money each year. A large part of TSA is simply security theater: take off your shoes, remove your laptop and no liquids over 3.4 ounces. It’s the illusion of security.

The most effective way to improve the screening quality at Hartsfield-Jackson is to let the airport directly manage the entire security process. After 9/11, five airports were allowed to use private screeners instead of TSA screeners. At one of those airports, San Francisco International (SFO), screening costs 40 percent less per capita than TSA screening at Los Angeles International (LAX). SFO screeners also process 65 percent more passengers than LAX screeners. Estimates show Atlanta could reduce costs by 42 percent and be 65 percent more efficient by replacing TSA screeners with private screeners.

Additional U.S. airports are being allowed to use private screeners, and 16 airports now do so. Hartsfield-Jackson should follow suit. (There’s an application process to go through to prove you are hiring qualified screeners and saving money.) The responsibility for screening baggage and passengers would be shifted from TSA to the airport. This makes the entire security system — passenger screening, perimeter security, employee screening, etc. — seamless.

Hartsfield-Jackson would hire, train and staff screeners, working with certified security companies. It would comply with all TSA regulations. And by removing its conflict of interest, which currently encourages it to cover up mistakes and security weaknesses, TSA could focus on its oversight role of finding and fixing security flaws at airports.

The entire Commentary is available here.

Print This

Video: Colorado Marijuana Legalization Update

Last month Colorado voters passed Amendment 64 to the state Constitution, which essentially legalized recreational marijuana in Colorado. My colleague Leonard Gilroy and I explained the implementation hurdles that policymakers face in the months and years ahead at Real Clear Markets, we wrote:

Cash strapped states no doubt are salivating at the potential deluge of new revenue. (Both measures are unique, so for clarity this piece will focus on Colorado.) The Colorado Center on Law and Policy estimates Colorado's Amendment 64 will generate $60 million annually, a figure that could double after 2017. This fiscal bonanza would come primarily from new tax revenue generated from excise taxes on wholesalers and new state and local sales taxes -- but also avoided costs to the criminal justice system. However, these revenues will materialize only if the legalization is done right.

The piece goes on to explain the various tax and regulatory concerns that constitute legalization being "done right."

More recently, I appeared on Devil's Advocate with Jon Caldara (a program hosted on Colorado Public Television) to discussion the subject in depth. I appeared on the program alongside Joe Megyesy who consulted the Yes on 64 campaign and will remain involved to oversee its implementation efforts. This episode is approximately 27 minutes long, watch it online below:

For more of Reason Foundation's work on implementing marijuana legalization, see our Real Clear Markets piece here (which also appears on reason.com here) and this blog post (which I wrote the day after the election after attending a press conference held by Yes on 64 across from the State Capitol.)

Follow Harris Kenny on Twitter @harriskenny.

Print This

Latest Articles on Reason Foundation

Out of Control Policy Archives