Throwing money at TSA doesn’t solve security problems

---

Improve TSA airport security — return diverted fees and spend smarter

---

We are at it again. President Trump wants to increase the TSA security fee starting next October. His rationale for more fees is that TSA needs more machines to help its officers identify threats and more money for more inspectors.

Let’s take a closer look before spending more money on TSA.

TSA has never in its history caught a terrorist or terrorist suspect at an airport checkpoint. Lawmakers and tests over the past two years conducted by inspector general undercover operators managed to get through the security lines as much as 95 percent of the time with guns and phony bombs. Let’s face it, these highly visible airport security checkpoints are little more than eye candy to make the public feel like it is being protected.

(Now, don’t get me wrong. The public is being protected by TSA and our intelligence services. If a terrorist gets to an airport checkpoint, they have managed to get through at least a dozen never-seen, before-the-flight security checks. Too bad the visibility of those protections cannot be better advertised.)

However, President Trump wants to spend another $71 million on equipment that will improve airport screening. The proposals presented will raise TSA fees from $5.60 to $6.60 starting in October 2018. Later, another increase from $6.60 to $8.25 will come into effect in 2020. Air Transport World reported this budget request, “…will generate $557 million in additional [annual] revenue to offset spending on critical transportation security needs.”

Congress and TSA have not spent our security fees wisely

The last time that the Congress increased the TSA security fees, Travelers United did not oppose the move.  However, our organization did oppose the diversion of half of the fee increases to lower the deficit of the general fund. That diversion, rather than sending fees that passengers paid specifically for security, went to pay off the national debt. This had dramatic consequences on travelers as the US entered the summer travel season.

Only months after the 9/11 security fees jumped, longer and slower security lines ended up forming as the US came into the summer travel season. Eventually, the TSA lines became the major US travel story only two years ago. According to the Washington Post:

The backups happened at most big airports and some smaller ones, particularly at the choice hours when passengers prefer to fly, and they seemed to occur most often when a particular flight was drawing hundreds of passengers to a single checkpoint.

At Chicago’s O’Hare International, that was Terminal 3, surprisingly, at 7 a.m. Sunday. At Boston’s Logan International the crush at B1 came at 4:40 p.m. Saturday. The checkpoint at 4B in New York’s John F. Kennedy International was moving with painful slowness at 12:30 p.m. Sunday. Crunch time came at Atlanta’s north checkpoint at 3:15 p.m. Sunday.

…at some mega-airports [the TSA security line wait] routinely tops an hour and sometimes stretches to two or three hours.

About a year later, the scare about Islamic terrorists having developed new technology that would allow bombs to be planted in laptop computers meant long lines at TSA checkpoints and all travelers having to take out laptop computers to have them individually checked. That created a new domestic checkpoint logjam.

The domestic effect of the increase in security was not as dramatic as it was for certain airports Islamic terrorists were feared to be targeting. At those foreign airports, no one could bring a laptop aboard a flight and all laptops had to be packed in with checked baggage. Thankfully, the mandate only lasted a few months — it turned out other measures could be used to keep explosives out of the cabin and other studies determined that putting scores of laptops in the belly of jumbo jets was not safe because of the possibility of battery fires.

Where are airline travelers’ billions of dollars of diverted security fees?

“Billions of dollars have already been diverted from aviation secu­rity to go towards deficit reduction or other sectors of government,” A4A CEO Nick Calio said in Air Transport World. “Congress should return this revenue to its intended purpose, instead of raising TSA and CBP fees. Passengers already pay 21 percent in taxes on a typical domestic ticket, and increasing them can’t be justified.”

Travelers United agrees with Airlines for America that the billions in fees that have already been diverted should be used for TSA security. We want our money back. These 9/11 fees were collected for a specific part of the government, not a general tax. Even replacing a small portion of the diverted fees could solve the TSA budget crunch and eliminate the need for additional funds.

Are higher security fees needed? More PreCheck signups will do the trick.

Today, the security checkpoint issues have died down. Enrollments in PreCheck have increased, which is putting less pressure on inspectors as well as increasing TSA’s income. However, TSA now wants better luggage screening technology at the airport security checkpoints. Of course, that means TSA needs more money — another half-a-billion or so.

The unseen pre-flight security systems have provided the real security for our flights.

Rather than putting more money into a portion of TSA that has never caught a terrorist, perhaps adding to the advertising budget for PreCheck and Global Entry might be a better way to spend the funds. Maybe, these TSA and Customs and Border Protection secure traveler programs could be combined to save even more overhead costs.

The Travelers United line: Rather than throwing money at TSA airport security checkpoints for fancier equipment and more bling, airport protocols should be examined, diverted money should be given back to the programs for which it was collected, and PreCheck should be emphasized. These changes, together with the continuation of the terrorist watchlist checks and other pre-flight security procedures, should keep American fliers safe into the foreseeable future.