Sen. Paul Introduces Amendment to Privatize the TSA

[lib3rtarian]

http://www.paul.senate.gov/?p=press_release&id=750


Mar 22, 2013
WASHINGTON, D.C. - On Thursday, March 21, Sen. Paul introduced Amendment 377 to S.Con.Res.8, the Budget Resolution, which would create a deficit-neutral reserve fund to reform aviation security, including the privatization of the Transportation Security Administration (TSA).
This amendment also precludes the use of new revenues in establishing a reserve fund for aviation security reform, an affirmation that the American people should not be asked to pay more for an improved, less intrusive airport screening process. Ultimately, it should be the responsibility of Congress to reform airport screening and reduce costs to the government.
"While providing sufficient security is undoubtedly important, it must be our priority to ensure that the airport screening process does not violate a traveler's basic rights, and that restraints are in place to protect travelers from government heavy-handedness as they move through an airport," Sen. Paul said. "TSA costs $1.2 billion per year, while doing very little to keep us safe. Privatizing airport security would ensure safer, more efficient and less costly way for the American people to travel. "

[sailingaway]

I don't want the TSA PERIOD. I want us back to pre 9/11 only with locks on the doors to the cockpits. Let the airlines vie for the most secure if they want to harass their customers.

[compromise]

I don't want the TSA PERIOD. I want us back to pre 9/11 only with locks on the doors to the cockpits. Let the airlines vie for the most secure if they want to harass their customers.

Unfortunately, that has no hope of getting any support (other than Rand and possibly Lee/Cruz) in the US Senate.

[sailingaway]

But would this be better? I am not sure it would.

[compromise]

But would this be better? I am not sure it would.

Rand's proposal would certainly be better than what we have at the moment.

[fr33]

We'll have blackwater fisting us in backrooms at the airport. Well, I won't because I don't fly...

[cheapseats]

We'll have blackwater fisting us in backrooms at the airport. Well, I won't because I don't fly...


Boycotting air travel is the ONLY way to tame this beast.

[cheapseats]

.
ImplausibleEndeavors ‏@MindOfMo
@SenRandPaul: Society gets more of whatever turns profits. You should be calling to REIN IN TSA, not make a PROFIT PARADIGM out of it. Geez.

[Aeroneous]

Boycotting air travel is the ONLY way to tame this beast.

Not enough people are, or are going to, do this. It won't work in practice, but would in theory if enough people did it.

[Christian Liberty]

Heck, I don't even do it. I don't even see why it would matter. TSA would just start regulating the roads. The TSA can just take money from us by force. So I don't see why boycotting flying is really a good way to fight it.

[mit26chell]

This is a bad idea, IMO. The Constitution is not a restraint on a private company, the Constitution is a restraint (well, its supposed to be anyway) on the US government. I realize the TSA's policies are already violating traveler's 4th Amendment rights, but a private security company surely won't have to respect them. At least with the TSA there is chance for reform, however unlikely that may seem. To be honest though, the entire thing needs to just be abolished.

[mit26chell]

If I'm mistaken I hope somebody can correct me.


This is why I like Ron better. Rand wants to tinker with unconstitutional programs and agencies while Ron wants them abolished.

[matt0611]

If I'm mistaken I hope somebody can correct me.


This is why I like Ron better. Rand wants to tinker with unconstitutional programs and agencies while Ron wants them abolished.

I may be mistaken, but didn't Rand propose ending the TSA at one point as well?

Rand seems to be more pragmatic in that when he tries and fails to get certain things (like ending all foreign aid) he tries for something he can get more support for (ending foreign aid for some countries).

But yeah, I don't see much point in privatizing the TSA, just end it. Let airlines handle the security.

[sailingaway]

what I've seen on twitter isn't happy with this, and doesn't think private in this sense is better. This isn't the same as just letting the airlines handle it their own way, which is what Ron had suggested.

[MelissaWV]

If I'm mistaken I hope somebody can correct me.


This is why I like Ron better. Rand wants to tinker with unconstitutional programs and agencies while Ron wants them abolished.

Ron on Medicare:



"Probably the worst thing that we ever did was make medical care the responsibility of the government," Paul said at a meeting of the Republican Congressional Health Care Caucus. "I don't think our federal government should be any more involved in medical care delivery than they should be in delivering education to our children."

The House member from Texas, who was for many years a practicing physician, recalled the days before Medicare and Medicaid were created in the 1960s, when government was only accountable for the care of veterans -- and even there, government did a poor job, he said.

But Paul noted that as president, he would not immediately cut health care benefits, especially for the elderly and children. Instead, he wants to transition out of the current system by allowing people to set up personal medical savings accounts and letting young people opt out of Social Security.

"I take a very moderate approach," he said. "I'd be willing work toward sanity by not cutting health care benefits until we solve our problems with this horrendous financial crisis."

[juleswin]

If I'm mistaken I hope somebody can correct me.


This is why I like Ron better. Rand wants to tinker with unconstitutional programs and agencies while Ron wants them abolished.

Privatizing TSA is essentially abolishing it. If I remember correctly, airport security for all the airports were consolidated into the TSA.

[sailingaway]

Ron on Medicare:

Yeah but that is entirely different. It was sold as insurance and people paid into it and planned for it. He sees it as a property right. He WOULD immediately end it for those under 25 who opted out, and same for social security, but would fund it for those who had paid in as best can be done as top spending priority while cutting other things. A property right is also protected by the constitution. They should never have forced people into the program, but once they did to take their money by force and not give promised services is very different than continuing an invasive pat down program in violation of the 4th amendment -- and if the private company isn't restrained would they see that as a way to avoid the 4th amendment? It should be gone.

[MelissaWV]

Yeah but that is entirely different. It was sold as insurance and people paid into it and planned for it. He sees it as a property right. He WOULD immediately end it for those under 25 who opted out, and same for social security, but would fund it for those who had paid in as best can be done as top spending priority while cutting other things. A property right is also protected by the constitution. They should never have forced people into the program, but once they did to take their money by force and not give promised services is very different than continuing an invasive pat down program in violation of the 4th amendment -- and if the private company isn't restrained would they see that as a way to avoid the 4th amendment? It should be gone.

Was only addressing the question of whether or not Ron tinkered around (or promised to tinker around) with unconstitutional programs and agencies. Due to necessity and fairness, he would have in the case I outlined.

I do think the TSA is a different matter, but will take any step away from it being a cushy Government job for total flunkies.

[robert68]

Privatizing TSA is essentially abolishing it. If I remember correctly, airport security for all the airports were consolidated into the TSA.

It would still be taxpayer funded (like Blackwater) and under Congressional (at least) control, so still very much in existence.

[sailingaway]

Was only addressing the question of whether or not Ron tinkered around (or promised to tinker around) with unconstitutional programs and agencies. Due to necessity and fairness, he would have in the case I outlined.

I do think the TSA is a different matter, but will take any step away from it being a cushy Government job for total flunkies.

but Ron did immediately end it on a going forward basis for those who didn't pay in, who could opt out. I don't think this is the same, it is creating a new corporatist program.

[cheapseats]

Privatizing TSA is essentially abolishing it.


Consider the privatization of prisons, to know that is just completely false.

Privatizing TSA turns it into a profit paradigm.

Generally speaking, society gets MORE of whatever turns a profit.

[idiom]

You privatise it, then make it compete for contracts.

TSA aint gonna be winnin no contracts.

[misean]

You privatise it, then make it compete for contracts.

TSA aint gonna be winnin no contracts.

I saw an episode of Stossel or maybe even when he was at 20/20 on a privatized TSA. I believe San Francisco and one other major airport is privatized and it's delivered a better, quicker product at a lower cost. At least that's the way Stossel presented it.

[sailingaway]

Consider the privatization of prisons, to know that is just completely false.

Privatizing TSA turns it into a profit paradigm.

Generally speaking, society gets MORE of whatever turns a profit.

this

[jj-]

But would this be better? I am not sure it would.

Yeah, this would be better. Fascism > Socialism.

[sailingaway]

Yeah, this would be better. Fascism > Socialism.

Uh, this doesn't change the control, govt would 'set the standard and approve' plans. they just wouldn't implement. And it would grow more entrenched.

[jj-]

This is a horrible idea and hopefully it doesn't pass, otherwise Rand will be very discredited by the awful new system.

[FSP-Rebel]

This is a horrible idea and hopefully it doesn't pass, otherwise Rand will be very discredited by the awful new system.
Pretty sure it's just a red meat proposal designed for failure but intended to impress.

[dancjm]

this

The way I understand it, this would end the TSA.

As has been said the TSA would have to compete in the market place, assuming that an airline will be prepared to treat it's passengers with dignity and respect, that airline will attract customers. Respecting the rights of travelers will be what turns a profit in the market place, and airlines and security companies will have to adapt in order to compete.

[cheapseats]

The way I understand it, this would end the TSA.

A rose by any other name would smell just as sweet? The opposite is also true.

BLACKWATER is now XE.



As has been said the TSA would have to compete in the market place

GOVERNMENT. SETS. THE. REGULATIONS.

TSA is the embodiment of NOTHING, if not regulations.



assuming that an airline will be prepared to treat it's passengers with dignity and respect

PAY EXTRA FOR ONE SUITCASE . . . or submit to a body-cavity search for the suspiciousness of NO suitcase.



Respecting the rights of travelers will be what turns a profit in the market place, and airlines and security companies will have to adapt in order to compete.

That's the theory, alright.

It passes muster on an exam.

PASS MUSTER, Cambridge: to reach an acceptable standard:
New teams won't be admitted to the league if their stadiums don't pass muster.

[cheapseats]

Pretty sure it's just a red meat proposal designed for failure but intended to impress.

Designed for failure, but intended to impress?

I would ask the obvious question...impress WHO? Big Swinging Dicks in the "security industry"?

Truth be told, is not the infamous Military/Industrial Complex now the notorious Military/Industrial/SECURITY complex?

[KingNothing]

Consider the privatization of prisons, to know that is just completely false.

Privatizing TSA turns it into a profit paradigm.

Generally speaking, society gets MORE of whatever turns a profit.

So we'd get get real security, instead of security theater?

[cheapseats]

So we'd get get real security, instead of security theater?


In the vast array of human activity and endeavor, do you believe AIR TRAVEL is among the more dangerous?


Leading Causes of Death
(Data are for the U.S. and are final 2010 data}

Number of deaths for leading causes of death
Heart disease: 597,689
Cancer: 574,743
Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 138,080
Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases): 129,476
Accidents (unintentional injuries): 120,859
Alzheimer's disease: 83,494
Diabetes: 69,071
Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and nephrosis: 50,476
Influenza and Pneumonia: 50,097
Intentional self-harm (suicide): 38,364

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/lcod.htm


Plane CRASHES obviously account for some of the ACCIDENTS but that has to do with quality of manufacture, skill of operation, and maintenance. Plane crashes of the ACCIDENTAL variety have diddly-squat to do with airport/transportation SECURITY. And Terrorist Attack/Hijack doesn't fall under ACCIDENTS.

9/11 was dreadful, yada yada. Hijackings are dreadful, yada yada. Seriously, "all due respect".

RIP to victims. "Our thoughts and prayers are with their families and loved ones."

But the "THREAT OF TERRORIST ATTACK" is wildly inflated . . . like the stock exchange.

"Protecting against the threat of terrorist attack" is whatcha call BIG BUSINESS.

[MelissaWV]

In all fairness, there were SOME restrictions on air travel way before 9/11. With the amount of booze that a number of passengers drink, I would not even mind individual airlines restricting some puncture and projectile weapons. I get it. Most of the restrictions, though, were concerned with your checked baggage. A number of things have made it into cargo that really should not, and they are what you might call "accidental" bombs.


On May 11, 1996, ValuJet suffered their highest-profile incident when Flight 592, a DC-9 flying from Miami to Atlanta, plunged into the Florida Everglades killing all 110 persons on board. The crash was caused by an onboard fire triggered by full chemical oxygen generators that were illegally stowed in the cargo hold without their safety caps by maintenance subcontractor SabreTech. The resulting investigation revealed numerous systemic flaws, and ultimately faulted ValuJet for not supervising SabreTech.

None of which is remedied by security grabbing testicles or sweeping breasts or molesting young children.

[cheapseats]

In all fairness, there were SOME restrictions on air travel way before 9/11. With the amount of booze that a number of passengers drink, I would not even mind individual airlines restricting some puncture and projectile weapons. I get it. Most of the restrictions, though, were concerned with your checked baggage. A number of things have made it into cargo that really should not, and they are what you might call "accidental" bombs.


WE DON'T NEED NO STINKIN' REGULATIONS, NONE WHATSOEVER...BEWARE & TAKE CARE, THAT'S OUR MOTTO people taint the Liberty Moovement more than aging hippies "rocking" the tie-dyed look taint the Legalization of Marijuana Moovement.

[cheapseats]

But the "THREAT OF TERRORIST ATTACK" is wildly inflated . . . like the stock exchange.

"Protecting against the threat of terrorist attack" is whatcha call BIG BUSINESS.



Selected Causes of Death, Ages 0-19, per 100,000 Population (2007)

Unintentional Injury 11,560 14.0

Motor Vehicle 6,683
Drowning 1,056
Fire/Burn 544
Poisoning 972
Suffocation/Strangulation 1,263
Firearm 138

http://www.childdeathreview.org/nationalchildmortalitydata.htm


"School shootings", HORRIFIC AND DEVASTATING AS THEY ARE, do not begin to constitute a leading cause of death. But there they are...Profiteers and Control Freaks, buoyed by the good intentions of, who else, Do Gooders...already clamoring for MORE SCHOOL SECURITY.

Does Rand wanna privatize that, too? Rather than battle the beasts of KNEE-JERK REACTION and ENTRENCHED UNNECESSARINESS?