TSA Blasted for Checked Baggage Scans, Security Breaches

ToastyKen/<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/toasty/2619866851/sizes/o/in/photostream/">Flickr</a>

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


This week will be a tough one for TSA’s public relations team due to two new findings. One, a GAO report, highlights the TSA’s failure to conduct risk assessments for 87% of US airports and the uncertain record of the agency’s behavior detection program. The other report, released by the Department of Homeland Security, revealed that there were 25,000 breaches of TSA security since 2001, including weapons brought on planes. Both were the subject of a heated hearing yesterday by the House Subcommittee on National Security, Homeland Defense and Foreign Operations.

Subcommittee Chairman Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah), who’s chastised the TSA in the past, once again voiced his lack of confidence in the organization in light of the 25,000 security breaches. “These are just the ones we know about,” Chaffetz said, “it’s a stunningly high number.” Chaffetz characterized TSA’s services as ineffective “security theater.” “We have to be right all the time,” he said, “terrorists only have to get lucky once.”

Chaffetz is right to be concerned about security, as the GAO’s report says that TSA isn’t even close to meeting current standards for detecting explosives in checked luggage. It took TSA four years to begin meeting 2005 requirements, and it looks like meeting current standards will be delayed similarly, if they’re ever instituted. “We found that TSA did not have a plan to deploy and operate electronic detection systems to meet the most recent requirements,” the report says [emphasis mine]. “As of January 2011, some of the electronic detection systems in TSA’s fleet are detecting explosives at the level established by the 2005 requirements,” and some were operating at the 1998 level of detection.

While TSA’s checked baggage scanning is still far behind, TSA is using a program to detect potential terrorists based on their body language. The program, Screening of Passengers by Observation Techniques (SPOT), has been lauded by Department of Homeland Security as being more effective than random screenings, but GAO isn’t buying it. The GAO says that DHS’s data collection wasn’t good enough to verify a link between a certain behaviors and terrorist activity. And anyway, “it is not known if the SPOT program has ever resulted in the arrest of anyone who is a terrorist, or who was planning to engage in terrorist-related activity.” This is really unfortunate, as last year DHS spent $212 million on the program and employed 3000 behavior-detection officers. This year, DHS wants an additional $20 million so it can employ 350 more officers. That seems like a lot of money and employees for a program that doesn’t actually work. GAO notes that it would have been a good idea if DHS scientifically assessed the program’s potential effectiveness before it was rolled out in 161 airports across the country.

Here’s a chart I made of the SPOT program’s results for FY2010. You’ll notice that “terrorism” is not one of the reasons people were charged.


 

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate