Rand's TSA Bill: Privatize...or "Privatize"?

"What we need is real privatization of security, but not phony privatization with the same TSA screeners in private security firm uniforms still operating under the ‘guidance’ of the federal government. Real security will be achieved when the airlines are once again in charge of protecting their property and their passengers." - Ron Paul, "Texas Straight Talk", July 5, 2011Rand Paul has been coming out with a slew of bills as of late, perhaps a mea culpa to his father's supporters after last week's endorsement of Mitt Romney, which left many in the liberty movement angry and confused.  In the past week alone, the Kentucky Senator has introduced or sponsored bills requiring warrants for domestic drone use and legalizing hemp, along with two bills related to curtailing my good pals at TSA.With TSA abuse being an issue close to my heart (amongst other body parts...) I was very interested to learn more about Rand's proposals, particularly after receiving emails last month from Campaign For Liberty encouraging me to "Help Rand Abolish The TSA!". Sounds good to me! But the devil's in the details...The first bill proposed by Senator Paul “would require that the mostly federalized program be turned over to private screeners and allow airports — with Department of Homeland Security approval — to select companies to handle the work.”I have in the past lauded attempts by Congress to private the TSA, but upon further research into this bill I take some pause.  The main problem with Rand's "privatize" bill is that it still essentially leaves airport security in the hands of the government by allowing the Department of Homeland  Security to "approve" of companies and still leaves the choice of screening methods in their hands.  While privatization is a good thing in general, this bill simply opens the door for crony capitalism with the government hand-picking the companies who get the "privilege" of radiating and groping us at the airport.  This bill doesn't do anything to change the methods used and continues to keep the burden of financing security on the taxpayer.  In fact, San Francisco has already switched over to private screeners under a trial program, and it sounds like they're no peaches to deal with either.

The 2nd bill Paul is introducing concerning the TSA is called the "Air Travellers Bill of Rights".  Don't we already have a Bill of Rights? The 4th Amendment of which the TSA routinely violates? Call me crazy but in my world the option of radiation treatment and a naked picture or the alternative of a genital grope classifies as "unreasonable".  When perusing the full text I noticed that it still allows for body scanners despite the fact there is some question as to whether they are safe and no question whatsoever that they are ineffective.  The bill does exclude certain people such as 12 year olds and the elderly from certain types of "unreasonable" searches and lets passengers "appropriately object to mistreatment".  Well, I can already object all I want, but it changes nothing, nor does this bill seemingly.  While it would allow passengers who set off a bodyscanner or metal detector to opt out of patdowns and be rescreened, it does nothing for people like myself who opt out of the body scanners in the first place.  I see nothing in this bill that would stop the TSA (or private contractors for that matter) from forcing most passengers into the same "radiation or grope" scenario.  Again, can't we just stick to the original Bill of Rights?While I wasn't thrilled with Rand Paul's endorsement of Mitt Romney, I urged caution in that Senator Paul has a pretty good track record in the Senate thus far.  It's no secret that, for better or worse, he's playing the political game. What we can only hope for is that he plays it towards good use.  I will continue to support Senator Paul when he stands up for liberty.  We should be keeping an eye on all of our lawmakers, but I will be keeping a particularly keen eye on Senator Paul's actions in the Senate.  It's important to hold all of our politicians feet to the fire, particularly those that claim to represent our beliefs.Senator Paul may have good intentions with these bills, but as far as I can tell they have no real teeth to them and I fear that accepting false solutions to the problems posed by the ever growing police state will only serve to pacify resistance towards it.   The Senator would do well to heed the words of his father that "real security will be achieved when the airlines are once again in charge of protecting their property and their passengers."  Now that would be real privatization.Receive access to ALL of our EXCLUSIVE bonus audio content – including “Conspiracy Corner”, “Degenerate Gamblers” and the “League of Liberty Podcast” by joining the Lions of Liberty Pride and supporting us on Patreon!