WASHINGTON, Feb. 28 (UPI) -- The wonderful folks at the Transportation Security Administration, created in the wake of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, are just now preparing to implement the already-discredited Computer-Assisted Passenger Pre-screening System and have finally discovered what most government bureaucracies learn within days of their coming into existence: taxpayer-citizens are but wallets to be opened and fleeced at will.
In a set of guidelines issued recently, TSA has set forth what fines its employees are to charge, and what circumstances will cause those fines to be increased, decreased, or perhaps not levied at all. A great deal of confusion has already resulted.
The confusion is certain to increase as more and more TSA supervisors discover the gold at the end of this taxpayer rainbow. While certain offenses listed in the Sanction Guidance Table are logical and appropriate, others clearly reflect the dangers of allowing an agency to exercise what essentially amounts to arbitrary and absolute power.
With regard to sanctions to be levied against airport operators and cargo handlers, hitting offenders with stiff fines for actions such as failing to conduct criminal background checks, neglecting to comply with security directives, falsifying records or reports or allowing unauthorized access to secure areas not only makes sense, but is to be encouraged. However, when the TSA turns from enforcing security requirements applicable to airports, aircraft and cargo and focuses on how it exercises power over individual air travelers, serious problems become manifest.
A threshold problem presents itself at the airport checkpoints through which more than 2 million air travelers must pass each day at U.S. airports: There are no signs warning that a traveler caught with a forgotten Swiss Army knife might be subject to subsequently levied fines up to $10,000.
Basic notions of due process and notification are not met, adding to the arbitrariness of the process. According to press accounts, a woman returning to Boston from Baltimore after her wedding forgot her carry-on bag contained a silver-plated cake serving set.
Even though the woman was allowed to place the items in her checked baggage and proceed on a later flight, some green-eyeshade bureaucrat at TSA later decided her offense was so egregious as to warrant a $150 fine.
A California lawyer was fined a similar amount for failing to remember she carried a small steak knife in her briefcase for slicing fruit, something many do in California. The lawyer made the further mistake of asking for a hearing when notice of the later-levied fine arrived. Even though the barrister decided not to pursue the hearing (since TSA insisted the hearing take place in Baltimore, while she lived in Los Angeles), the nice folks at TSA decided to punish her for even considering appealing the agency's action. Her fine was doubled.
Two other aspects of the TSA's new guidelines, however, are perhaps even more outrageous than the manner in which it can levy and increase fines in the first instance.
A fine of up to $1,500 can be levied (after the fact, of course) against an air traveler for something called "non-physical interference with screening." What is that? Looking at the screener the wrong way? Failing to jump high enough when told to jump? Or maybe, just maybe, "non-physical interference with screening" consists of a bad "attitude," perhaps failing to greet a screener with appropriate deference or subservience as she arbitrarily forces you to disrobe publicly or submit to an additional, "random" inspection?
No kidding. The TSA is asserting the right and the power to fine you, a law-abiding American citizen or lawful visitor to this great land, simply because its employees don't like your "attitude."
One of eight "aggravating factors" listed in the new guidelines is the "attitude of violator." Of course, you may not know until long after you've departed the airport, landed and gone home that your "attitude" sufficiently rankled some TSA employee after he or she found an item of contraband mistakenly left in your carry-on to warrant a hefty fine.
Remember, we're not talking of deliberately bringing weapons through a security checkpoint. That would be a criminal offense, not a civil infraction, and should be prosecuted.
What we're talking about here are mistakes committed by law-abiding but harried men and women trying their best to comply with vague, even unknown, security guidelines in the crowded and pressure-filled atmosphere that permeates all airports in the post-Sept. 11 world.
These people deserve better treatment than is now being afforded them by the Transportation Security Administration in exercising these unfair and onerous sanctions.
-- Bob Barr is a former member of Congress from Georgia.
-- United Press International's "Outside View" commentaries are written by outside contributors who specialize in a variety of issues. The views expressed do not necessarily reflect those of United Press International. In the interests of creating an open forum, original submissions are invited.
