In an article with the sensationalist title “Report: X-rays don’t detect explosives” released by the Associated Press, I found some encouraging nuggets of information about the latest TSA plans for increased security:

Among the changes the TSA is considering, according to TSA spokeswoman Ellen Howe:

_Hire more people to take baggage-handling responsibilities from screeners so the screeners can focus on security responsibilities.

_Have screeners, instead of contract employees hired by airlines, check IDs and boarding passes.

_Expand a program that trains screeners to look for unusual behavior in passengers that might indicate malicious intent. Called SPOT — Screening Passengers by Observation Technique — it’s used in at least 12 airports, Howe said.

Seems like an excellent plan to me, but will they be able to pull it off?

Those changes may require approval by Congress and agreement with airports and the airline industry, which might have to bear some of the cost, Howe said.

The airlines might go along with the plan, an industry spokesman said.

“We favor this proposal provided it doesn’t add costs to the carriers,” said David Castelveter, spokesman for the Air Transport Association.

Odd. One would think that the Air Transport Association would see that overall costs go down, and ridership goes up, if you have a more effective profiling and screening process. Makes you wonder how much of the security policy is determined by lobbyists and politicians with conflicting motives (e.g. want to sell more x-ray machines, or just believe that technology is the answer).

This reminds me of a conversation I overheard the other day: A young woman said “We get a box of fresh produce delivered from local farmers to our doorstep now. It’s really great, don’t you think?” An elderly woman asked in response “Is it organic?” The young woman started to say “Yes, it…” when the elderly woman cut her off and said “A worm in every bite, if that’s what you mean by great. I’d rather have pesticides any day than those worms you find in organic food.” I couldn’t help but wonder if the elderly woman might be an elected official backed by the pesticide industry, since who else could believe that organic food has a worm in every bite and all pesticides are good for you? Maybe she hasn’t seen the EPA site with sections like “Ways to reduce risks to children from pesticides”, or comes from a time before childrens’ health was thought to be at risk.