3 ms·

Just for some inside baseball American politics, when the TSA was set up, the deal was that the Republicans wanted to be seen doing something about law and orde

Just for some inside baseball American politics, when the TSA was set up, the deal was that the Republicans wanted to be seen doing something about law and order and the Democrats wanted a huge new block of unionized civil service workers. The interesting question is: which of these political rationales will hold and which won't? Will there be a backlash against another union voice working in their own interests more than the flying public? (After all, nobody wants shootings at airports, why arm TSA workers and not, say, baggage clerks?) Will there be a backlash against the entire idea of the TSA as being necessary for safety? My money says that neither of these will happen. Both rationales will hold up fine, and American airports will continue to look more and more like prison camps instead of places to celebrate our ability to freely travel. By having conflicting and complementary rationales for existence, no matter what happens, the overall response from the media and the political system will be "We need more TSA"

rayiner 13y ago
I dunno, it could cut the other way too. In addition to the usual complaints about restricting freedom, if I were looking to build conservative opposition to the TSA I'd shout from the rooftops that they're a heavily unionized, heavily minority (45%) workforce.
- DanielBMarkham 13y ago
  And you'd fall into a larger narrative between the parties that has nothing to do with TSA. That's the beauty of the way this was set up: we got the TSA because it fits into the larger strategies both parties already have in place. You can't attack it directly without just diving into good old domestic politics, which in practice means that the agency is impervious to scrutiny. So sure, take a shop-worn argument from the right and shout it from the rooftops. It'll just blend in with the rest of the clamor.
- euroclydon 13y ago
  I've not known conservatives to say, "hey, there's a bunch of minorities working in occupation X, we're aganst it."

rayiner 13y ago

I dunno, it could cut the other way too. In addition to the usual complaints about restricting freedom, if I were looking to build conservative opposition to the TSA I'd shout from the rooftops that they're a heavily unionized, heavily minority (45%) workforce.

DanielBMarkham 13y ago
And you'd fall into a larger narrative between the parties that has nothing to do with TSA. That's the beauty of the way this was set up: we got the TSA because it fits into the larger strategies both parties already have in place. You can't attack it directly without just diving into good old domestic politics, which in practice means that the agency is impervious to scrutiny. So sure, take a shop-worn argument from the right and shout it from the rooftops. It'll just blend in with the rest of the clamor.
euroclydon 13y ago
I've not known conservatives to say, "hey, there's a bunch of minorities working in occupation X, we're aganst it."