Feral Jundi

Wednesday, November 30, 2011

Industry Talk: Push On To Expand Private TSA Baggage Screeners

Filed under: Industry Talk — Tags: , , , , — Matt @ 3:48 PM

Even then, lawmakers allowed TSA in 2004 to hire private screeners that are almost indistinguishable from federal officers in San Francisco; Kansas City, Mo.; Jackson Hole, Wyo.; Rochester, N.Y.; and Tupelo, Miss.
Another 12 airports have joined the program since then. The additions range from seven small airports in Montana to a heliport in New York City. Other participants are in Sonoma County, Calif.; Sioux Falls, S.D.; Roswell, N.M.; and Key West.

Check it out? 12 more airports have signed on to the program to choose a private company over a government option. lol This is turning out to be a Fedex/UPS versus the Postal Service scenario.

Now my personal opinion on this is that the TSA might not care to manage this process as well as they should, just because these private companies are the competition. The TSA also has a union breathing down their neck about protecting government employees and their benefits. So there is a definite conflict of interest here, if the TSA is involved with managing this program.

Still, the main benefit here is that these airports will have the ability to fire poor security companies. That, and competition between security companies all fighting to get that contract, is what will give an airport an excellent value and the service they demand. (as long as they choose a company based on best value, and not LPTA). They do not have that luxury with the government and John Stossel pointed this out beautifully in his articles about the private versus public debate.

The other thing is that this debate has been going on for awhile now. So every year around the holidays, everyone experiences the screening process at the airports, and they all direct their frustrations at the TSA. So I imagine that politicians are hearing this frustration from their constituents, and acting accordingly. –Matt

 

Push on to expand private TSA baggage screeners
By Bart Jansen
11/30/2011
As complaints swirl around the Transportation Security Administration, some airports and lawmakers want to hire private baggage screeners under a program the TSA administrator is reluctant to expand.
Sen. Roy Blunt, R-Mo., wants more airports to join the little-known TSA program that hires private screeners — rather than government workers — at 17 airports so far.
“Frankly, competition is a good thing in almost all places,” Blunt says.
Texas Gov. Rick Perry, a Republican candidate for president, said in a CNN debate Nov. 22 that he would privatize TSA security “as soon as I could. … It makes abundant good sense.”

(more…)

Friday, September 16, 2011

Maritime Security: The EUNAVFOR Says Armed Security Will Fail, Despite Successes

You know, I agree that eventually a boat with an armed crew will get taken one of these days. But even if one or two are taken, how would that possibly indicate any kind of potential failure? I mean look at the statistics so far?

According to the figures from EUNAVFOR, 90% of ships surviving a pirate attack in the Gulf of Aden this year have credited a security team for aiding their escape.

I don’t know about you, but my math says that even if a couple of boats with armed security are taken, the overwhelming success of the boats that got away would still show the validity of the concept. That it works.

On the other hand, I do agree that eventually it will happen.  That is just the odds of the whole thing, because eventually the worst and most minimally staffed and armed security detail will be overwhelmed by a well armed pirate crew(s) that know what they are doing. But so far, that has not happened ‘god forbid’.  But I am not going to sit here and say that if does happen, that armed security on boats is a bad idea or that a few incidents will equal a failed concept.  That is just ridiculous.

It kind of reminds me of how contractors in Iraq or Afghanistan are viewed by the public, based on a few very highly publicized events. That the thousands of missions of success, are wiped out by one or two events?  Make no mention of the complexity of these conflicts, and just bash private industry as it tries to survive and win in such an environment. Pffft. It would be like bashing the concept of the Marines, because of Haditha? Or bashing the concept of the Army, because of their Kill Teams deal. Or bashing any of the branches for accidentally killing or harming civilians.

And here is where the public versus private debate really begins. Much like with the early privateers and their successes in US wars, Navy proponents will always become jealous and get competitive if private industry is looked upon as a good idea or had success. So likewise, at the end of those wars, there was always that element of anti-private industry in any of the scholarly treatments of the concept and that history, just because it helps knock down private industry a few notches. It is totally an ego/budget thing when it comes to matters of defense and the monopoly on the use of force. And guess who owns the military academies, or has massive budgets to promote how cool and effective they are? lol Exactly…..

So the only thing private industry can do, is to continue to prove it’s worth and improve upon the service it provides. To be the better idea, despite what anyone says.  I thoroughly expect to see this ‘perfect record’ be broken, and I imagine that these particular cases will be used against private industry by all those who stand to benefit from that.

I would like to hope that we are all on the same side in this fight. Or ‘expulsis piratis, restituta commercia’? That ego could be put aside, and the public/private partnership could actually be a strategic edge in this fight.-Matt

 

Bound To Fail
September 16th, 2011
Why are armed guards currently so popular? Well the answer is simple, no ship has yet to be taken by pirates with an armed team onboard.
But for how long can this continue? Well according to EUNAVFOR, not much longer.
Captain Keith Blount, chief of staff at the counter-piracy task force, speaking at a conference organised by the International Chamber of Shipping (ICS), believes that this 100% record will inevitably fail. He stated that pirates will take a ship with armed guards on board, it is simply a matter of time.
With piracy season in the Indian Ocean soon about to ramp up again due to the end of the monsoon season, these words may come to haunt an industry which has seen armed guards as the only ray of hope in an otherwise forlorn situation.

(more…)

Friday, June 25, 2010

Military News: Admiral Mike Mullens– Debt Is Biggest Threat To U.S. National Security

     “Of the total military spending in the world, the US spends half of that, and that’s an unsustainable number,” Erik Prince, founder and chairman of Xe, told CNBC Thursday.

    “You’re going to have to turn to private sector efficiency initiatives if the US is going to be able to project power and help its friends,” –Erik Prince, June 24, 2010

*****

     Thanks to Doug for sending me this. The numbers on this are staggering.  I also think that Prince is absolutely right.  If we plan on continuing the war effort, then efficiency initiatives in this war will be a necessity.  Those efficiency initiatives come from competition and the innovation born from that competition in private industry.  The money is running out and both government and private industry will be partnering on this to find a way.

     With that said, this is another great reason for introducing methods of warfare that might be more cost effective. I talk about the concepts of incentivizing warfare here all the time.(letter of marque, privateering, bounty hunting, etc)  I personally feel that if you want to combat an out of control industry of terror, drugs, or piracy, you need an organized and violent industry that profits from their demise.

     I would also like to see an effort to make supplying the troops more cost effective. Do we have to fly or convoy fuel into Afghanistan, or can we figure out a way to either grow fuel or utilize some other energy source to power our vehicles? Do we have to ship in food, or could we grow food locally on military farms, or through co-operatives with local farmers? Do we have to use expensive jets and bombers, to provide close air support against an enemy that has no air force? Do we have to helicopter troops in, or can we drop them in by parachute?  Little changes here and there, can do wonders for reducing that million dollar price tag per soldier, per year, in a country like Afghanistan.

     Most of all, are we doing all we can to invigorate investment in Afghanistan?  Could charter cities be set up in Afghanistan, as a way to invigorate progress in that country?  How about focusing on infrastructure that supports this trillion dollars of mineral wealth? Are we creating an environment that is attractive to all investors, and not just China?

     These are all just ideas to throw around, but I really think as the belt is tightened, you will see efficiency initiatives becoming more important to the military.  They will still have a mission to accomplish, but it will be about doing more with less.  And private industry will be right there with government and the military, coming up with the better/faster/smarter/cheaper solutions necessary to get us there. –Matt

—————————————————————–

Joint Chiefs chairman reiterates security threat of high debt

By Roxana Tiron

06/24/10

Pentagon leaders, the military services and defense contractors must work together to cut bureaucratic bloat and unnecessary programs, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff said Thursday.

Adm. Mike Mullen also renewed his warning that the nation’s debt is the biggest threat to U.S. national security.

“I was shown the figures the other day by the comptroller of the Pentagon that said that the interest on our debt is $571 billion in 2012,” Mullen said at a breakfast hosted by The Hill. “That is, noticeably, about the size of the defense budget. It is not sustainable.”

(more…)

Powered by WordPress