the most useless government body

Yeah, that's a heavily loaded title. And I'll stand by it. I've been meaning to get this post up for a while. So, continuing on my anti-government rampage that's lasted three posts now...

Partly to rant about an organization that seems to serve no purpose except inflict enormous hardship on millions and millions of people, and partly as my "I see your encounter with pointless rules and raise you by this much" to Brian's post about getting stopped by headwear nazis in the mall, allow me to recall a recent experience with my favorite publicly funded nuisance to hate: the (drumroll please) Transportation Security Administration. Now we all know that there is no shortage of wasted government resources, but I seriously don't think any bureaucracy is on the level of the TSA. I present the following example as just a small sample of the mounds of evidence.

So I'm boarding a flight recently, en route from Baltimore to Arizona, and, of course, I have to go through the security clearance thing. I get to the sign that says I have to get a little clear plastic bag and put all my liquids and gels in it. I feel my irritation level start to rise as I dig out my toiletries bag, empty my potentially dangerous chemicals into the clear bag, and send them through the detector. Much to my dismay, I notice the guy on the other side move my stuff back and forth on the belt a couple times and then grab it off. Great, they found my stash of radioactive poison, I sarcastically think to myself. The guy figures out it's mine -- maybe the look on my face gave it away -- and informs me I'm attempting to bring contraband items into the boarding area.

Slightly surprised, I stammer some and manage to ask for an explanation. He points out the "3-1-1" rule, and I don't remember what it all stands for but the 3 is for the maximum size, in ounces, of any allowable container of liquids -- not the actual amount of liquid in the container, mind you, or the total amount of liquid in all containers, but the maximum allowable size of any one container with liquid in it. And I know one of the 1's is for only one bag worth of stuff. In other words, a quart worth of liquid in 2.99-oz bottles is allowable -- and I'm convinced their little baggie would hold that much -- as long as your quart container in your travel bag is empty when it passes through the detector. Tell me, does that make a heck of a lot of sense or what? I feel more secure already.

Anyway, maybe I'm the dumb one, but such a stupid line of reasoning hasn't occurred to me yet as I'm confronted by the TSA guy. So I point out that the 4.25-oz toothpaste tube is mostly empty and the 4-oz mouthwash bottle is clearly missing enough mouthwash to be under the cutoff. It doesn't matter, he says, because it's the container size that is in the rule. I point out that that's ridiculous because there is very obviously no way any of my carry-on items in dispute are approaching the limit. He says it's the container size that counts. Shifting more and more into smartass mode by the second, I politely tell him I heard him the first two times. He says I can't bring it into the boarding area. I say, "Seriously, does that make a bit of sense to you?" or something to that effect. He says it's not allowed into the boarding area and is clearly becoming annoyed with the banter.

I realize that there's no hope at this point for a reasonable conclusion. I have seemingly encountered a human being so stupid it must be a marvel of genetic engineering. So, rather than risk further delay and a missed flight that could smash my whole travel schedule, I surrender my battle for liberation from the tyranny of absurd and ineffective rules and tell him his reward for enforcing stupid rules is free toothpaste and mouthwash compliments of yours truly. Thoroughly pissed off by this point and having already grabbed the rest of my stuff, I take my slightly lighter clear bag of possessions and wander to a chair to put my shoes back on, hoping that my friends won't find something else to hassle me about or get on to me for resisting idiocy. I don't remember when I met back up with my travel buddy after we went through different lines, but I figure he guessed I wasn't feeling great about something.

Looking back, I admit the guy was just doing his job by enforcing a useless rule, and he probably encounters so many folks like me every day he just stonewalls and doesn't bother arguing back. And I certainly could have carried myself a little better without sacrificing principled resistance. But it seems like every experience I have with the TSA is a bad one. And given the hatred it garners at airports and from anyone I've ever heard say anything about it, I can safely say it's right up there, if not just below the IRS, for gross amount of inconvenience and discomfort inflicted upon citizens. If my blog were more popular I'd open up a nomination period and then post a poll on the most useless, worthless, pointless government body that's not the IRS. But it'd likely be a waste of time; I've tried for a while and still can't think of any other contenders.

But let's look more at the rule that's the problem at hand. Think about it. Is that humorously pointless 3-1-1 rule actually improving safety at all? Any? If they think that will limit the total potency of chemicals, someone will come up with a more powerful solution. But it'd only take a little bit of fireworks and explosives to send a whole cabin of drones into a panic anyway, so they can't be thinking they're preventing someone from inciting an airborne riot. And there's no real limit on the amount of fluid when you consider several people could combine their stuff after they get past the checkpoint, so that purpose is easily thwarted. Does any thinking American -- admittedly I just greatly narrowed the field -- but really, does anyone out there with a working brain think this rule is doing a damn bit of good? Does anyone feel more safe because of it? Does anyone feel less safe because of the anger it produces and the potential for tempers flaring?

Worse yet, realize how this rule must have made it into the books in the first place. Some idiot somewhere in the dark recesses of bureaucracy came up with it, a group of idiots agreed on it and collectively forwarded it on, several idiot-filled levels of management bought into it, even the high-brass staff idiots of cabinet members approved it, and into the volumes of travel regulations it went. Through this whole process nobody on its government path -- and come on, there are boatloads of people in the way of anything happening in government -- mounted enough resistance to stop it. Such a stupid rule, yet with the backing or silent endorsement of so many people. I don't know if that's more sad or just flat-out mind-boggling.

Do people just get dumber in groups? Are we seeing some of the deeper evils of mob rule and groupthink being worked out here? The Despair slogan fits so perfectly for government: "None of us is as dumb as all of us."