That seems doubtful. Nearly everyone agrees that TSA checkpoints are irritating and slow, how many would actually vote to abolish them? Even just returning back to pre-9/11 security?
I think we have exactly the government most of us want. That's the uncomfortable truth. If the majority of voting citizens wanted the TSA gone, it would be.
We have a President who was the second highest vote getter, and a Senate where the majority party was elected with a minority of the votes (counting across the most recent elections for each seat.)
So, no, we don't have “the government most of us want”, independent of the TSA.
> If the majority of voting citizens wanted the TSA gone, it would be.
Look, if the majority of the voting public wants a particular Presidential candidate elected, at the time of voting, that still relies on them not having an unfavorable geographic distribution to work out.
A policy that is more distant from a single candidate election, and which must compete in any voting decision with other policy preferences for importance and which requires action by both the President and the Congress to effectuate is far from guaranteed.
But... it's not. The TSA and the rest of our various police forces stick around because while a few loud people complain about the threat to liberty, the vast majority of people quietly vote for more safety.
Or they don't want to see the impact of nearly 100,000 government mandated jobs lost. It's an assumption to think "the vast majority" are looking to the TSA for safety.
It's like adultery, still a crime in many states, including a felony in a few (and in others, is a crime only a female can commit). Despite no prosecutions in decades, it's still on the books, not because it should be, but because no politician wants the backlash of "non-family-friendly" that'd come with "decriminalization".
You do know that expression uses “prove” in the (otherwise uncommon in modern English) sense of “test”, not the (more common in modern English) sense of “establish the truth of”, right?
And which of the multiple examples I cited is supposed to be the singular exception? (And, certainly a Senate that is minoritarian but for conditions of either supermajoritarian popular alignment or fortuitous geographical alignment of the majority isn't an rare exception, it's a fundamental and conscious design feature.)
The United States isn't a majoritarian government by design, and very commonly does not (and certainly does not now) have the government most voting citizens want. It's even less the case that it is majoritarian on any single issue; there are many issues you can find where there is a durable majority opinion not reflected in government policy. (In part because it's not the sole issue and multiple issues compete in electing representatives, in part because candidates manipulate voters with false positions which they find reasons to blame other people for having fail, but in large part again because even a majority voting solely on one issue, for politicians honestly pursuing the voters' preferred position, doesn't guarantee winning control of either House of Congress or the Presidency, much less winning all three or winning both Houses of Congress with a veto proof majority, and so does not guarantee ability to legislate the desired goal.)
If there is serious, broad outrage about an issue that lasts through an election, then change may come for that issue under our current system. As is, stuff that most of the voting public objects to happens daily, but these actions are shielded by our current system.
Offer flights with TSA screening for $10 extra or flights with no screening.
What information does the TSA collect?
I can't think of anything the airlines don't already collect when you buy your ticket.
There's no inherent reason your identity is more relevant for a plane ride than it is for taking the bus.
You have to admit it does make good "Theater for the Masses" when you see them stripping down an 80 year old in a wheelchair or dragging an 8 year old off to the side for additional screening.
This is what happens when "The People" lose control of the Government.