There is an outrageous story behind the scenes at the Transportation Security Administration, and it’s not the one you’re thinking of.

Anger over virtual strip searches and aggressive body pat-downs at our nation’s airports understandably has been attracting the most attention, but people in the know also are questioning massive agency spending.

We have long worried that the TSA’s role has been mostly public theater meant to project the idea that travel is safe when in fact many tests have revealed that dangerous items often make it past screeners.

The result too often has been to lengthen travel times and add inconvenience to air travel.

So, we read with dismay a recent Washington Post story outlining the TSA’s big spending. The article quotes several government officials who are concerned the money isn’t always buying useful equipment.

Consider the puffer. TSA officials spent $30 million on the machines that shot jets of air at passengers to search for explosive residue, only to later abandon them as impractical.

Since the TSA’s founding after the 2001 terror attacks, the agency has spent about $14 billion in more than 20,900 transactions.

Agency officials are requesting $1.3 billion for screening technologies next year. But auditors say the TSA often doesn’t properly assess the equipment it buys.

The Government Accountability Office says the puffers were put into use even though tests showed them to be unreliable. So in 2006, the TSA yanked 116 of the machines and has either mothballed them or transferred them to other agencies.

Auditors also have negative reactions to the full-body scanners, saying that TSA officials haven’t justified their cost. Furthermore, auditors say the plans for expanding use of the scanners will require more employees to run and maintain them.

We understand that in the rush to prevent terrorism after 9/11, some money was going to be spent hastily. But government auditors shouldn’t be saying in 2010 that the TSA has failed to conduct a cost-benefit analysis of its technology.

“They need to look at whether there is other technology to deploy at checkpoints,” said Steve Lord of the GAO.

“Are we getting the best technology for the given pot of money? Is there a cheaper way to provide the same level of security through other technology?”

Airport security expert John Huey told The Washington Post that TSA officials don’t plan for security in a systematic way, and that they too often add technology as a direct response to headline-grabbing terror tactics.

Clearly, much more is at stake here than a concern about government spending. It is critical that our nation can trust air travel.

We urge Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano to overhaul how the TSA evaluates and chooses costly security screening technologies.