Trump Proposes to Begin Privatizing TSA
Screening Operations

Didn't some airports privatize security years ago?

Many countries in Europe, including the United Kingdom, Germany and Switzerland have privatized airport security. Also privatized in Canada, Australia and New Zealand. Public Unions are very, very opposed to us privatizing airport security so it probably will never happen here.

#1 - Large airports have their own airport police agencies to provide law enforcement assistance as necessary in the public areas. Their salaries are paid by the airport administration, whose operating funds flow from fees charged the airlines, car rental companies and other concessionaires. The airlines hire private security for their gates, executive waiting rooms, and leaseholds particular to their airline. TSA and Customs are separate entities belonging to the Federal Government, which provides the necessary personnel and funding via the federal budget. (For seven years I was a senior management analyst for an Assistant Executive Director at LAX. I was there the day Clinton shut down the airport waiting to get his hair styled. Boy, was that fun!)

About damn time. Hopefully this is the off ramp to abolish TSA altogether. This federal knee-jerk reaction to 9/11 is a concept whose time has gone. It never improved airport security. It only drove up costs, wasted time, expanded a bureaucracy, and unnecessarily hassled the public. There’s nothing wrong with federal oversight but the establishment of TSA created a conflict of interest in oversight AND execution of airport security. Some large airports have already privatized passenger screening, like San Francisco. The template is there.

Don't stop there privatise the Post Office too.

On the one hand, this gets airport security out from under the whims of the 'Rats in Congress, which is good. On the other, private airport screening would then be at the mercy of the local politicians, which may be good, or it may be worse than the 'Rat CongressCritters. I am thinking of the mess that some 'Rat-run states have made of Commercial Driver's Licenses. With proper Federal oversight, grounded in Federal law to prevent abuse, it may be a good thing. Another factor may be that non-Federal airport security would not have Federal-personnel immunity from lawsuits, and they may be at the mercy of the 'Rat lawyers, working to score a huge payout at the expense of the local Taxpayers. OK, L-Dotters.....Any thoughts or comments?

Please!! Pretty please!

Since that particular 9/11, I have learned two things about TSA. 1. They excel at annoying passengers. 2. They have not apprehended a single terrorist. I no longer fly, not because I have a fear of flying, but because it has become a drudgery.

I prefer the do it yourself security. Everyone enters through a metal detector that is set to catch the guns and knives. Keep your shoes on, tweezers, scissors, and even your water bottles are ok. No one touches your body unless you set off the alarm. Then all passengers are given a rock as they board the plane. Should a hijacker try to take the plane, he gets stoned. Weaker passengers can supply someone who has a good arm with more ammo. On the typical flight, everyone just turns in their rock as they exit.

Make the airlines once again be responsible for their own security, and make them liable in court. Get the government out of the airport except for Customs enforcement.

Any move by Trump to privatize TSA at airports will result in immediate Democrat support for continued governmental TSA services. Democrats would probably suggest expanding TSA if Trump suggested eliminating it. Remember, you can only add government programs and departments, NEVER eliminate them!

Go back to the OLD WAY, which WORKED! Airlines paid the security tab to the airports they use. I must emphasize this immediately, the so-called "Gore Commission Report." found NO WRONGS DONE by the private security employed at ANY of the airports used on 9-11 by the "90% Saudi" hijackers. This fool approach of Federalizing and creating yet another Federal Police Force, which, "Can Not Be Unionized," per its Charter... but wound up getting Unionized only a couple of years later. Question: When should you believe a politician? A: (c'mon now, you know this one!) The SINGLE LARGEST FAILURE on 9-11 was the Feds non-sharing of information, intra-Agency, and damn sure not with "civilian contractors." To share nothing of value regarding "high-likelihood" terror "threats" to the Security Teams of the Private Screening Companies', as they were SUPPOSED to do, SHOULD have been grounds for somebody in charge losing their job. Invoke the "Navy Way" of dealing with incidents at sea. The Captain is always fired, no matter what, as he's the one in charge. Regarding the "Box Cutters" that were "smuggled" on board... that is total B.S. reporting. The FAA Passenger Screening Handbook, that formed their Screening Standard, specifically ALLOWED those items to be passed through the Scanners, along with 3" folding pocket knives. They couldn't stop them, because it was "allowed." Again, the Private Screeners did NOTHING wrong! I fault the mentally deranged Senator from Arizona for getting on board with this Democrat desire to put every crisis the nation experiences into the, "We Need MORE Federal Government!" bucket as a solution. Big Government, more specifically, the tendency of ALL bureaucracies to withhold information unique to their unit, was the TRUE Failure Point. But organizations, whether they like it or not, will always fulfill the old axiom, "Information that only YOU have is Power, and the One holding the most Information is King." The question is whether any corrections were put in place to make sure it never happens again. American air travelers are the true "Lab Rats" in this test in perpetuity. A test that even upon failure, never sees anyone held accountable, and problems never truly fixed. But Democrats used a national crisis of the Federal Government's doing that ended up giving a LOT more Union Lemmings who will instinctively vote (D) and silently pay their Union Dues for transfer to "nice sounding" leftist NGO "causes" to further wind heir way through the labyrinthine money-laundering network and back into Democrat political campaign funds. Enhancing Transportation Security was never the real issue.

Poster #12 is correct. The then privatized screeners did nothing wrong. It was at the upper levels of federal agencies (like the FBI, not sharing information across federal agencies and the lack of imagination that someone would use a plane to fly into a target. See Condi Rice testimony below: CONDOLEEZZA RICE: To the best of my knowledge, Mr. Chairman, this kind of analysis about the use of airplanes as weapons actually was never briefed to us. I cannot tell you that there might not have been a report here or a report there that reached somebody in our midst. Part of the problem is that you have thousands of pieces of information, car bombs and this method and that method, and you have to depend to a certain degree on the intelligence agencies to sort, to tell you what is actually... is actually relevant, what is actually based on sound sources, what is speculative. And I can only assume or believe that perhaps the intelligence agencies thought that the sourcing was speculative. All that I can tell you is that it was not in the august 6th memo, using planes as a weapon, and I do not remember any reports to us, a kind of strategic warning that planes might be used as a weapon. source: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/under-oath

A great idea in the right direction!

privatise and de-thief and de-pervertise, please

The TSA should be eliminated entirely.

My recollection is that Sen Lieberman pushed the TSA to increase Federal Employee Unions.

The Aviation and Transportation Security Act of 2001(ATSA), created TSA and contained a number of time bound legislative mandates, became public law (107-71) on Nov 19, 2001. Like treaties and tariffs, Trump is not constitutionally empowered to unilaterally privatize TSA, as the main point of ATSA was to federalize pre-board screening of passengers and their belongings, both carry-on and checked. ATSA recognized that attacks against US aviation interests were attacks against the United States, not simply against individual airlines, therefore aviation security should not be left to the airlines as a 'cost of doing business.' ATSA also contained limited provisions to allow a small number of well-regulated private screening firms to participate in the "Screening Partnership Program (SPP)," initiated under FAA and transferred to the new TSA post-ATSA being signed into law by President GW Bush. Under the SPP, the TSA kept its airport Federal Security Directors and management support staff in charge, while the personnel staffing the screening checkpoints and operating the security equipment are private sector employees. Prior to TSA, the private screeners worked for private screening companies, like Globe, Wackenhut, and Argenbright, were contracted and overseen by the airlines, under the existing Federal Aviation Regulations. FAA performed covert testing of screener performance - the dismal long term results being a consideration for Congress in deciding to federalize the screening workforce post 911. The most beneficial aspect of TSA that I observed as a federal senior executive was in fulfilling the time-bound Congressional mandate requiring the identification, acquisition, deployment, and integration into airport environments of state-of-the-art security technology used to screen passengers and their belongings, including air cargo. When left strictly to the airlines and private screening companies, the technology used in screening was mostly vintage 1960s transmission X-rays and metal detectors, moderately capable of detecting metal guns and knives but highly ineffective in detecting explosives and/or the components of an IED, in particular the homemade explosives cooked up by Islamic terror outfits. The emerging technology, modified from medical CT machines, was highly effective in detecting and alerting the screeners to the presence of a host of plastic, military, commercial, and homemade explosives. Years prior to 911, the FAA, since Pan Am 103 (1988) exploded over Lockerbie Scotland and the downing of TWA 800 (1996) over the Long Island Sound, heavily invested in the R&D and testing of explosive detection apparatus, both in federal laboratories and operationally in large international airports. This led to the FAA certification of Explosive Detection Systems, technology capable of detecting the types and amounts of explosive materials likely capable of taking down commercial airliners in flight, which TSA was required under ATSA to acquire and operate. Most large airports agreed to share the costs of integrating the large, minivan-sized explosives detection systems into the existing airport baggage handling automated infrastructure, significantly reducing the number of screening personnel required to manually load and inspect passenger baggage. This required a partnership between government and industry and formalized by the creation of an Integrated Product Team, with industry members at the table with the feds, contributing to decision-making and in developing cost effective alternatives. TSA met the ATSA requirements for screening technology on time and within budget and has stayed abreast of maintaining the ability to detect new or emerging threats posed to aviation interests into the machine technology. In rough numbers, with innovative, technological efficiencies TSA staffing was reduced from around 65,000 ( prior to in-line automated security screening systems) to below 50,000 personnel (post automated screening system integration) and significantly improved the overall probability of detecting threats against aviation and the traveling public being transported from points A to B. There is no magic bullet inherent in privatized security screening, as the short term profit motive lacks the financial monetization considerations of societal benefit vs capital and operational expenses on their OMB Exhibit 300 analyses, as do public programs mandated by public law. If Congress wishes to amend ATSA to allow for widespread privatization or repeal ATSA entirely, then we may go back to the pre-911 level of aviation security.