Airports Should Opt For Private Screening

John L. Mica (R-Fla.), ranking Republican on the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, is urging the 100 busiest airports to consider switching to private security companies in place of the Transportation Security Administration. TSA would continue as the regulating agency overseeing hands-on screening operations. It “was never envisioned that [the TSA] would become a huge, unwieldy bureaucracy,” he added in a common letter, soon to go to 67,000 employees. One of the authors of the public law that created the TSA, Mica has long regarded the agency’s role as a regulator, rather than a hands-on screening operation, his aviation subcommittee aide said Thursday. “It is both inappropriate and inefficient for the TSA to serve as the administrator, quality assurance regulator, operator and auditor of its own activities,” Mica wrote. San Francisco International and Kansas City International airports hire private screening companies under the Screening Partnership Program set up under the public law that allows airports to opt out of federal screening. A total of 17 airports have taken that course, and airports in Montana are seeking to exercise the opt-out provision. The board of directors of Sanford International Airport has voted to opt out. Sanford is in Mica's district. The congressman said private screeners’ performance is at least “equal to, or statistically significantly better than, all federal operations.” Airports Council International-North America (ACI-NA) supplied the same airports with background and legal information related to converting to private screening. An accompanying ACI note said the issue will generate more interest when the new Congress meets next year. ACI officials regard the decision to be a purely local one. Mica assured airports that they would encounter no additional expenses because the TSA would remain responsible for screening costs. He said airports could adopt varying levels of involvement depending on local needs and interests. Under one model, he said, the airport authority could be actively involved in providing screening services. Legal exposure would be well protected in law, he added, and offered committee staff assistance to airport considerations.