In the aftermath of September 11, the Federal Government centralized airport screening security under the auspices of the Department of Homeland SecurityÆs Transportation Security Administration (TSA). Glaring failures in airport screening security in the wake of 9/11 were responsible for this move. Recently, however, Republican Representative Hal Rodgers proposed dumping federal airport security screeners in favor of TSA security screeners. The proposal is part of the Homeland Security DepartmentÆs 2006 spending bill and is due to be signed by President Bush this week. Despite Robert PooleÆs (2005, p. 1) assertion that ôhaving the federal government delegate these duties makes sense,ö nothing could be further from the truth. Instead of common sense, hiring private screeners and permitting airports to have authority over them is, as the Editors (2005, p. 1) of USA Today, maintain, ôa triumph of ideological rigidity and political scheming over common sense.ö
The Editors (2005, p. 1) of USA Today maintain, when it comes to delegating airport screening security, that ôitÆs hard to imagine a level of incompetence greater than that shown by private companies.ö Low pay, high turnover, vague standards and low morale made such private screening employees virtually useless in the bright spotlight that shone on them in the aftermath of September 11. Dumping federal screeners in favor of private companies, already exposed as completely ineffective after 9/11, is primarily collusion among lawmakers and businesses. Interest groups like FirstLine Transportation Security have donated generous amounts to republican lawmakers to help influence this decision. Likewise, by hiring out private companies for airport screening security, airports become ôexempts from being sued for failure of private screeners in the event of a terrorist attack,ö (Editors, 2005, p. 1).
Though it is hard to imagine any lawmaker or transportation exec...