Posted on 03/24/2012 4:23:41 PM PDT by re_tail20
A new law makes it easier for airports to replace federal screeners with private contractors, and several airports, after years of passenger complaints, are lining up to make the change.
San Francisco International is among a few airports that use private screeners.
The law was welcome news to Larry Dale, president and chief executive of Orlando Sanford International Airport, who said his airport’s request to opt out of using Transportation Security Administration officers last year was denied by the federal government.
Mr. Dale said his desire to use private screeners in place of T.S.A. personnel was motivated by hundreds of complaints from passengers, and added that he had his own problems with the agency’s screeners.
“We’ve visited a number of airports who have opted out of the T.S.A. screenings, and no one wants to go back,” Mr. Dale said. “We think this will be more efficient and customer-friendly for us.”
Since 2001, a little-known law has let airports seek permission to stop using federal screeners. But airport officials said that the T.S.A had been slow in allowing the switch, and last year the agency said it would stop accepting additional requests.
That angered Representative John L. Mica, Republican of Florida, whose district includes the Orlando Sanford airport. Mr. Mica, the chairman of the House transportation committee, included a provision in aviation legislation strengthening the ability of airports to use private screeners. The law passed last month.
A committee report found that private contractors could be more cost-effective than federal screeners. If the nation’s top 35 airports switched to private contractors, the report said, taxpayers would save $1 billion over five years.
In its own report last year, the agency estimated that private screeners would cost 3 percent more than federal ones...
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Of course they stopped accepting requests to drop them. Like all bureaus they think their survival is more important than the rights of people. Passing a law that doesn't require the approval of TSA in order to opt out is the only solution. You know most airports are going to drop them if this becomes law.
New?
It was never a requirement that the screeners be Govt TSA.
The most liberal city in the nation, opted out form day one.
Earlier this year, the Transportation Security Administration halted a program that allowed airports to privatize their screeners, citing safety concerns, but airport administrators say TSA stopped the program with little warning and without adequate justification.
http://transportation.house.gov/news/PRArticle.aspx?NewsID=1309
Defeats the purpose: MassPort used a private security company out of Georgia, at Logan Airport in Boston which allowed the illegal alien and wanted Al-Queda operatives to board airplanes that would be used as bombs at the World Trade Center on Sept. 11, 2001. Those security ‘officers’ were from Somalia.
And I'd be 70% more likely to take additional flights.
This fall, my son and I are going to The Burgh, and rather than make a 1 hour flight, we'll take a bus, thanks to the TSA.
Really, why don't they let people bring anything they want on a plane? I know I'd feel (and be) safer if I and many of my fellow Americans were armed.
Hip Hip Horay!
Free markets solve problems and rewards the problem solvers.
Hey, how about we make TSA screeners exempt from bing sued or prosecuted for ‘profiling’
Then they would not have to screen grandma’s and crippled children “to be fair”
Is it a new law? Or is it just a bill? I refuse to fly with TSA running things. Haven’t since 2002.
just OY.
“Passing a law that doesn’t require the approval of TSA in order to opt out is the only solution.”
Since when have mere Laws mattered to this corrupt admin’s agenda?
As of now there isn't enough incentive for airports to do otherwise.
According to this article many airports feel that hundreds, if not thousands, of customers complaining about TSA is enough incentive. As they continue to lose flyers do to TSA screeners they will replace them. Leaving the decision up to TSA however will not get the job done. TSA lets all sorts of Mulims through screening now, if TSA lets a terrorist through that kills thousands of people, the airport that refused to go to private screeners will not be immune to prosecution, on the contrary they will be more liable for not opting out of TSA.
Ooops. Just read where ‘airlines’ were granted special limitations on air carrier liability regardless of fault. Cool, once again taking the incentive away from proper security.
I think I read that a couple of years ago Gov. Perry attempted to opt out of the TSA and the Feds said...fine, no airplanes will land in Texas.
Or did I dream that?
Maybe, I misunderstand your post. But the 9/11 perpetrators had valid ID and box-cutters were not prohibited. Do you really think the Federal Government will do better?
Even if the private screeners had to to follow the same TSA rules, I highly doubt they would scream at passengers waiting in line, karate chop you in the nuts “for security” and be a lot less theft from luggage.
How did this bill ever pass without the Unions screaming bloody murder??
The downside is that then the TSA goons will descend on Amtrak and Greyhound. The Amtrak Police Chief has already thrown TSA out of his Savannah Georgia station.
True that TSA and Govt agencies aren’t very efficient. I thought one of the operatives name was on a wanted list at the time he passed through the gate. In general, The private company they used at MassPort was a disaster.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.