Airport Opt-Out Of TSA

Five airports are experimenting with private screeners, and all want to
continue - primarily because by positioning screeners where they are
most needed, they have reduced passenger hassles. The airports are in
San Francisco, Kansas City, Rochester, N.Y., Jackson Hole, Wyoming and
Tupelo, Mississippi.

If an airport went to private security, it would be required to follow
TSA guidelines, and the TSA would pay the screeners. Although that would
seem to dictate the number of screeners who can be hired, an airport
might be able to employ even more if it uses federal passenger charges
and its federal allocation money.

Ft.Lauderdale-Hollywood, Florida Airport, one of the few in the nation
which has shown a significant increase in traffic and travel since
September 11th, is debating whether to opt-out of the TSA screener
program after November, and go private. MIA (Miami International), the
nation's third largest foreign departure airport also is considering it.

Along with normal security breeches, some of the major problems people
and the airlines cite about the TSA is that they significantly overhired
staff, so much so that Congress mandated they cut the number of
screeners from 55,000 to 45,000; failed to do adequate background
investigations on those hired, particularly on those with runway,
airplane jetway, fueling, catering, loading and backdoor access; cargo
carriers; failed to train screeners in proactive customer friendly
service (TSA is noted for treating every person exactly the same -
including elderly, infants, infirmed and handicapped, not in the best
interests of the customer service oriented airline industry), and
essentially that TSA is "window dressing" and not much different than
the private screening which was done before September 11th.

Granted there are over 400 airports in the United States to cover, that
was a tremendous pipeline to fill the "alleged" security void after
September 11th, and we haven't had a significant terrorist incident
since then.

But the question is - do you feel safer with TSA at the controls now
under the administration of the Federal government, or would you feel
safer with the screener operation at your local, or most used airport or
destination airport, under the control of the individual airport, and
airlines?

I would imagine this sort of question may come up in the Presidential
election this November, so just curious, since I fly regularly out of
FLL, usually on Southwest. My personal opinion is that TSA isn't much
better than what we had in the past with private screeners, and a return
to that - with the September 11th terrorist attack 2 1/2 years past,
would probably be sufficient, less costly, and greatly enhance service.
Than again, another terrorist incident, and people will stop flying - a
terrible blow to the nation's economy. Who better to run airport
security, the government, or private?

The Air Marshal Service, increased pilot training in carrying firearms,
and including the cargo plane's pilots in the umbrella for those
authorized to carry firearms on board. are areas where TSA has made more
significant strides than passenger / luggage screening, where they often
over-react and cause tremendous traffic delays. Granted, it is always
better to be down here wishing you were up there, than up there writing
about this stuff down here. Comment?