Should the Govt. Handle Airport Security?

Nov. 1, 2001 -- To federalize or not to federalize: that is the question facing the House of Representatives as it grapples with airline security.

With House debating air-safety legislation that may come up for a vote today, the major sticking point remains the role of the nation's airport baggage screeners.

House Democrats and some Republican moderates support a Senate bill, passed unanimously on Oct. 12, nationalizing baggage screening and adding the workers to the government work force.

The GOP-backed House bill would increase federal oversight of the security workers, but keep screening in the hands of private security companies.

Public Sector vs. Private Industry

A long-standing desire to limit the size of the federal government and their traditional wariness about organized labor appear to be behind the House Republicans' stance on the issue.

The GOP leadership does not want, as House Majority Leader Dick Armey, R-Texas, puts it, to "create 28,000 union members," claiming it would be difficult to get rid of inadequate employees. Additionally, the House bill, unlike its Senate counterpart, specifically forbids baggage screeners from going on strike.

But supporters of federalization say the private companies contracted by the airlines to handle security have lax standards. One security company in particular, Argenbright Holdings, has come under fire for alleged regulations violations at 13 different airports.

Critics of the current system also say the private companies do not pay their employees well enough to ensure a stable work force. According to the Government Accounting Office, an investigative arm of Congress, turnover among baggage screeners at Boston's Logan International Airport was 207 percent last year.

"The American people," said House Minority Leader Richard Gephardt, D-Mo., this week, "don't believe air security should solely depend on the lowest bidder."

But Transportation Secretary Norm Mineta says there's nothing wrong with the low-bid system.

"We build buildings, we build airports, highways, bridges, all on low bids," Mineta told reporters on Wednesday. "There's nothing wrong with that. They are built to specifications that those contractors have to meet."

President Would Prefer Private Force

President Bush has announced his support for the House GOP bill, saying it "gives the government the flexibility it needs to assemble a skilled and disciplined screening work force."

But under pressure to improve airline safety after terrorists turned four jet planes into deadly missiles on Sept. 11, the administration has signaled its willingness to accept a measure that includes federalization. The president "wouldn't want to have to sign it, but he would," said White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card.

In an effort to speed the bill into law, House Democrats announced this week they would back legislation identical to the Senate bill.

If the House approved the Senate's measure, the legislation would skip the often-fractious committee process in which the two chambers work to produce one streamlined bill. Many measures simply die in committee after being approved in both the House and Senate.

"If we pass this bill on Thursday, the president could sign it that evening," Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., one of the co-sponsors of the Senate legislation, said Tuesday.

Mineta: Lapses Still Occurring

Those favoring a government takeover also claim the interstate nature of airline travel calls out for federal oversight. The planes that crashed into New York's World Trade Center on Sept. 11, for instance, originated at Logan airport.

But the Republicans claim private security firms have been effective in a variety of European countries, including Britain and France.

As for the airlines themselves, some industry leaders have expressed interest in nationalizing the baggage screeners. With the major carriers racking up losses of historical magnitude, a federal security takeover could cut expenses.

Some airline workers, including the employees of United Airlines, the nation's second-largest carrier, have called for the federalization of baggage screening.

The American Federation of Government Employees has been running television ads in favor of federalization, and disputes the notion that its workers cannot be removed for poor performance.

"To fire a worker, a manager simply needs to file a complaint, provide the employee an opportunity to improve performance, and if no improvement is found the employee is issued an immediately effective termination notices," asserts an AFGE paper on air safety.

And while the events at Sept. 11 have had enormous consequences in America, security lapses have continued since then. People have carried weapons through screening points in New Orleans and Washington in recent weeks.

"An unacceptable number of deficiencies continue to occur," acknowledged Mineta on Tuesday.