Some people apparently like terrorist attacks

At least that's how I explain this.

Officials at Dulles International and Baltimore-Washington International airports said they are considering the replacement of federal airport screeners at security checkpoints with workers employed by private contractors.

The Transportation Security Administration this week invited airports to apply to leave the federal security screener system and return to private screeners. The government took over airport screening after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks and is planning a transition for approved airports by spring or summer 2005.

Several airports have said private contractors might provide more staffing flexibility and might be more responsive than the federal government to hiring more employees when needed. This summer, passengers at Dulles waited more than an hour at times to pass through security as air traffic surged there with the launch of Independence Air.

"The issue of the long lines -- that's probably where we're most concerned about customer service issues," said Tara Hamilton, spokeswoman for the Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority.

As the link points out, the whole point of the TSA was replace under-paid under-trained and under-checked private security agents with government workers who received enough training and were carefully enough checked that we could hopefully reduce the risk of a repeat of 9/11. So yes, the government might not be as fast at changing staffing levels as a private contractor. But, as I often point out, that's the whole fucking point. We don't want to drag some dolt off the street every time there's a surge in traffic at an airport. Every security screener needs to be properly trained, thoroughly background-checked, and well-paid so that we can rely on them to provide the security we need. Sometimes it's slow and sometimes it causes inconvenience, but having to stand in a line for an hour when there's a spike in traffic isn't that big of a price to pay.

The best part of having the federal government in charge of airport security is that it provides an opportunity for real accountability. The Republican party isn't always a big fan of it (like whenever a Republican is President) but there's this wonderful thing called Congressional oversight. When a private company is in charge of airport security, they're responsible only to their stockholders. If their stockholders think that lower security is worth the risk, the stockholders win every time. A company's first and only loyalty is to their stockholders. If the TSA decides to lower security, they have to answer to Congress. Then, anyone who wants to lower security for the sake of profit first needs to go through the trouble on bribing the Congress-critters on the appropriate committees. And, if there's a lapse in security, we the people can make sure that heads roll for it. With a private company, accountability is left up to the stockholders.

As we saw on 9/11 aviation security is something that affects everyone, even those who don't fly. If I think a particular airline or airport is unsafe, not flying with them isn't necessarily going to protect me. If someone wants to put a huge fucking bomb in the air and fly it over my house every day, they can damn well let my government check everyone getting onto the plane to make sure no one's going to fly the bomb into my house.