Thread #1503292
Anonymous
Trump proposes to begin privatizing TSA screening operations 04/03/26(Fri)22:13:50 No.1503292
Trump proposes to begin privatizing TSA screening operations 04/03/26(Fri)22:13:50 No.1503292
Trump proposes to begin privatizing TSA screening operations Anonymous 04/03/26(Fri)22:13:50 No.1503292 [Reply]▶
File: TOIDARYCCFMQDAKK2WWUDPQV4Y.jpg (61.2 KB)
61.2 KB JPG
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trump-proposes-begin-privatizing-us-a irport-security-operations-2026-04- 03/
President Donald Trump on Friday proposed to begin privatizing airport security operations handled by the Transportation Security Administration, in an effort to save money.
The White House budget proposes cutting funding for the federal agency created after the September 11, 2001 attacks by $52 million and would require small airports to enroll in a program in which TSA pays for private screeners.
TSA has about 50,000 federal employees who handle screening at nearly all U.S. airports.
Budget documents released on Friday said airports currently using the privatization program have demonstrated savings compared to federal screening operations.
In recent weeks, major U.S. airports suffered massive disruptions after TSA security officers went unpaid since mid-February after funding for the workers was halted in a budget dispute. The standoff in Congress led to daily absences of 10% or more of TSA workers and brought chaos and long security lines to U.S. airports. The agency said on Monday the absence rate fell to 8.6% after the security officers were finally paid.
Privatization could help remove TSA from congressional funding fights.
Still, cuts to the airport security agency would come at a critical time for air travel with rising concerns about air safety after more than 500 TSA officers quit in recent weeks and amid a longstanding shortage of air traffic controllers. Trump's budget included money to hire more controllers.
Trump has been critical of the TSA. He fired its head, David Pekoske, on his first day in office and has never nominated a replacement. Last year, the White House said it wanted funding cut for the TSA by $247 million, saying the "TSA has consistently failed audits while implementing intrusive screening measures that violate Americans’ privacy and dignity".
88 RepliesView Thread
>>
That budget reduction represented about a 3-4% cut to the TSA staffing levels - with half for staff at exit lanes and the remaining cut of 2% of transportation security officers spread across 435 airports.
The Biden administration had increased the size of the TSA, which has nearly 60,000 employees, as air travel has increased in recent years. The TSA screened 904 million passengers in 2024, which was a record high and a 5% increase over 2023.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>1503356
Best president I've ever lived under with 90% good ideas.
I'm not happy about Iran and some other minutia, but jeez, looking back, how did we even survive Nixon, Carter, Bush, Clinton, Bush, and Obama?
Man, we are (were) a resilient people.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>1503369
My metric was all these other fuckers. Look at these fucking jackasses.
I left Reagan out because he ended decades of economic bullshit, but fuck him too.
>Positive change
Why go into specifics? You were complaining his first term about everything and wanted Biden to win. Look at what that fucker did.
You're opinion is like piss.
>>
>>
>>1503404
Of your trolling? You're not even effective at it.
Did you think you were? The only part that even comes close to bugging me is how absolutely useless you are. Get a fucking life. There's nothing positive about posting 1 liners.
Not funny
Not enraging
No point in doing what you do
You're a loon
Seek meds and ingest.
>>
>>
>>1503403
No you stupid fucking faggot, you don't know what I was doing his first term and are necessarily arguing against a strawman when you tell me what my opinion is. Fuck you for deliberately derailing the discussion you honorless fucking coward.
You can't go into specifics because you're a witless dipshit who can't justify you beliefs.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
Privatization is a scam. Replacing an entity that operates at cost with one that requires it to make profit either means it’s more expensive for the same level of service or you cut down the staffing which would mean longer lines at security. And you know the contracts are going to be no-bid to some shady politically connected company that was just formed a week before.
>>
>>
>>1503481
No it doesn't.
Generally better service, more accountability.
Cost may be a factor, however. The government can control the pricing and may be able to deliver the service at a less expensive rate depending on the specialization of the service.
The question is, "Will they?". Or will we have an Meicare/Medicaid/ACA-like situation where lobbyists from insurance companies set the pricing?
>>
>>
The US government should not be subsidizing the airlines. We shouldn't be paying taxes to keep them or their BS rewards programs going. We shouldn't be paying for the TSA. It's literally poor people subsidizing the rich's international travel.
Let the airlines fail for once. Let banks fail for once. Let Walstreet declare bankruptcy. Or watch it all happen at the same time.
>>
>>1503517
>Generally better service, more accountability.
Lol
Lmao
They don't need to have accountability because it's a private company, they can do whatever they want. It's the government that has obligatory accountability and transparency
>>
I bet now you're going to need an app and a subscription and to use your social security number and a credit card and they will hire teenagers with less than a high school education and pay them nothing All while the heads of the security companies are making billions and the same chums of the other Epstein billionaires.
Yes that was a huge run-on sentence but you know exactly what they're going to do. It's all so tiring.
>>
>>1503522
My brother in Christ, the TSA doesn't exist to protect the airlines. The airlines are fucking insured. It exists to protect national security.
They aren't security at a club. They're there to keep someone from dropping a missile the size of a large building on the CIA.
>>
>>1503528
This is probably what's going to happen. We'll start needing an ID to travel, and it will be traveling anywhere. At the same time they'll demand what are effectively bribes to speed the process along (join the Epstein+ TSA line to get fast-tracked through!!! give face, name, DOB, SSN, and location of your children to sign up!!!)
I say that and I think they already have pre-screening which is effectively that. It's right out of Papers Please
>>
>>1503292
Okay. I know I'm going to get about five replies calling me an esl shill, but what's wrong with this idea? Why not let each individual airport be responsible for their own security, with staff hired by them?
>>
>>1503567
Nothing so long as regulatory standards are kept, which is more difficult when dealing with private companies.
The secondary problem is that these services being public utilities are virtual necessities and if they begin to fail the government has to bail them out
>>
>>1503577
Couldn't we set it up where the state is liable for any incidents? For example, some retard brings a knife on the plane and stabs somebody over an argument about a seat, for a flight from LAX to NYC. Los Angeles and the state of California would then be on the hook for failing to do their job.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>1503567
The TSA is a federal agency that was created by the DHS after 9/11. They work closely with security agencies to create normalized standards and practices to help keep air transit relatively safe.
A privatized TSA means you will have different airports with different standards for airport security. This is happening on the cusp of the US killing the Ayatollah and the immediate threat posed by terrorist orgs in the United States.
>>
>>
>>1503567
Because private businesses only care about making money. That's it. They don't care about helping people, they don't care about providing a good product or service, the ONLY THING they care about is making money. Nothing else.
If providing a service makes them money, then sure, they'll do it. But if cutting corners, cheaping out, nickle and diming, and generally providing a worse service will make them MORE money? Then they'll do that instead every single time.
You don't want airport security privatized because private security companies don't care about providing security, they care about making money.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>1503665
nta but it’s assumed government agencies will usually also have some kind of oversight built-in to ensure there is no corruption. If the function of the TSA is privatised allowing the private companies to handle their own corruption investigations when they are primarily motivated by profit is more than a bit stupid, you’d be allowing the company to investigate itself. If you’re going to go private but still have government oversight then that’s fine
>>
>>
>>1503670
>If you’re going to go private but still have government oversight then that’s fine
Duh. And the profit motivation isn't a bad thing either. As long as it's something as low-skilled as security work as there's plenty of competition. The possibility of losing a government contract is massive motivator.
>>
>>
>>1503672
Ok but they only lose the government contract when they fuck up, and if they fuck up it isn’t necessary a small problem. One mistake could cause a catastrophic event. And a private company motivated by profit will do things that will increase profit, a government agency does things in accordance with the government mandated regulations.
This has been proven throughout history that certain public utilities and services cannot be entrusted to people motivated by profit, an early example is the fire department in ancient Rome
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>1503683
The minor difference is that privatization allows the government to fulfill it's role which is regulation and accountability. A role the government is better at than providing services.
Reason being that the government only has an interest in providing services according to the law. That makes them terrible at things like efficiency and customer service things private companies thrive at since they have a monetary interest in providing good service (generally held accountable by the government). For instance, if you aren't aware (you aren't) CMS takes all complaints extremely seriously and has the ability to take action on consumer complaints against insurers, insurance agents, and hospitals.
Not to say there aren't problems with privatizing, government services, but they're usually the social services provided nationwide that are exploited.
>>
>>1503517
This is true - if you're also allowing competition in that market. There's no incentive to provide better service or better accountability if you're the only choice in the market. In fact, there's an incentive to raise prices on consumers of the product.
So get ready for mandatory tiered security (at a small monthly cost) - Free, TSAPre, TSAPre+, TSAPre+ (with optional international), and TSAPremiumPre (international included).
>>
>>1503691
https://www.tsa.gov/precheck
>Get fast, convenient access at over 479 enrollment centers with pop-ups daily.
>479 Active Locations
>$76.75
>Enroll in TSA PreCheck® with Telos - fast, local, and convenient.
>508 Active Locations
>$85.00
>>
>>1503684
>…privatization allows the government to fulfill it's role which is regulation and accountability. A role the government is better at than providing services.
The government can also be as good or better at providing services as any private company. You’re being presumptuous here with this trope that private provides better services, it’s baseless.
>the government only has an interest in providing services according to the law
That’s also true for a private company
>… efficiency and customer service things private companies thrive at since they have a monetary interest in providing good service
Ok so here’s a massive flaw in your logic. It’s true that private enterprise is motivated to create good service in order to keep the business solvent and in profit, that I agree with. What you’re missing is that the reason this is true is because of competition and consumer choice, if the consumer doesn’t like the quality of service they can take their money elsewhere to another service provider. The problem with this is that it does not apply to public utilities and essential services. If I’m not happy with the quality of the security screening process at the airport am I to try another airport? There’s also no accountability for a corporation which can simply declare bankruptcy or some other way out of taking responsibility, a government agency is permanently responsible.
All of these issues pale in comparison to the fact that the private company is providing the service to turn a profit where the public sector can provide exactly the same service by exactly the same people for exactly the same total costs and not be under any obligation have to turn a profit
>>
>>
>>
>>
I think if you want to privatise security services at airports you need to make an argument that it isn’t an essential need for the public. Then you can do what you like and if the private security companies don’t do the job properly it won’t matter they’ll just lose their business
>>
>>
>>1503695
>The government can also be as good or better at providing services as any private company. You’re being presumptuous here with this trope that private provides better services, it’s baseless.
UPS, FedEx, Amazon v US Mail.
>That’s also true for a private company
You've never worked, huh?
Anyway, here's where you're faggot-brain has failed.
IF a private company doesn't provide good service they can be replaced, generally pretty easily..
IF the government provides trash services (it does) then how do you replace it?
Go ahead and apply for foodstamps or some other government assistance. You'll be on my side in no time.
>>
>>1503695
Republicunts love the idea of privatizing things that have no competition
Their laziness and greed naturally point them towards easy scams, and there's literally no way for any competition to pop up in this case
>>
>>
>>
>>1503724
>Their laziness and greed naturally point them towards easy scams, and there's literally no way for any competition to pop up in this case
TSA at the airports is pretty much just standard security. There's plenty of competition there.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>1503730
IDK? Because they embezzled money from their high up DHS position?
Oh, we're talking about privatized?
Because the DHS agents are sexy, and it's like getting felt up by a Hooters waitress, or cute twink. You get to choose! CAPITALISM!!!
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>1503723
US postal can be as good as all of those.
Private companies can’t always be replaced especially if they’re engaged in a unique service, nor should they be if they’re not profitable it’s indicative that the service isn’t necessarily profitable.
There’s no sane reason why a government agency can’t do the same service as a private enterprise and at the same cost but without the need to increase prices for the sake of profit
>>
>>
>>
>>1503737
>US postal can be as good as all of those.
No. They are not good at it.
USPS was a revolutionary thing, but in modern times there's better modes of shipping and communication.
And once again, walk into a post office one of these days and see how you're treated.
I've had both good and terrible experiences with USPS.
Whereas FedEx will almost suck my cock.
There's a large gap in government services. And shitty employees are generally not held accountable.
>>
>>
>>1503748
Do you not understand that the word “can” implies potentially. There’s no need for these courier services if US postal just does exactly what the couriers do but for less because they don’t need to profiteering
>>
>>1503744
They have sky marshals but not on every plane and they are plain clothes so terrorists don’t know which person to kill with a plastic fork before taking over the whole plane. It’s also dangerous shooting holes in an airlocked environment
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>1503723
Hi I'm Canadian. We have a great postal service and a decent social welfare system, that I live off of. The government can do things well, you just need to fujd them and provide oversight to ensure it's working. There also comes a point where the one company is too integral and thus hard to replace or consolidation makes it impossible as with Loblaws logistics here in Canada.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>1503881
Oh how relevant this posts concern is to my own, I often am transporting handmade electronics and small amounts of precious metals or occasionally just nice tools. In my checked baggage when I fly. I've had plenty of shit stolen already from TSA fuckers.
Anyway I've already crunched the numbers and will no longer be flying unless I absolutely have to.
>>
>>
I used to work for TSA. No one will read this but a few things:
1. TSA oversees federal regulations for all airport security, even among its private contractors. So someone would need to step up and keep enforcing these rules (which are more complex and cohesive than you’d think). The standards are extremely high.
2. The vast majority of airports that went private reverted back to TSA. The private companies underpaid and overworked their employees so badly they couldn’t keep a workforce. TSA doesn’t pay great but the benefits are good.
3. TSA is a bargain for travelers. Did you know that one x-ray machine costs $500,00-$800,000? Yes, one. Each airport has hundreds of millions of dollars of equipment. And yet travelers only pay like 12 dollars per round trip for security. A private company would charge travelers out the ass.
4. TSA is really good at catching important shit. It is literally impossible to miss a gun. 0%. It is impossible to miss explosives. Again, 0%. People don’t realize how good they are because they see public numbers which are 10 years old and are very misleading. TSA is tested internally with inside knowledge of how to bypass their systems. The general public would have no idea how because the situations are incredibly niche, but they’re there. The tests aren’t designed to be fair, they’re designed to expose weaknesses, and yet they use these numbers to try and show how bad the agency is. It’s a demoralization campaign. Also, in these tests they use fake explosives on machines that are meant to detect real explosives. It’s stupid.
So there.
>>
>>1504468
And by the way, I hated the job and so did probably 80% of the people there. Everyone is trying to just get their foot in the door of the government and move on to better things as fast as they can. Morale was low and officers were bleeding out like crazy. There really was/is a demoralization campaign constantly internally, it’s really shit.