In March 2026, millions of American travelers are enduring hours-long security lines at major airports as Transportation Security Administration (TSA) officers face unpaid work amid a partial government shutdown. Hundreds have quit, and call-out rates exceed 10% at many hubs, turning routine travel into chaos. Is privatizing airport security the answer?
This isn’t the first time federal budget battles have paralyzed airport screening—it’s a recurring symptom of a system where security workers are federal employees entangled in partisan gridlock. Private airport security contractors, already operating successfully at roughly two dozen U.S. airports under the TSA’s Screening Partnership Program (SPP), have kept lines moving normally during this crisis.
Privatizing airport security nationwide would deliver faster screenings, lower costs, better accountability, and—crucially—freedom from political shutdown theater.
Uninterrupted Operations, No Matter the Politics
Federal TSA officers are paid (or not) through congressional appropriations. When shutdowns hit, they work without full paychecks, leading to mass absences and resignations—as seen right now with over 360 quits and warnings that small airports could close.
Privatizing airport security with contractors, paid for by airports or airlines rather than the federal payroll, face no such risk. At SPP airports like San Francisco International (SFO) and Kansas City International, screenings continued seamlessly during past shutdowns and this one. Travelers there report normal wait times while federal-only airports grind to a halt.
Privatization insulates security from Washington drama. Airlines and airports, which depend on smooth operations for revenue, have every incentive to keep staff working and motivated. No more using passengers as pawns in budget fights.
Shorter Lines and Higher Efficiency
Privatizing airport security consistently match or exceed TSA performance in threat detection while processing passengers faster. A Government Accountability Office review and TSA-contracted studies found private operations at SPP airports equal to or better than federal ones in detecting threats, with some analyses showing they handle 65% more passengers per screener.
This translates to shorter queues and fewer frustrated travelers.
Why? Private firms compete for contracts and prioritize productivity. They can adjust staffing dynamically, cross-train employees, and deploy technology more nimbly than a rigid federal bureaucracy. Airports report improved customer service, higher employee retention, and the ability to fire underperformers quickly—something nearly impossible with unionized federal workers.
Cost Savings for Taxpayers and Travelers
The TSA’s annual budget exceeds $10 billion, much of it for screening. International models prove privatization can slash expenses without compromising safety. Canada’s quasi-private system (via the Canadian Air Transport Security Authority) spends about 40% less per capita on aviation security than the U.S. while meeting global standards.
Across Europe and Latin America, where private firms handle most screening, governments avoid the overhead of a massive federal workforce.
Even within the U.S., SPP airports often achieve comparable or lower effective costs through better labor management and reduced bureaucracy. Private operators can invest in cutting-edge tools—like advanced scanners or AI-assisted detection—without waiting for slow federal procurement. The result: fewer resources wasted on redundant rules and more focus on actual threats.
Greater Accountability and Innovation
TSA sets security standards nationwide; private contractors simply execute them under contract. If a contractor fails, airports can switch providers. Federal TSA, by contrast, regulates itself with limited external pressure to improve. This competition drives innovation—faster tech adoption, friendlier service, and tailored procedures that respect local airport needs.
Studies from think tanks across the spectrum (Heritage Foundation, Cato Institute, Reason Foundation) show private screening maintains security quality while cutting headaches. Pre-TSA, U.S. airports used private screeners; many countries still do, with strong results.
Privatizing Airport Security – Addressing Common Concerns
Critics, often union representatives, worry privatization could erode standards or job quality. Yet evidence from SPP airports and global examples shows no drop in security—private firms must meet the exact same TSA protocols. Pay and benefits remain competitive because firms must attract reliable workers to win and keep contracts. The real difference is flexibility: private models reward performance rather than seniority or political protection.
Time to Scale What Already Works
America doesn’t need to reinvent the wheel. The SPP already proves privatization succeeds here at home. With 44% of the world’s airports already involving private security models, the U.S. is an outlier in relying so heavily on federal employees for routine screening.
Expanding the program—or going further by fully privatizing screening under strict federal oversight—would end the cycle of shutdown-induced chaos. Travelers would get faster, more courteous service. Taxpayers would save money. And security would focus on threats, not partisan posturing.
The current delays aren’t just inconvenient—they’re a predictable failure of government monopoly. Privatization offers a proven, market-driven alternative that puts passengers first. It’s time Congress and the TSA made it the national standard.