Recent airport delays across the United States, tied to a shutdown of the Department of Homeland Security, have revived debate in Washington over whether to expand privatization within the Transportation Security Administration (TSA). During a congressional hearing, acting TSA Administrator Ha Nguyen McNeill argued that both workers and travelers need greater reliability, noting that many TSA employees have missed significant pay during the shutdown. In contrast, private contractors operating under the Screening Partnership Program (SPP) have continued receiving pay without interruption.
The SPP, in place since 2004, allows private companies to handle airport security screening under TSA oversight. It is currently used at nearly two dozen airports, including San Francisco International Airport and Greater Rochester International Airport. The administration’s proposed fiscal 2027 budget calls for expanding the program to approximately 250 smaller airports, with claims it could save taxpayers over $50 million—about 0.4% of TSA’s total budget.
Lawmakers remain divided on the proposal. Some are open to privatization as a way to improve efficiency and reliability, particularly during funding disruptions. Others, such as Rep. Nikki Budzinski, strongly oppose the idea, warning it could increase costs for consumers and reduce accountability.
Labor groups, including the American Federation of Government Employees, have also raised concerns, arguing privatization could weaken security standards. They point to pre-9/11 conditions, when low wages and high turnover among private screeners were seen as contributing factors to vulnerabilities in airport security.
