Trump’s TSA privatization push threatens a key federal workforce

By MS NOW
May 20, 2026, 6:44 AM EST
1
View
Listen to this article

We have seen this story before: Anti-government ideologues and their corporate allies target a government service that works, label it inefficient and propose handing it to private companies where profit comes first and accountability comes last. Now they have focused attention on the Transportation Security Administration and the workforce that screens millions of airline passengers every day.

President Donald Trump proposed a fiscal year 2027 budget that would force privatization at smaller airports and cut TSA staffing. Recent reports revealed that secret plans have been in the works to privatize the TSA in every airport for months — going way beyond Trump’s public proposal. They’re dubbing it TSA’s “GoldPlus” program, but all it does is move the system toward a fragmented, contractor-driven model and line billionaires’ pockets.

The groundwork has already been laid. Last year, former Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem issued two orders aimed at dismantling collective bargaining rights for TSA officers. Weakening worker protections does not improve security. It makes it easier to enact privatization by silencing workers’ voices.

I’m all for modernizing, especially the obscure civil service rules that limit transportation security officers’ pay and workplace rights.

This push to privatize airport security is not about efficiency, long lines or saving taxpayer money, but about weakening unions, enriching contractors and dismantling a federal workforce that has spent more than two decades proving it can perform one of the most demanding jobs in public service.

This is what I plan to tell the House Homeland Security Committee on Wednesday, when it meets for a hearing on modernizing the TSA. I’m all for modernizing, especially the obscure civil service rules that limit transportation security officers’ pay and workplace rights. Those limits make a hard job even harder. But privatizing is not modernizing; privatizing TSA would put at risk the safety of millions of Americans on a shopworn idea that was widely embraced on Sept. 11, 2001, when thousands of people were killed on U.S. soil.

After those terrorist attacks, Congress made the bipartisan decision that airport security was too important to be left to companies competing for the lowest bid and the highest shareholder profits. That decision created the Transportation Security Administration and a professional federal workforce. TSA officers are not just screeners. They take an oath, pass extensive background checks and complete rigorous training that private contractors do not and cannot match.


Before 2001, when private contractors handled screening, workers were underpaid, undertrained and stretched thin. The consequences, as we saw on 9/11, were catastrophic. Today many of the same interests running airport security are eager to return. They are seeking large contracts and making familiar promises.

Privatization advocates have shifted their argument. For example, The Washington Post editorial board and the Cato Institute argue that tying aviation security to federal funding creates instability and that privatization would shield TSA workers from government shutdowns. That argument might sound reasonable, but it’s not.

Contractors rely on federal funding and ultimately face the same risks during shutdowns. Privatization would not fix that problem. It would likely make it worse. Private workers lack federal protections and long-term stability. If profits shrink, companies can cut corners or walk away.

Passengers faced long lines during the recent historically long funding lapse not because the workforce failed but because elected officials failed to act. That is a political failure, not an operational one.

Congress should work in a bipartisan manner to fix the problem caused by shutdowns without gutting TSA. The recent disruption did not expose a broken system. It created an opportunity to claim that it is. That is not reform. It is opportunism that benefits contractors at the expense of workers and passengers.

Top Stories

The Daily Fresh