This logjam that has TSA agents not being paid is absurd. We are now going on week 5 and those providing security at the nation’s airports- our TSA agents haven’t been paid. That’s because they are beholden on Congress to fund their paychecks and because of the partial government shutdown due to Republicans or Democrats willing to compromise, they don’t get paid.
Last weekend Elon Musk offered to pay them. What a generous offer, but even that seemingly innocent gesture has one side of the aisle up in arms.
My suggestion is that we lock Thune, Schumer and other Senate leaders in a room and don’t let them out until they can compromise and end this partial shutdown. Do not provide food. Do not provide drink other than water. Let them talk face to face across from the table to one another instead of making unrealistic demands to reporters.
If this doesn’t work then I would try something drastic.
The ongoing strain on the Transportation Security Administration workforce—manifesting in long lines, inconsistent screening times, and frustrated travelers—has exposed a deeper issue: a one-size-fits-all federal bureaucracy trying to manage a dynamic, high-pressure environment that varies wildly from airport to airport.
So here’s a more disruptive idea—one that will make some uncomfortable, but deserves serious consideration: privatize airport security, and make screeners employees of the airlines themselves.
At first glance, that sounds radical. But step back and think about incentives.
Right now, TSA employees answer to Washington. Their performance is judged through layers of bureaucracy, union rules, and federal oversight. But airlines? They live and die by efficiency, customer experience, and on-time departures. If security screening became their responsibility, delays wouldn’t just be an annoyance, they’d be a direct hit to the bottom line.
That changes everything.
Airlines would have every reason to fully staff checkpoints, invest in better technology, and streamline processes. A backed-up security line wouldn’t be blamed on “the government”—it would be their problem to solve immediately. Competition could even drive innovation, as airlines and airports look for faster, safer, and more customer-friendly ways to move people through screening.
There is precedent for this kind of model. Through the TSA’s own Screening Partnership Program, some U.S. airports already use private contractors under federal oversight. Internationally, many countries rely on private or semi-private screening systems that function efficiently without sacrificing safety.
Of course, this idea comes with real concerns.
Security is not the same as baggage handling or boarding procedures. It’s a core national security function. Handing that responsibility—even partially—to private employers raises questions about consistency, training, and accountability. The last thing anyone wants is a race to the bottom on safety in the name of cutting costs.
But privatization doesn’t have to mean deregulation.
The federal government could and should still set strict security standards, conduct audits, and enforce compliance. Think of it as shifting operations, not abandoning oversight. Airlines would execute; the government would regulate. Fail to meet the standard? Lose the contract, face penalties, or worse.
And let’s be honest: the current system isn’t exactly immune to inconsistency either.
In fact, one of the biggest frustrations travelers face today is the unpredictability. Some airports run smoothly; others feel like gridlock. A decentralized, performance-driven model could actually bring more accountability, not less.
There’s also a workforce question. Transitioning TSA employees into airline or contractor roles would need to be handled carefully, with protections for pay, benefits, and job security. The goal isn’t to punish workers, it’s to empower a system that lets them succeed in a more responsive environment.
At its core, this debate isn’t about ideology. It’s about results.
If Washington can’t fix the staffing and efficiency problems plaguing airport security, then alternatives should be on the table. Whether it’s locking lawmakers in a room until they compromise, entertaining outside financial support from figures like Elon Musk, or rethinking the structure entirely through privatization, the message should be clear: doing nothing is no longer acceptable.
Air travel is too important to the economy, to national security, and to everyday Americans to be held hostage by dysfunction.
If privatizing TSA operation leads to shorter lines, better service, and maintained safety, then it’s not a radical idea.
It’s a practical one whose time may have come.
