Editorial: Back to the future?

Friday, June 25, 2004 | 8:57 a.m.

On Wednesday the Bush administration released guidelines for airports that no longer want the federal government to provide the screening of airline passengers and their baggage. It's ridiculous this option even exists, though. In November 2001, in the wake of the devastating 9-11 terrorist attacks, Congress transferred control of airport security from private firms to the government for safety reasons. The screeners hired by private firms typically were paid low wages and didn't have the necessary skills or training to help prevent terrorists from slipping weapons through security checkpoints.

The public overwhelmingly supported creating a professional, federal airport security force after 9-11, but President Bush and Republican leaders in Congress opposed a federal force because of their devotion to turning over government services to the private sector. Privatization is a cozy relationship that has worked out well for the companies that provide these services (in the form of lucrative contracts) and for those elected officials who support it (in the form large campaign contributions from the winning bidders). To get Republicans on board who support privatization, then, the final legislation in 2001 contained some sops to privatization. One of the law's provisions provided that within three years any airport could choose to have a private firm run its security instead of it being handled by the federal government.

It doesn't make sense to us why any airport, if it genuinely cares about security, would return to a poorly run, privatized system. For that matter, Congress, if it really wants to strengthen airport security, should scrap the provision permitting privatization. Or have members of Congress and the Bush White House already forgotten that it was lax airport security, which failed to detect the weapons the terrorists were carrying, that helped contribute to 9-11?