"...do what the airline industry did, instead of adapting and changing to match up with the new competative environment, just run to the government for money." Let's be clear about this.
Free people are the sole owner of their property.
Amendment V guarantees that right.
"...nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation."
All mandated "security" procedures, by the federal government take private property from the airlines (money) for the public use of "security."
The airlines deserve to be "compensated" for those takings.
Just in case you have doubt that "money is property," I offer the following:
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES No. 98—963 JEREMIAH W. (JAY) NIXON, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MISSOURI, et al., PETITIONERS v. SHRINK MISSOURI GOVERNMENT PAC et al. ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT [January 24, 2000]
Justice Stevens,
"I make one simple point. Money is property;"
okay how that has any thing to do with subsidies for given the airlines for "lost revenue" I don't know. The airline industry has taken a dive because of poor business decisions in many areas, not because the government established security checkpoints at airports. The airline industries are not being compensated for lost property, but rather straight welfare subsidies (like Amtrak).
The industry should be allowed to fall on its knees. This would weed out the companies with poor business models and make room for airlines who run on successful platforms. This would be the best for the consumer (hello its called competition) and for the long term health of the airline industry. Bottom line the tax payer should not have to float the bill for a corporation who is not turning profits.