[TheOtherOne]

IMHO, aiport security is a job for the military. Those folks are accountable for their performance. They're specialists -- and, by the way, highly underpaid.

I agree 100%. When I say 'Federalize' the workers, I mean militarize the airport security, as though it were a US border (Hmm, crazy thought). I do not mean simply hire the same un-trained airport crossing guards back as Federal security officers.

[MarkM]

Yes, look at what a great job the federal workers at the INS did in keeping the terrorists from entering the country. Don't allow pilots to be armed though. We can't trust the pilots. They're not federal workers.

[BruceS]

I agree 100%. When I say 'Federalize' the workers, I mean militarize the airport security, as though it were a US border (Hmm, crazy thought).

Right. And they can do as good a job keeping terrorists out of airports that the Border Patrol does keeping out illegal immigrants.

Seriously, I have not yet decided where I am on this issue. One of the legitimate functions of the Federal government is security of the country and regulation of interstate travel. So maybe we should hire uniformed, trained law-enforcement personnel to handle security at airports. On the other hand, the same thing can be done by hiring competent civilian companies to do the same job and hold them strictly accountable for performance.

I am willing to be convinced by either side. The argument that by adding union members it will hurt the Republicans (maybe true) is not a convincing one to me, since this is a matter of public and national safety.