Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Aviation Bill to Federalize Workers
Excite ^ | AP

Posted on 11/16/2001 1:17:08 PM PST by freedomcrusader

Aviation Bill to Federalize Workers

Updated: Thu, Nov 15 11:54 AM EST

By JIM ABRAMS, Associated Press Writer WASHINGTON (AP) - House and Senate negotiators reached a tentative agreement Thursday on legislation aimed at making the nation's airports and airplanes more secure. All airport screeners would become federal employees within two years.

"I think we have an agreement," the House Transportation Committee chairman, Rep. Don Young, R-Alaska, said after an hourlong meeting of five negotiators from each chamber.

Young and other lawmakers declined to discuss specifics, but aides, speaking on background, said the negotiators had agreed to a phased-in system under which all airport baggage screeners would become federal workers.

Under the tentative deal, the government would take immediate responsibility for the oversight of screeners. Within two years all screeners would become employees of the federal government. However, individual airports that meet strict federal standards could opt out of the system and use local law enforcement officials or private security firms for screening functions.

The negotiators also agreed that passengers would pay a fee of $2.50 every time they get on a plane to finance increased security measures. There would be a maximum $5 charge per trip.

The House and Senate negotiators had been stuck for several weeks on the issue of screeners. The bill passed by the Senate would create a new federal work force of 28,000 screeners. The House bill would put screeners under the supervision of the federal government but left it to the administration to decide whether screeners would become civil servants or remain employees of private security firms.

With the holiday season approaching and Americans still shying away from flying because of post-Sept. 11 security concerns, President Bush on Tuesday urged Congress to work day and night to give him an aviation security bill.

"I plead with the conferees to quickly reach agreement," said Sen. Joseph Lieberman, D-Conn., at a hearing of his Governmental Affairs Committee,where transportation officials outlined continuing security problems at airports since Sept. 11. "It will be truly outrageous if Congress leaves for Thanksgiving without passing aviation security legislation."

The two bills agree on most points, such as fortifying cockpit doors, increasing air marshals on flights and moving toward screening of all check-in bags. Differences remain on whether aviation security should be under the jurisdiction of the Justice Department or Transportation Department and on language in the House bill giving liability protection to building owners and others affected by the attacks on the World Trade Center.

But there was a consensus that the other parts would fall into place once the screener issue was settled. "The climate is there," said Sen. John Breaux, D-La., one of the negotiators.

Transportation Department Inspector General Kenneth Mead told the Senate Governmental Affairs hearing that numerous measures had been taken since Sept. 11 to bolster security. He cited reinforced cockpit doors, use of law enforcement officials and National Guard at airport checkpoints, background checks of airport personnel, use of FBI watch lists to identify suspicious passengers, and allowing only ticketed passengers beyond screening points.

But he said there were "still alarming lapses of security" and that steps taken would remain patchwork until Congress moves to enact fundamental changes.

Fewer than 10 percent of checked bags at the nation's airports are inspected for bombs and one overworked detection machine operator was found falling asleep on the job, Mead said.

He said that even those airports that have the $1 million machines often use them only sporadically. A survey by his office over the past weekend of 30 machines at nine airports found that 73 percent were not in continuous use.

Mead said checks over the past several weeks found some 90 security problems, including screeners missing dangerous items such as knives in carryon bags and airlines not carrying out random checks of passengers.

One of the big problems, those at the hearing said, was a lack of consistency. "You know something is wrong when screeners are confiscating thousands of nail clippers but allowing people with arsenals of weapons through," said Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill.

---

The House bill is H.R. 3150

The Senate bill is S. 1447.


TOPICS: Breaking News; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-73 next last
The stupid party doing stupid things again. How could Bush and the House Republicans cave so massively on this?

See the following thread on the difficulties of firing these idiots once they become Federal employees:

SUPREME COURT GOES POSTAL

1 posted on 11/16/2001 1:17:08 PM PST by freedomcrusader
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: freedomcrusader
Well, there goes any chance at airport security.
2 posted on 11/16/2001 1:17:08 PM PST by stubernx98
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freedomcrusader
All airport screeners would become federal employees within two years.

The Pubbies cave again!

3 posted on 11/16/2001 1:17:08 PM PST by flamefront
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freedomcrusader
I don't understand. I thought this was not passed. What happened?
4 posted on 11/16/2001 1:17:09 PM PST by BunnySlippers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freedomcrusader
Under the tentative deal, the government would take immediate responsibility for the oversight of screeners. Within two years all screeners would become employees of the federal government. However, individual airports that meet strict federal standards could opt out of the system and use local law enforcement officials or private security firms for screening functions
5 posted on 11/16/2001 1:17:09 PM PST by Dane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freedomcrusader
Told you so. One more time repeat after me - the "Two-party Cartel".
6 posted on 11/16/2001 1:17:09 PM PST by Digger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: flamefront
Also, no word on armed pilots. Since the AP didn't say it was defeated, and trumpet that fact, that leaves me to hold out some hope that arming pilots made it out of conference. On the other hand, the fact that the pubbies caved on federalizing security personnel, argues against that hope.
7 posted on 11/16/2001 1:17:09 PM PST by freedomcrusader
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: freedomcrusader
Read closer

However, individual airports that meet strict federal standards could opt out of the system and use local law enforcement officials or private security firms for screening functions.

8 posted on 11/16/2001 1:17:09 PM PST by VRWC_minion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dane
Yeah, like that'll happen. And if it doesn't happen in your city, then forget about security.
9 posted on 11/16/2001 1:17:09 PM PST by freedomcrusader
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: freedomcrusader
Yeah, like that'll happen. And if it doesn't happen in your city, then forget about security.

Huh?

10 posted on 11/16/2001 1:17:10 PM PST by Dane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: VRWC_minion
I'll believe it when I see it. What are the 'strict standards'? If the AP is calling them strict, then they're probably impossible to meet. What incentive, other than none apparent, do the local folks have to keep it local as opposed to going Federal?
11 posted on 11/16/2001 1:17:10 PM PST by freedomcrusader
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Dane
The chances that anyone will meet the 'strict federal standards' are slim to nil.
12 posted on 11/16/2001 1:17:10 PM PST by freedomcrusader
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: freedomcrusader
Now we all can feel better knowing the same organization that no sane person would want to run their business will now be employing government workers to screen luggage, we are in deep sh@@.
13 posted on 11/16/2001 1:17:10 PM PST by boomop1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freedomcrusader
No brains, no balls.
14 posted on 11/16/2001 1:17:10 PM PST by wny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dane
However, individual airports that meet strict federal standards could opt out of the system and use local law enforcement officials or private security firms for screening functions

It'll be interesting to see these standards. That will be the most telling part of this agreement.

15 posted on 11/16/2001 1:17:11 PM PST by NittanyLion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: freedomcrusader
What are the 'strict standards'?

This is what the GOP argued for. Strict standards that would be oversaw by federals.

If the AP is calling them strict, then they're probably impossible to meet.

The AP writer probably never read it.

What incentive, other than none apparent, do the local folks have to keep it local as opposed to going Federal?

Cost.

16 posted on 11/16/2001 1:17:16 PM PST by VRWC_minion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: NittanyLion
Even then, what's the incentive to remain private, when the feds will pay all these folks their salary and you don't have to? What's the incentive to remain private and even try to meet the standards?

Also, some cities may meet the standards and the rest won't. Will you like living in a city where the employees are federal? You won't have a choice of an airport with non-federal employees if you want to fly...

17 posted on 11/16/2001 1:17:17 PM PST by freedomcrusader
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: freedomcrusader
The cowardly republicans again agree to increase the size of the federal non-military payroll, and thus increase the tax burden on the living and all future unborn generations of Americans.

Cowardly republicans who compromise away our great Republic are truly the dung on the bottom of a liberal's shoe.

It is time to start petitions to recall all of these cowardly republicans!

18 posted on 11/16/2001 1:17:17 PM PST by Graewoulf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: VRWC_minion
What cost? Employees paid for by the Feds versus we pay the employees, we pay the costs of meeting some 'strict standard'? Of course the locals are going to let it all go to the Feds.
19 posted on 11/16/2001 1:17:17 PM PST by freedomcrusader
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: freedomcrusader
What cost? Employees paid for by the Feds versus we pay the employees, we pay the costs of meeting some 'strict standard'? Of course the locals are going to let it all go to the Feds.

I assumed that the additional charge on passengers would be available to pay for a private security company and the airport would pocket the difference or offer lower fare.

20 posted on 11/16/2001 1:17:18 PM PST by VRWC_minion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-73 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson