My point was that the advantage of privatization that is usually touted is that you can always take advantage of some alternative if your airline does something you don't like. But you have those alternatives now. If airport security bothers you, you always have other choices, same as you would under any privatization plan.
And I don't know that there's a real problem there to be solved in the first place, this article notwithstanding. I've flown a half-dozen times since 9/11, and the security people in all the airports I've been through have been uniformly professional about the whole affair - and I must fit some sort of profile, since they invariably ask me to remove my shoes.
This aticle runs counter to my own experience, and I see no evidence that there is some sort of epidemic of abuse by screeners. If that's the case, privatizing solves a non-existent problem, and there's no reason at all to do it.