Transportation Security Administration agents are usually one of the first faces people see at most U.S. airports. Since 9/11, TSA agents have been a source of controversy after gaping holes were found in airport security.

However, a little-known fact is that airports could apply to opt out of using TSA agents and appoint private contractors instead. Now Congress would like to make it even easier for airports to do this.

The benefits can be for both parties: Airport operators gain flexibility in how they staff security and negotiate fees, and see greater efficiency as a result, whilst the government will see an overall reduction in costs as private companies take on the burden of employing agents.

The first major airport to choose its own agents instead of using the TSA was Kansas City International back in 2002, which required a more flexible staffing option than was possible with the government agency.

It worked well but brought the additional headaches of contract renewals and negotiations once the private contract expired.
Other major players, including San Francisco International, also opted in favor of private contractors at the earliest opportunity.

These are maintained under the Screening Partnership Program, which was set up by the government to make it easier for airports to do this while maintaining the levels of security the TSA expects. But for many who have applied under the scheme, the wait has been painfully long.

The plan is to get that to under a year from application to approval. The most recent to receive its approval is Glacier Park International Airport, which applied in 2009, and is one of four airports in Montana to apply.

Despite the benefits and improved application times being promoted, only a handful of airports, which are mostly smaller, have applied or shown interest.

According to a statement by the American Federation of Government Employees, since the application process was made easier in 2012: Aside from Montana, over the last two years, only three airports - the small Orlando-Sanford and Sarasota Bradenton airports in Florida and the airport in Portsmouth, New Hampshire, have asked TSA for permission to make the switch to private screeners. The lack of interest was noted by the GAO in December 2012.

Then there are also the airports that considered the SPP option but elected not to go down the private route. Amongst those was Sacramento International in California. According to the same statement, “One of the factors they considered in Sacramento was that no airport that large has made the switch from public to private.”

There are other reasons that airports choose to go private, including a sour relationship with the TSA, or the desire to employ locals. But rarely is the quality of security itself mentioned in deciding whether to switch; it seems that it is rarely any better or worse by doing so, and therefore is of little importance to decision-makers who don’t have strong opinions on the matter.

Arguments over whether the TSA is worthwhile or does the job of protecting its 630 million annual passengers with the effectiveness expected is a whole different argument, which is going on at the same time.