BY COMFORT OGBONNA
A leading U.S. airline industry group has voiced opposition to a White House proposal that would require smaller airports to replace federal airport security workers with private screeners, raising a fresh debate over the future of aviation security in the United States.
According to written testimony reviewed by Reuters, Airlines for America argues that private security screening should remain optional for airports and not become a mandatory requirement under any reform of the system.
The group’s chief executive, Chris Sununu, is expected to tell a U.S. House of Representatives committee on Wednesday that preserving flexibility is critical to maintaining safety and operational stability in the aviation sector. He warned that making private screening compulsory could disrupt airport operations and complicate security coordination.
“Ensuring that private security remains an option for airports and does not become a mandatory program is paramount to the U.S. aviation industry,” Sununu’s prepared remarks stated.
The debate comes as President Donald Trump pushes forward a broader plan to reduce the size and cost of the Transportation Security Administration, which oversees airport security across the United States. Last month, the administration proposed cutting more than 9,400 jobs and reducing the agency’s budget by over $1.5 billion.
The proposal represents an early step toward restructuring or partially privatizing the Transportation Security Administration, which was created after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks to centralize airport screening under federal control. Some Republican lawmakers have gone further, suggesting full privatization of the agency.
Under the White House plan, smaller airports would transition to private security providers, a move projected to eliminate more than 4,500 TSA positions. Additional job cuts—estimated at around 4,800 positions—would come from efficiency measures, including the removal of staffing at exit lanes and the reduction of overlapping responsibilities.
The TSA currently employs roughly 60,000 people and is responsible for screening passengers and baggage at airports nationwide. The agency has faced repeated scrutiny over costs and efficiency, with critics arguing that parts of its operations could be streamlined or outsourced.
Sununu’s testimony also emphasized support for modernization efforts, including the use of advanced screening technology and automated systems designed to improve checkpoint efficiency and reduce wait times.
“We are committed to TSA’s modernization efforts and support innovative solutions that accelerate the deployment of checkpoint and checked baggage technology as well as algorithms that increase efficiency,” he said.
The proposed restructuring follows a period of workforce instability at the TSA, which has already lost more than 1,600 employees during recent government funding disruptions. Despite those losses, the agency reported screening a record 906 million passengers in 2025, highlighting the continued pressure on airport security infrastructure.
The White House argues that restructuring is necessary to reduce federal costs and improve operational efficiency, particularly as part of a broader effort to shrink government payrolls. Officials say the changes would modernize airport screening while reducing redundancy within the system.
President Trump has also moved to reshape TSA leadership. He recently nominated David Cummins, a senior executive at Serco North America, to head the agency. Cummins currently oversees the company’s government services portfolio across federal, state, and local levels.
The nomination comes after Trump dismissed former TSA administrator David Pekoske, whom he had originally appointed during his first term and who was later reappointed by President Joe Biden for another term in 2022.
Opposition from labor groups has been strong. The American Federation of Government Employees, which represents TSA workers, argues that privatization could weaken airport security standards and reduce overall safety for passengers.
As debate continues in Congress, the future structure of U.S. airport security remains uncertain, with lawmakers weighing cost-cutting measures against concerns over national security and the effectiveness of private screening systems.