NEW YORK—A House committee on May 20 discussed how to modernize the Transportation Security Administration as the Trump administration presses for changes that would shift airport screening responsibilities to private contractors at some airports. The hearing, held by members of the House Committee on Homeland Security, also became a forum for lawmakers to air concerns about pay and morale after TSA officers went without pay during past funding lapses, even as the administration’s approach would replace them at certain smaller airports.
Republican Rep. Andrew Garbarino of New York, the committee chairman, opened by pointing to the shutdown-related disruption that TSA officers experienced. He said TSA officers endured a total of 119 days impacted by shutdown conditions between the 2025 and 2026 shutdowns, adding that the result meant TSA officers spent roughly 40% of the fiscal year reporting to work without a paycheck while continuing to carry out what he described as a core security mission.
Other committee members argued that Congress has not passed pending bills that would guarantee continued pay for TSA workers during shutdowns. Rep. Lou Correa, a California Democrat, said lawmakers should not receive pay during shutdowns if TSA workers do not. Correa said the issue tied directly to the broader question of whether a shift toward privatization would address operational needs or deepen vulnerabilities.
Correa also criticized the Trump administration’s budget proposal and its plan for the next stage of airport screening. He pointed to the proposal’s combination of spending $477.3 million to have private companies take over screening at about 250 smaller airports and cutting more than 4,500 TSA positions, framing it as an effort that, in his view, would reduce government roles rather than strengthen security.
The hearing covered how the TSA is already beginning to reorganize parts of airport screening infrastructure. This week, the TSA authorized contractors in its airport staffing program to acquire and maintain screening equipment, a change that the committee discussion described as moving a function that previously was strictly government-run into the contractor side of operations. Correa said in his remarks that technology alone cannot replace the experience of TSA officers who have historically staffed security checkpoints.
Privatized screening in the United States is already part of the airport landscape through an existing TSA program, lawmakers said, but participation varies by airport. About 20 U.S. airports already staff their checkpoints through the Screening Partnership Program, with airports choosing whether to opt in, according to the committee hearing discussion. Under the Trump administration’s proposed budget, smaller airports would be required to participate, and the TSA’s proposed approach would cover specific categories of airports based on scheduled passenger service and charter or private operations.
Witnesses at the hearing included Christopher Sununu, president and CEO of the airline trade group Airlines for America; Dallas Fort Worth International Airport CEO Chris McLaughlin; and Everett Kelley, president of the American Federation of Government Employees, which represents TSA workers. Sununu told lawmakers that ensuring the Screening Partnership Program remains an option for airports and does not become mandatory was important to the aviation industry. McLaughlin also discussed airport and operational perspectives on screening staffing.
Kelley took a different view and opposed the administration’s privatization plan. He said he was “totally against the privatization of any airport,” and he framed his objection with a comparison that, as he put it, “You don’t contract out the CIA, do you?” After Kelley’s remarks, additional Democrats argued that moving security functions to businesses could leave U.S. airspace more vulnerable.
Garbarino responded to the concerns by pointing to examples of large, politically diverse cities that use private screeners under existing arrangements. He interjected that “the very conservative cities of San Francisco, Seattle and Atlanta” all use private screeners at their airports, and he said this suggested the issue was not confined to a single political posture.
The committee also discussed proposed legislation backed by Garbarino and other lawmakers earlier this month. Garbarino and Rep. Tim Kennedy, a New York Democrat, along with three other committee members, introduced bills that would double—from $250 million to $500 million—the amount the TSA administrator is required to set aside to reimburse airports for capital costs tied to security. The legislation would also establish an annual TSA fund of $250 million for airport screening technology.
Those proposed revenue streams, the hearing discussion said, would come from a $5.60 passenger security fee per one-way trip. The committee discussion said the 9/11 Passenger Security Fee has existed since 2002, and it described how Congress in 2013 directed that certain amounts be used to reduce the federal deficit, rather than directly funding aviation security technology. Garbarino said the committee members wanted Congress to restore the fee to its original intent, arguing that nearly half of the revenue goes elsewhere. He also said Trump’s fiscal 2027 budget proposal would end that diversion of passenger fees and fund the TSA in part with $1.68 billion expected to go to deficit reduction.