Both sides claim victory in airport security agreement

Both Republicans and Democrats claimed victory Thursday, as the House and Senate struck a historic deal on a major overhaul of the aviation security workforce--choosing to make most security personnel federal workers, but allowing airports to opt out of the federal system after three years if they meet certain standards with private screeners.

The Senate will take up the conference report under unanimous consent today and the House is expected to take it up shortly after it passes the Senate.

House Majority Whip Tom DeLay, R-Texas, one of the key opponents of federalizing the security workforce, said the agreement was "a victory for American air, rail, bus and boat travelers," based "almost entirely on the plan passed by the House"--but many others said the final deal was closer to the goals of the Senate bill.

While Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, D-S.D., said the bill was a "win-win for everyone," Rep. William Lipinski, D-Ill., who supported the Senate version of the bill along with most House Democrats, said the deal was "very close to what the Senate wanted originally."

Lipinski also said the deal would take a few months to implement.

The House bill, passed Nov. 7, would have increased federal supervision of private screeners, but the Senate bill, passed Oct. 11, would have required most screeners to become federal employees.

The deal covers airport service workers other than the screeners the Senate bill would have covered, and it gives authority to a new deputy transportation safety secretary in the Transportation Department. The Senate bill would have placed most of the oversight in the Justice Department.

In a written statement, President Bush applauded the deal, noting it would "ultimately offer local authorities an option to employ the highest quality workforce--public or private."

Senate Minority Leader Trent Lott, R-Miss., and Commerce Committee Chairman Ernest Hollings, D-S.C., brokered the deal with others in a meeting with House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Chairman Don Young, R-Alaska, and Subcommittee Chairman John Mica, R-Fla., Thursday morning, after several proposals involving an "opt out" were floated.

The "opt out" provision, first floated Tuesday in a proposal by Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas--as well as an allowance for five airports to participate in pilot programs with private screeners--helped House Republicans get on board, several sources said.

When asked which airports might choose such an option, Young said, "We happen to believe experience overseas will show up here."

House Transportation and Infrastructure ranking member James Oberstar, D-Minn., attributed the breakthrough, after weeks of intense political negotiations, to public pressure. But he said other House and Senate conferences have not experienced the "ideological divide" this one did.

The deal also contains liability protections for the property owners of the World Trade Center, Boeing, General Electric and others, House members said, but would not include protections for private screeners.

Consumers Union issued a statement saying it was pleased with the security provisions, but "very disappointed that Congress chose to provide liability protections before we know all of the facts of what happened on September 11."

Private screening companies, which will be virtually shut out of the airport business under the deal, were disappointed.

Kenneth Quinn of the Aviation Security Association, which represents private airport- security companies, said in a conference call with reporters today that while the companies will do all they can to ease the transition to federal control, the government might experience some of the same problems plaguing the companies.

"Mistakes are going to occur... so long as human beings are operating imperfect technology," he said.

Quinn also said the citizenship requirement under the deal could make it harder for the government to find workers, but private companies are looking forward to proving they can do a better job through the pilot programs.

The improved security system would cost the airlines about $700 million, about what they pay now, and the rest would be covered by a passenger surcharge of $2.50 per leg of each trip, to a maximum of $5.