By Merrie Spaeth
Dallas, TX – Why should we in Texas care about the controversy over aviation security? Of course, we care because we fly and we want the skies to be safe. There's another reason, and it has to do with what kind of free people we are.In brief, the Senate passed a bill with a number of provisions, which would make all the airline screeners federal employees. Last week, the House passed its bill. It's very close - except, companies in the private sector will hire the screeners. Some argue that only this approach will give the federal government the ability to set high safety standards. That clearly isn't true. Been up in a high rise lately? More people work and visit skyscrapers than fly. Those buildings are built and maintained by private workers who are very, very carefully monitored by a number of agencies, most prominently the Occupational Safety and Health Agency. As someone who works with a number of construction companies, I can guarantee that safety is indeed the number one concern and that this country has a fabulous record.Certainly members of Congress know the combination of federal and state regulation and private sector services work well. Look at the food industry; again, a spectacular record of safety and public confidence. Notice I'm not claiming perfection. It's not possible, and people who urge perfection are really urging paralysis.The philosophical 'liberal' versus 'conservative' debate asks whether the state or the private sector should handle something. Our founding fathers did think that defense was first priority for government, so one can make an argument that aviation screeners should be government employees. On the other hand, one can make an argument for other services and industries as key to security. Clearly we aren't about to nationalize airlines, banks and farms. I love how our Washington representatives switch sides on debates without blushing. Liberals argued that the airline companies should not get a so-called financial bail-out - that they weren't fundamental to national security; and conservatives argued they were. Now, the two groups have switched sides. What's going on is a tiresome, obsolete display of partisan politics and posturing, demonizing those who disagree. Democratic minority leader Gephart said Republicans were capitulating to special interests. Republican charged Democrats just wanted more dues-paying union members.My own view: I consult with a number of governmental agencies, and - while most employees are indeed dedicated and competent - let me tell you, the federal work rules are rigid, out-of-date, and need to be completely reformed. It's virtually impossible to promote, move or remove an employee. You can imagine the impact on productivity. As an entrepreneur, I'd believe if private companies can build Bank One Tower safely, they can handle screenings - and the government can set and monitor standards appropriately. Is there a ready solution? Sure. In your home or business, you'd set time limits and accountability. You'd say, "Here are the goals; you have 24 months to prove you can do it, then we revisit the issue." This is what Congress just agreed to do for the new anti-terrorism provisions. There's a five-year sunset clause, and they assess its success.So here's our message from Dallas, Texas to the DC plutocrats. Come on, guys. Enough with the posturing. We're expecting real leadership from you. And now, we're watching.