Row over Airline Security Bill

By Sridhar Krishnaswami

WASHINGTON, OCT. 4. Even as the prestigious Ronald Reagan National Airport opened to air traffic this morning, the first signs of Congressional partisanship are surfacing in the Senate over the Airline Security Bill. The hope of the Democrats that the Bill would have swift action has been stalled by Republicans for more than one reason.

For the administration, the opening of the Reagan National Airport had more of a symbolic than political meaning. For an administration that has been urging people to get on with business, the continued closure of the airport in the nation's Capital meant that things were yet to fall in normal place.

But security considerations remain paramount and for the time being residents of Virginia would have to put up with ``noise'' factor as flight paths have been changed to keep in line with the enhanced security considerations over the Capital City.

But on Capitol Hill the ``noise'' between Democrats and Republicans has to do with the Federal takeover of screening at all of the nation's airports. Objecting to the idea, the Republicans in the Senate blocked the Bill from coming to the floor. And the expectation is that the Bill will clear the chamber next week after disagreements have been hammered out.

Senior Republicans like the Senator, Mr. Trent Lott, are against the ``federalisation'' of the screening services. But what is making this Bill more difficult is that some law makers have indicated that they will be ``adding'' more provisions to the legislation that has little or nothing to do with airline security.

One such proposal that is gaining currency in the Senate is to add funding for security for Amtrak, the rail network, and provide funds to the people who have been laid off in the aviation industry. A big criticism of the $15billions airlines bailout package was that it did not take into account the woes of the workers laid off in the aftermath of the September 11 crisis.

The Bill calls for, among other things, federal screeners at the nation's 140 large airports with state law enforcement officers doing the job at smaller facilities. Republicans are worried that involvement of the Federal government at screening facilities means displacement of contractors and private agencies under the present scheme of things.

Further, an argument is being made that it would mean the creation of a new bureaucracy of at least 20,000 employees. The Democrats, on the other hand, are making the point that the bill only calls for Federal managers and Federal standards for screeners, not new Federal employees. Law makers realise that a full takeover by the federal government of the nation's 420 airports is an extremely difficult proposition.

The White House is closely watching the developments on Capitol Hill and has said that the President will not veto a bill that called for Federal takeover of the screening process. The Bill is yet to make any headway in the House of Representatives where the political leaderships have not taken any more significantly different positions than in the Senate.

Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Section  : International
Previous : WFP seeks funds to feed Afghans
Next     : Key questions unanswered, say Palestinians