What to know about TSA Gold+, the Trump administration's new push to privatize airport security

Travelers flying out of three airports across the U.S. may see changes at security lines next year, as the Trump administration pushes a new program to privatize more aspects of screenings.

Tampa, Charleston and Des Moines' international airports were the first to opt in to the Transportation Security Administration's Gold+ program, which lets airports contract private companies to run security screenings rather than federal TSA workers.

Using outside contractors for airport security isn't entirely new. More than 80% of Europe's commercial airports use private screening, according to the libertarian Cato Institute.

And 20 airports in the U.S., including San Francisco International Airport, are part of TSA's Screening Partnership Program. The decades-old initiative allows airports to apply to contract out security screening services to private companies.

The Trump administration's Gold+ program puts that existing program "on steroids," said Sheldon Jacobson, an aviation security expert and professor at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign.

The union that represents federal workers, including TSA agents, has publicly denounced the new program and the administration's push to privatize airport security screenings.

Everett Kelley, national president of the American Federation of Government Employees, said in a statement that privatizing airport security is a "major departure and step backwards" from the systems that Congress put in place following the Sept. 11 attacks.

"We don't have to theorize about what that may look like because we have been through this before and witnessed the devastating and deadly consequences," Kelley said.

Here's what to know about the Trump administration's privatization push and the new Gold+ program.

How will the Gold+ program work?

Airports that opt into the Gold+ program can hire private contractors to both implement and maintain new technology, as well as run security screenings.

This differs from the existing Screening Partnership Program, which lets airports hire private contractors to conduct the screenings, but requires them to use TSA-provided technology.

"The driving force behind this initiative is speed and agility," Jeff Price, an aviation security expert and professor at Metropolitan State University of Denver, wrote in a blog post for his airport management consulting firm. "The standard federal procurement cycle for screening technology can move at a glacial pace."

WATCH: FEMA, TSA nominees testify in confirmation hearing before Senate Homeland Security panel

Security standards are still under the purview of the federal government and TSA, with the agency serving as an oversight body over the private contractors, according to its website.

"The airports can't violate that," Jacobson said. "They still have to follow it because the TSA is setting the policies as well as the procedures."

He added that agents who work for private companies are required to go through the same training as TSA officers hired by the federal government.

However, TSA hasn't detailed how it will ensure private companies meet security standards. And critics have "pointed out the inherent tension of inserting profit motives into national security decisions," Price wrote.

How will privatizing security screenings affect travelers?

The new Gold+ program has yet to be implemented — Tampa International Airport has set a target date of May 2027 — so its effects remain to be seen. But the Screening Partnership Program provides some insight into what security screenings run by private companies look like.

Jacobson said consumers likely won't notice a clear difference between airports that opt into the privatized programs and airports that don't. He used San Francisco International Airport as an example.

"It's seamless for the average traveler," he said. "They don't even notice the difference because the uniforms, although they're not exactly the same, are similar enough that people will think, 'Oh, this is just the TSA.'"

Because the privatization programs are optional, there will likely be variation across the country.

"The concern is continuity amongst all those different airports," Price told PBS News.

He said while security measures would remain the same, the processes people go through at airports may vary. For example, people might be required to take their liquids out of their bags in some places, but not others.

But that's already the case even among airports that use federal TSA agents, he said. That's because some airports have more advanced technology.

In the event of a government shutdown, customers may see a difference.

WATCH: TSA workers finally paid after 44 days, but challenges continue

Federal TSA agents aren't paid during government shutdowns. This led to hourslong security lines during the partial shutdown in March. But airports that opted into the private screening programs were able to continue paying their agents. The New York Times reported that those airports saw shorter wait times.

However, during a congressional hearing in May, Dallas Fort Worth International Airport CEO Chris McLaughlin said that his airport, which does not use private contractors, did not see long wait lines during the shutdown.

He said airports should be given the choice whether to opt into private contracting.

How does this compare to airport screening before the Sept. 11 attacks?

Before Sept. 11, 2001, airport security was predominantly run by contractors hired by individual airlines, Price said.

"Airlines are for-profit operations, they're going to look for ways to cut costs," Price said. "And they hired screeners basically at the lowest level they possibly could, paid them the minimum they could get away with and met frankly what were inadequate federal standards at the time."

He emphasized that screening wasn't the main problem. It was "a policy failure." Security standards and regulatory requirements, Price said, were low.

The current push for privatization is different from what airport security looked like decades ago because the TSA and current federal security guidelines now exist.

Price says he hopes TSA continues to "maintain the levels of security that we have today."

Why the push toward privatization?

The Trump administration has pushed for or suggested privatization across several agencies, including Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the U.S. Postal Service and TSA.

In its budget for fiscal year 2027, TSA requested $477 million to increase the Screening Partnership Program to privatize all Category III and Category IV airports. This proposal would include "all small and non-hub airports" and expand privatization to 220 out of approximately 440 commercial airports, according to the TSA officers' union.

The TSA's budget aims to cut more than 4,000 TSA agent positions through expanded privatization, which it estimates would save $52 million.

READ MORE: Trump nominates David Cummins to head the TSA after a rocky period for the agency

Jacobson said whether privatizing airport security will save money "is a wait and see."

He said he believes the private contractors would likely hire the airport's TSA officers who have already been trained. Existing TSA agents will be given priority for jobs with the private contractors, according to Tampa International Airport.

Price said while it seems the existing privatization program has been effective because TSA hasn't ended it, that doesn't mean the push toward more privatization will be.

"For me, the jury's still out on it because we haven't expanded this program to 200-plus airports," Price told PBS News. "And we don't know what this Gold+ really is going to look like."