RALEIGH – Let’s sell Charlotte Douglas, Piedmont Triad, and Raleigh-Durham International airports to private enterprise. Local governments would receive a huge cash windfall, which they can use for high-priority construction projects such as schools or roads, while passengers would receive better, cheaper service.

Sound radical enough for you? It isn’t really. We are just lagging behind (as usual) when it comes to adopting innovative ideas in governance. In Japan, the prime minister has just announced plans to sell Tokyo’s international airport and use the proceeds to reduce the government’s debt load. In Belgium, the government last year accepted a $955 million bid for a 70 percent ownership stake in Brussels International Airport from Macquarie Airports, a company that already owns or partially owns airports in Rome, Birmingham, Bristol, and Sydney.

Other countries that are getting into the act of selling all or part ownership of government-owned airports include Greece, France, the Netherlands, India, the Czech Republic, Russia, and Ireland. Anyone who has flown into London’s Gatwick Airport can attest to the fact that private airports are well-run, secure institutions that often have better services, facilities, and retail offerings.

Robert Poole, a transportation analyst at the Reason Foundation, explains that airport privatization – be in the form of outright sale, long-term lease, or management contract – is popular around the world not because of its ideological implications but because it brings practical benefits. They include better capital investment, cost savings through more efficient operations, sale or lease revenue to local governments, and a more passenger-friendly approach to service. In short, he says, a “commercialized approach” to new and existing airports is “well on the way to becoming the new paradigm.”

Even Jesse Jackson seems to agree. That’s Rep. Jackson Jr., who represents a congressional district in Illinois. He’s on board with a proposal, endorsed by Democratic Gov. Rod Blagojevich, to involve the private sector to build and operate a third airport for the Chicago area. The proposed Abraham Lincoln National Airport will, Jackson said recently, “combine the best of both worlds – private investment and ingenuity with public oversight and governance.”

So to return to North Carolina for a moment, why not offer ownership stakes in Douglas, PTI, and RDU to private companies? I’m not against considering the idea for smaller airports, as well, such as the installations serving Asheville, Fayetteville, and Wilmington, but we might as well start with the airports most likely to attract national and international bidders. One possible argument against privatization is that private firms would attempt to reap profits by jacking up fees and charges on unsuspecting passengers. The good news is that we already have years of experience with airport privatizations in other places, and they do not appear to result in higher prices – indeed, they often end up lower prices, improve service, or both.

Another potential criticism would be that private ownership might reduce the ability of local governments to engage in regional transportation planning. I’m tempted to say “good,” but perhaps a more constructive response would be to point out that a sale or lease contract can be structured in ways that retain some planning role or oversight by governments, as other jurisdictions have already demonstrated.

Let’s sell the airports and build schools with the proceeds. Do it for the children.

Hood is president of the John Locke Foundation.