Join Our Gang Or Be Terrorized

Thursday, Nov. 3, 2005 11:13 p.m. EST

'Registered Travelers' Avoid Airport Pat-Downs

The government plans to offer airline passengers nationwide the chance to avoid extra security checks by paying a fee and agreeing to
a background check.

Transportation Security Administration chief Kip Hawley, who announced the plan to Congress on Thursday, said his agency also is studying other ways to reduce security delays. That includes possibly rescinding the post-Sept. 11 prohibition on passengers' carrying
scissors and small knives onto planes.

Hawley said the "registered traveler" program will debut June 20 after an overall evaluation of airport security. Officials did not say how much participants would pay, saying private companies selected to run the program would set the fee. A trial program now extended at the airport in Orlando, Fla., charges $79.95.

The program, tested at five airports for more than a year, would allow most people to avoid random pat-downs if they pay a fee, clear a voluntary background check and provide some form of biometric identification, such as a fingerprint.

The program is intended to let frequent air passengers avoid delays and to free up security screeners to focus on other travelers.

"We believe that a nationwide registered traveler program can provide expedited screening for many travelers and enhance aviation security as well," Hawley told the House Homeland Security subcommittee on economic security.

To encourage participation, Hawley said the agency is considering adding benefits such as letting registered travelers keep their shoes and jackets on, or setting up special screening lanes for registered travelers. There will be occasional random pat-downs to make sure
terrorists do not try to beat the system, Hawley said.

The American Civil Liberties Union and other critics say security would be undermined if a terrorist could obtain a false identity and gain admission to the program. The ACLU says the plan also favors passengers who can best afford to pay and gives the government greater access to personal information.

"Those who don't want to give up this information 'or who can't afford the costs' will have to deal with other airport screening lines growing exponentially longer," ACLU legislative counsel Timothy Sparapani said. "This isn't a choice any traveler should be forced to make."

The pilot program began more than a year ago at five airports and ended Sept. 30. But the government is allowing the program to continue at the Orlando, Fla., International Airport by a private company headed by Court TV founder Steven Brill.

Brill told the subcommittee that 10,000 frequent travelers paid $79.95 each to join the program. Their average wait was 4 seconds, plus 14 seconds to have their cards authenticated at the checkpoint. The average wait for regular screening lines was 4 minutes, 16 seconds.

Program members' average maximum wait time was 3 minutes, significantly less than the maximum wait time of 31 minutes, 48 seconds for regular lines.

Under the national registered traveler plan, the government will conduct the background checks. Hawley said officials expect to use private companies to enroll travelers, issue ID cards that would be shown at airports and promote the program.

Lawmakers, most of whom are frequent fliers, generally support the program, though some said they were concerned about the possibility
that consumers might be overcharged.

"The private for-profit price gouging model is not the best way to get security or relief to frequent travelers," said Rep. Peter DeFazio, D-Ore.

In January, the transportation agency plans to issue guidance on collecting and storing biometric data and to outline an appeals process for people rejected as registered travelers.

That's also when the agency plans to announce any changes to the list of dangerous items banned from airplane cabins, Hawley said. The
agency may reverse itself and allow passengers to carry on small knives and scissors, he said.

Hawley told the subcommittee a great deal of time and attention is directed to objects that do not pose a real threat of being used to take over an aircraft.

Chris Witkowski, spokesman for the Association of Flight Attendants, said rescinding the ban is a bad idea.

"For flight attendants, front-line personnel with little or no effective security training or means of self-defense, such weapons could prove fatal," Witkowski told lawmakers.