|
|
|
   
|
|
|||||||||
|
Scare sparks debate on frequent-flier screening
By Chris Walsh The failed terrorist plot to blow up U.S.-bound airlines could spur support for a fledgling program intended to streamline security checks for frequent fliers. But last week's development also could have the opposite effect, increasing fears that the program will divert security efforts for the benefit of a small number of fliers, among other concerns. Either way, expect the debate over the program's value to accelerate, those close to the issue say. "Maybe the cynics get muted or maybe they get a stronger voice; it's hard to tell which way it's going to go at this point," said Kevin Mitchell, chairman of the Business Travel Coalition, a lobbying group that supports the program. The goal of the Registered Traveler program, which is spearheaded by the Transportation Security Administration but run by private companies, is to allow low-risk passengers to move quickly through security checks. Travelers still must pass through metal detectors and send their bags through X-ray machines. But they can take advantage of separate, and ideally shorter, security lines. The convenience comes with strings attached, of course. Travelers must pay an annual fee of $80 to $100 and surrender some personal information such as their addresses and phone numbers. They also have to pass background checks and provide fingerprints and iris scans. That information is embedded on a card, which is scanned and matched up with the traveler at the security checkpoint before each flight. The program is voluntary for both airports and travelers. It's currently being tested at Orlando International Airport, with plans to add at least another 10 airports to the program by year-end, the TSA says. More than 20 airports have expressed interest in adopting the program. DIA has applied to participate and recently started the process of finding a firm to run the program should the airport win TSA approval. The program is still in the developmental stage, and the TSA said it is working with private companies to finalize various aspects and standards. But "every person enrolled would be subject to an equivalent level of security as those who aren't enrolled," said TSA spokeswoman Carrie Harmon. "The benefit is that members might be able to use alternative procedures or technologies to make the trip faster while strengthening customer service." Business travelers largely support it, saying it can help save valuable time, particularly with the potential for backups after the U.S. imposed new security procedures last week. The rules ban travelers from bringing most liquids and items such as toothpaste and gels onboard with them. The goods must now be stowed in checked baggage. (Those in the registered traveler program would be subject to those limits as well.) "I believe the program will be even more attractive now as an alternative to people who travel at frequent levels," said Jim Miller, chairman and chief executive officer of ImageWare Systems Inc., a biometrics software company that has teamed with several other firms including Microsoft to bid for individual airport contracts to handle registered traveler programs. "As the screening gets more intense . . . the ability to judge whether or not I represent a certain threat level is absolutely lessened by knowing my background," Miller said. But some of those opposed to the program, which include privacy groups, say last week's foiled terrorist plot underscores the need for even more screening. One Democratic member on the U.S. House Committee on Homeland Security says the program is ineffective as a security measure against a new breed of terrorists who are difficult to identify and don't have criminal backgrounds. The program "is hard to justify, either from a security or convenience standpoint," Rep. Edward J. Markey, D-Mass., told The Boston Globe earlier this week. "It is clear that al-Qaida terrorists who aspire to attack the U.S. recruit converts without any of the characteristics that would result in denial of registered traveler privileges." Opponents also argue that there are not enough people who will pay for the program to make it feasible, while airlines fear it will lead to increased costs for them in the future. And if federal officials extend the current security bans to include all carry-on items, the program could become obsolete, as checkpoint lines would be much easier and quicker to get through if no one had any bags. DIA officials, though, said their view on the program has not changed. "We think it would be a good thing for our travelers," said DIA spokesman Chuck Cannon. "It would help simplify the screening process for those who want to participate." |
||||||||||
|
|
