[ OUR OPINION ]
Government airport checks
will improve securitySOME international travelers complained last week when the U.S. government activated a security system that requires visitors carrying visas to undergo digital fingerprinting and have their faces photographed at U.S. ports of entry. Now some American travelers are protesting, too. Two airport systems aimed at measuring the risk of domestic travelers would provide useful information for security agencies, and complaints that they would violate privacy rights are unwarranted.
THE ISSUE
The government is planning two systems to gain information about air passengers and identify suspected terrorists prior to their boarding domestic flights.
The federal Transportation Security Administration initially had included such information as passengers' credit reports, bank account activity, housing information, medical records and family ties in the database search envisioned in a proposed system called Computer Assisted Passenger System II, or CAPPS II. That sensitive information now has been deleted from the plan.
Under the scaled-back version scheduled to begin this summer, federal officials will take information supplied by the airlines -- the passenger's name, phone number, home address and date of birth -- and feed it into commercial databases to verify the identity. It then will be compared with wanted criminals and suspected terrorists in other databases.
Most passengers are expected to be given a "green" rating and be subjected to ordinary security measures. An estimated 5 percent would be "yellow," subject to additional security, or "red," not allowed to board.
The second system to be tested in a pilot program would allow travelers to avoid secondary inspections at airports after volunteering to undergo background checks. Such "registered" travelers would be given identification cards so they would not be stopped for extra scrutiny, which includes a security agent using a metal-detecting wand, checking the passenger's shoes or inspecting carry-ons.
Privacy advocates are opposed to both programs. They warn that private companies operating CAPPS II would be able to gain access to passengers' travel history and sell it to other companies. That should not be allowed.
Opponents of the registered traveler program say it would create two classes of airline passengers. Terrorists could build clean records over a period of a few years so they could qualify for registration and "game" the system, they add. However, registered travelers still would be subject to regular security checks to a degree that advocates of such a program, including major airlines wanting to make air travel easier for frequent passengers, are not enthused.
"I don't think that will be helpful," said David Stempler, president of the Air Travelers Association. "We had expected that either there would be a separate security lane for registered travelers or, in the alternative, a priority lane with the regular checkpoint."
