During the past Thanksgiving holiday season—the busiest time of year for the nation's airports—complaints about the federal government's method of screening passengers at airport security checkpoints reached a fever pitch.
Hundreds, if not thousands, of air travelers loudly protested against airport scanners that render passengers virtually naked and Transportation Security Administration (TSA) pat-down procedures that many said amounted to government groping.
Crystallizing the traveling public's frustration, and now something of an unofficial battle cry, one pugnacious passenger at San Diego International Airport hotly warned a TSA agent, "If you touch my junk, I'll have you arrested!"
Thanks in large part to that public outcry, chances that the federal government will improve airport security procedures appear better now than anytime since the Al Qaeda terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. And smoother airport security screening can only help increase attendance at meetings, conventions and trade shows, especially given the rough couple of years the meetings industry has endured in a weakened economy.
Leading the charge to change the present screening system is the United States Travel Association, which represents the entire domestic travel industry. In March, U.S. Travel unveiled a set of proposals that its executives say have been well-received by government officials, even if no public commitments to specific proposals have yet been forthcoming.
"Air travel is the gateway to commerce and an improved experience is directly tied to job creation and a stronger economy," said Roger Dow, CEO of U.S. Travel, in announcing the proposals, which are based on a comprehensive report of aviation security that U.S. Travel issued concurrent with its proposals.
American travelers would fly on average two to three times more per year if the hardships of airport security were eliminated, according to a survey, conducted last year by Consensus Research that was included in the report. Those additional flights would add nearly $85 billion in consumer spending and nearly 900,000 jobs to the American economy, according to the report.
The centerpiece of U.S. Travel's proposals is a voluntary, government-operated Trusted Traveler program, under which passengers will presumably breeze through separate checkpoints because they will no longer be forced to take off their shoes or remove computers from their carry-on bags. They will also be allowed to carry aboard more liquids than the present limit per person of 3.4-ounce containers in a one-quart, see-through bag.
Key to any Trusted Traveler checkpoint is biometric screening of passengers. Program participants would enter a kiosk that scans their finger or iris to confirm their identity, and both they and their luggage would additionally pass through an explosives-detection device.
Passengers applying for admission into the Trusted Traveler program must provide their biometric information and submit to a criminal background check and an interview by government officials. Those enrolled in the program would receive an identity card, which they would show at airport security checkpoints.
"Creating a Trusted Traveler program is, without a doubt, one of the best ways to control the cost of aviation security and improve efficiency," former Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge, who served as a co-chair of the blue-ribbon panel that compiled the report, said in March when the report was released.
U.S. Travel executives say their proposed Trusted Traveler program is fundamentally different than similar such programs that failed. Previous programs essentially allowed approved passengers to cut in front of the security checkpoint line, while the U.S. Travel proposal sets up a parallel security system with separate lines, according to association executives.
"Today, security is a one-size-fits-all approach," says Geoff Freeman, executive vice president of U.S. Travel, meaning that TSA, which is part of the Department of Homeland Security, essentially treats all passengers the same, that is to say, as potential terrorists. "Tomorrow, we hope it's a tailored approach."
The same Consensus Research survey of travelers' views on airport security measures suggests many passengers may jump at the chance for more government intrusion into their lives in exchange for less hassle at checkpoints; two-thirds of survey respondents consider airport security measures heavy-handed. About 250,000 people participated in a privately operated Registered Traveler program, which floundered in 2008 when TSA withdrew its assistance, according to the U.S. Travel report.
"The traveling public is beginning to say—and you heard this around Thanksgiving Day—‘we can do better than this,'" Freeman says of the present system. "What hasn't really been there to date is what a different system looks like—and that's what we've put forward."
Hoping to capitalize on passenger discontent with airport security, U.S. Travel in April launched a public campaign to persuade Congress to approve a Trusted Traveler program. The website, www.betrustednow.org, features a petition and provides more information.
U.S. Travel also proposed that the government require airlines to allow each passenger to check one bag at no extra charge—a move that could significantly decrease the logjam at security checkpoints. Many domestic airlines now charge passengers for even one checked bag, and as a result passengers carry on as much luggage as they can to avoid the extra cost.
"You have to look at the incentives that are driving more bags through that security checkpoint," Freeman says.
Despite U.S. Travel placing a high priority on its proposal of one free checked bag per passenger, other travel industry groups are not necessarily lining up to support it.
As expected, the Air Transport Association, which represents the major U.S. airlines, opposed the recommendation. (The nation's airlines collected some $6 billion in checked-baggage fees over the past four years, according to the Department of Transportation.)
More surprisingly, perhaps, the Global Business Travel Association (GBTA), which represents professional travel and meeting managers as well as travel suppliers, does not support the one-bag proposal.
"Philosophically, we disagree with requiring the airlines to include an element of their pricing that is mandated by government," says Mike McCormick, executive director of the GBTA. "That's one aspect of the report we disagreed with. But overall it was well-written and well-received. They did a very good job of putting a blueprint on paper."
New Support
Freeman credits the newest TSA administrator, John Pistole, a former deputy director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation who took office last July, for advocating change to the present system.
At least Pistole is employing the same buzzwords as U.S. Travel executives in describing the system's present flaws and the criteria for improvement.
"We do use a one-size-fits-all approach, which I don't think is either efficient or beneficial for the traveling public or for security," Pistole told lawmakers during a congressional hearing last February, according to a report in <<The Hill>>, a newspaper that covers Capitol Hill. Pistole said he was dedicated to "a risk-based approach" and "more identity-based screening."
"He couldn't have been more gracious to our recommendations and the need for better risk assessment,” Freeman says of Pistole. “There is a new focus. That gives this a greater potential for success than previous recommendations."
The full U.S. Travel report is available at www.ustravel.org
Marshall Krantz has been writing for meetings industry publications for more than 15 years.
