"Privacy activist Bill Scannell, who has fought the CAPPS II proposal for a year and a half, thinks yesterday's obituary notice was just that, despite what DHS said Thursday.
"This program is not going anywhere before the November elections," Scannell said. "We got rid of the program, and now we need to get rid of the administration that designed it."
"Privacy activist Bill Scannell, who has fought the CAPPS II proposal for a year and a half, thinks yesterday's obituary notice was just that, despite what DHS said Thursday.
"This program is not going anywhere before the November elections," Scannell said. "We got rid of the program, and now we need to get rid of the administration that designed it."
^
Like many here, I think the program will reappear in another form. The "registered traveler" is currently the best candidate. The anti CAPPS-II folks should not disband, especially those that are FFs. The mission creep path for registered-traveler is approximately:
free test => free pilot program => pay program => required for elite security line => required to avoid SSSS => required to fly
though some of those steps may get skipped or never occur.
It already seems possible that the registered-traveler line will REPLACE the elite-line at LAX T6 for UA.
Those of us that fly UA need to find out if this is true and fight it tooth and nail if it is.
On another note, I think it is a shame that Scannell put such blatantly partisan (pro-Kerry) statements on his website. There are a huge number of Republicans and conservatives that identify with the privacy and civil-libertiesw issues and identify with Scannell, and he's taken a step toward alienating us. This is not a partisan issue; both sides are pandering to feel-good security and privacy violations. Anyone who thinks Kerry/Dems will fix what we see as problems is deluding themselves.
GUWonder
Jul 18, 04, 1:04 am
On another note, I think it is a shame that Scannell put such blatantly partisan (pro-Kerry) statements on his website. There are a huge number of Republicans and conservatives that identify with the privacy and civil-libertiesw issues and identify with Scannell, and he's taken a step toward alienating us. This is not a partisan issue; both sides are pandering to feel-good security and privacy violations. Anyone who thinks Kerry/Dems will fix what we see as problems is deluding themselves.
I agree. This is not a Republican-Democratic issue or a Kerry-Bush issue. This is about American values and American rights and the sheeple across the political spectrum will go for "comfort actions" instead of real security. Consequently, we will all be sold out unless pro-rights Americans put aside the partisanship and push forward without discouraging others from pushing forward on the same front too.
I suggest that some others here email him to make him aware that this is not a partisanship issue and that even Kerry-supporters want help on this front from Bush-partisans.
BillScann
Jul 21, 04, 12:58 pm
I suggest that some others here email him to make him aware that this is not a partisanship issue and that even Kerry-supporters want help on this front from Bush-partisans.
All,
I've been an FT lurker for a while now and appreciate all that FT readers did to help kill-off CAPPS II.
Some of you haved wondered why I've said things like, "We got rid of the program, and now we need to get rid of the administration that designed it." It's well-known that my personal politics are centrist to a fault. After spending close to a year and a half building a coalition for people from across the political spectrum, why now get partisan (http://www.dontspyon.us) ?
I thought long and hard before doing so, but believe I made the right decision. The bottom line for me is that CAPPS II was a political program driven by ideology; and the ideologues doing the driving were unlike any Republicans I'd ever seen. The nanny state was always a left-wing Democratic thing, not a 'leave me alone' Republican ideal.
If those currently running our country are radicals, not Republicans, then it is my duty to do what I can to get them out of power. I hold no brief for Kerry (http://www.johnkerryisadouchebagbutimvotingforhimanyway.c om/) , but believe he's a mainstream politician that will usher-in four years of dull, boring politics. And after three-plus years of dubious excitement, doesn't boring sound pretty darn good right now?
Back into lurk mode,
Bill Scannell
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
- Benjamin Franklin
Spiff
Jul 21, 04, 1:08 pm
Bill,
It is my pleasure and honor to welcome you to FlyerTalk.
Your analysis of the current regime is spot-on. I am a Libertarian and have little love for either major party. The existing administration, disgusised as traditional Republicans, quickly became, as you've identified them accurately, radicals. I wasn't angry or upset when Bush won the election. I never claimed he stole it. My ambivalence quickly dissipated after his new policies aimed at destroying civil liberties and harassing visitors to this nation were enacted. It's time to replace a regime that is clearly acting on its own agenda. Kerry is far from an ideal replacement but he's got one very big plus: he's not George W. Bush.
bdschobel
Jul 21, 04, 1:52 pm
Ditto. Bush and his cronies seem all too willing to edge the country gradually toward fascism. Those of us alert to such tendencies must fight them from the beginning to nip it in the bud, so to speak.
Bruce
FliesWay2Much
Jul 21, 04, 1:56 pm
Bill, I also extend my welcome, even though my posts are at least an order of magnitude less than Spiff's. I admire you being one of the standard-bearers for the cancellation of CAPPS-II.
I'm not registered in any party, and don't ever plan to. I admit I voted for Bush, but only after I voted for McCain in the open VA primary. I guess I was too physically close to Gore! His DC PAC office suite was literally right next to my corporate office's. I never saw Gore, but our office manager shared many elevator rides with Tipper. Even the 2000 election didn't deter me from my initial hopefulness for his Administration. If anything, I thought the election pointed out just how brilliant our Founding Fathers were creating the Electoral College. They wanted to make it hard to get elected President -- a very smart decision!
Initially, I respected his faith (Yes, I'll admit that...), his resolve to defeat his personal problems, his commitment to fitness, his love of family, and his business sense. The parties are so close in policies and platforms that none of his proposals made much of an impact on my 2000 ballot decision. Initially, he provided a much-needed morale boost to the Armed Forces. He definitely provided the decisive and strong leadership we needed right after the attacks.
But, it's been all downhill ever since. Virtually every decision has been "Ready! Fire!!! Aim!!!", including creating the DHS and TSA. They are prime examples of creating bureaucracies to fight the last war and to make us "feel good." This is very much a Democratic approach in terms of "Government is good; more Government is Better." His Cabinet have shown their true colors. Most are idealogues, arrogant, or just plain incompetent. Does anyone remember Ashcroft wanting to set up a neighborhood watch program in which he wanted to enlist meter readers, garbagemen, mail carriers, etc, to become spies in the neighborhoods they serviced? Don't even get me started on the Patriot Act or David Nelson... Regretfully, Bush's performance since Sept 2001 has shown he has no vision and can't think out of the box.
I still personally respect Bush for the reasons stated above but I'm hardly a Kerry fan. The hardest question I probably won't answer until I have my ballot in hand is if Bush's transgressions, especially those of his Cabinet, are eggregious enough to conclude that I must throw out the baby with the bathwater.
Ed55
Aug 5, 04, 7:07 pm
I still personally respect Bush for the reasons stated above but I'm hardly a Kerry fan. The hardest question I probably won't answer until I have my ballot in hand is if Bush's transgressions, especially those of his Cabinet, are eggregious enough to conclude that I must throw out the baby with the bathwater.
This decision won't be difficult for me. Texas is my home and throughout my life I have historically favored Republican presidents for their business sense and toughness. However, I have stopped flying since this intrusive security nonsense started and I abhor what has been done with my Constitutionally guaranteed liberty in the name of national security.
None of the reasons you gave are proper qualifications for anyone to lead this nation. George Bush has been a quick draw / shoot from the hip president with a bad aim and he has plugged more innocent bystanders than bad guys. He has not shown he is a good businessman and I have serious doubts about his commitment to any of the principles I value. While I also respect his dedication to his family and his strong faith, he is too far removed from the American mainstream to lead this country. I will vote for Kerry this time. And if for the next election McCain decides to run (assuming that he does not support the decimation of my Constitutional rights in the name of national security), then I will probably support him.
MisterNice
Aug 6, 04, 9:29 am
The DHS is here to stay, thus I am totally convinced there will soon be a NEW IMPROVED ENHANCED TRAVELERS program called CAPPS III or whatever (remember, the ADM Poindexter types are always out there). Those beaurocrats gotta do something to induse their cushy/powerful jobs. And it will happen a lot sooner if Bush is the Nov winnah.
MisterNice
GUWonder
Aug 11, 04, 8:35 am
Apparently, the project is slated to come back to life.
So many people objected to the Computer-Assisted Passenger Pre-screening System, CAPPS II for short, that the makeover will even include a new name.
...
Homeland Security officials say the new plan will likely use a different system to check identity.
....
The makeover will include a new name, though that, too, is turning out to be a dilemma for the Homeland Security Department.
The working title, "Secure Passage," was abandoned because it had the same initials as another aviation security program. In a city that loves its acronyms, it's best not to double up.
...
Any new system would probably have a different process for verifying identity, according to Homeland Security officials.
...
But Paul Rosenzweig, a researcher with the Heritage Foundation think tank, predicts Homeland Security officials will come up with a successor to CAPPS II.
"They're strongly committed, as I think they should be, to the idea that we need to know something about people who travel on planes," said Rosenzweig, who attended the meeting last week with Homeland Security officials.
"They're strongly committed, as I think they should be, to the idea that we need to know something about people who travel on planes," said Rosenzweig, who attended the meeting last week with Homeland Security officials.
I disagree completely.
Anyone who passes the security checks at the airport should be permitted to fly domestically. It is none of the government's business what their identity is.
USCGamecock
Aug 13, 04, 5:27 pm
Bill,
It is my pleasure and honor to welcome you to FlyerTalk.
Your analysis of the current regime is spot-on. I am a Libertarian and have little love for either major party. The existing administration, disgusised as traditional Republicans, quickly became, as you've identified them accurately, radicals. I wasn't angry or upset when Bush won the election. I never claimed he stole it. My ambivalence quickly dissipated after his new policies aimed at destroying civil liberties and harassing visitors to this nation were enacted. It's time to replace a regime that is clearly acting on its own agenda. Kerry is far from an ideal replacement but he's got one very big plus: he's not George W. Bush.
Point well taken; however, do you really think Kerry will do anything different if he is elected? You can't even get the guy to tell the truth on where he stands on the issues. The only thing I can see about a Kerry presidency is that Hillary will probably be shut out of the process of running for prez.
GUWonder
Aug 15, 04, 11:58 am
Point well taken; however, do you really think Kerry will do anything different if he is elected? You can't even get the guy to tell the truth on where he stands on the issues. The only thing I can see about a Kerry presidency is that Hillary will probably be shut out of the process of running for prez.
One good thing: gridlock. If a Democratic President and Republican Congress can return to the good old ways of confrontational/compromise politics, then at least a little brake action will be applied. ;)