MORE FREE passes to Precheck - Managed Inclusion III
#181
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 38,398
Well they're unclogging the normal lines in equal parts, so not really fair to call it clogging. In fact, optimising taxpayer resources could be one way of looking at it (even more efficient if they just moved everyon to pre of course).
FWIW visa users have already paid some ridiculously hefty Visa fees (and wasted a lot of time in a US consulate), it's only fair to grant them some niceties when in the US.
FWIW visa users have already paid some ridiculously hefty Visa fees (and wasted a lot of time in a US consulate), it's only fair to grant them some niceties when in the US.
One way I think they could improve things is to not grant pre-check to those without a certain number of US departures under their belt.
While it was my first time actually using pre-check (I've gotten it before but unless we both get it we use the regular line--that way one of us is always in a position to keep an eye on our bags) I know what's expected--but they didn't. (Not to mention that none of them has a meaningful about of English, she had to translate.)
#182
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,526
Does anybody have a subscription to Politico Pro? A tweet on @TSA says "scraps PreCheck expansion search"
https://twitter.com/POLITICOPro/stat...85783034863617
https://twitter.com/POLITICOPro/stat...85783034863617
Last edited by petaluma1; Oct 27, 2016 at 6:48 am
#183
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: where the chile is hot
Programs: AA,RR,NW,Delta ,UA,CO
Posts: 41,629
https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-...ouse-bill/2843
Part of the bill addresses issues surrounding Precheck enrollment platforms, focusing on the handling of biographic and biometric info.
Another part of the bill covers other Pre-check aspects, including reliable availability.
Part of the bill addresses issues surrounding Precheck enrollment platforms, focusing on the handling of biographic and biometric info.
Another part of the bill covers other Pre-check aspects, including reliable availability.
The TSA shall:
- coordinate with the heads of appropriate Department of Homeland Security (DHS) components to leverage DHS-held data and technologies to verify the citizenship of individuals enrolling in the program;
- partner with the private sector to use biometrics and authentication standards such as those developed by NIST to facilitate enrollment;
- consider leveraging existing airport resources to conduct fingerprint and background checks to expedite identity verification;
- ensure that PreCheck Program screening lanes are available during peak and high-volume travel times at airports to enrolled individuals;
- provide for expedited screening at standard screening lanes during times when PreCheck Program screening lanes are closed; and
- initiate an assessment to identify security vulnerabilities in the vetting process for the program, including whether subjecting PreCheck Program participants to recurrent fingerprint-based criminal history records checks, in addition to recurrent checks against the terrorist watchlist, could be done in a cost-effective manner to strengthen the security of the program.
#184
Moderator: Travel Safety/Security, Travel Tools, California, Los Angeles; FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: LAX
Programs: oneword Emerald
Posts: 20,593
San Francisco Chronicle:
Bill to ban non-members from TSA PreCheck lanes
Excerpt:
Excerpt:
So this week the House approved by voice vote a bipartisan bill that would bar TSA from letting non-members into the PreCheck lanes. It's called the "PreCheck Is PreCheck Act of 2018." The legislation has the strong support of the Global Business Travel Association (GBTA), which said in a letter to the House Homeland Security Committee that the practice of letting non-members into the PreCheck lines has "raised issues within the business travel community." GBTA is a trade organization that represents corporate travel interests in Washington.
"PreCheck offers business travelers a risk-based, intelligence-driven aviation security that is fast, safe and efficient," GBTA said. "Time is money for business travelers, and inefficient procedures reduce business travel due to the hassle factor and ultimately hurt the economy."
The bill, HR 6265, mandates that only travelers who are members of a trusted traveler program (like PreCheck or Customs and Border Protection's Global Entry program) will be allowed to use the expedited PreCheck screening lanes, effective no later than one year after the bill becomes law. The only exceptions for non-members would be travelers age 12 or under, and 75 or over, who are traveling on the same itinerary as a program member.
"PreCheck offers business travelers a risk-based, intelligence-driven aviation security that is fast, safe and efficient," GBTA said. "Time is money for business travelers, and inefficient procedures reduce business travel due to the hassle factor and ultimately hurt the economy."
The bill, HR 6265, mandates that only travelers who are members of a trusted traveler program (like PreCheck or Customs and Border Protection's Global Entry program) will be allowed to use the expedited PreCheck screening lanes, effective no later than one year after the bill becomes law. The only exceptions for non-members would be travelers age 12 or under, and 75 or over, who are traveling on the same itinerary as a program member.
#185
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: YYF/YLW
Programs: AA, DL, AS, VA, WS Silver
Posts: 5,950
San Francisco Chronicle:
#186
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,526
PreCheck is a failure. If this bill becomes law, TSA will either gradually phase out the program or it will die of its own accord because TSA doesn't have the staffing to open lanes for only a few people and sending PreCheck passengers to regular lines for "expedited" screening doesn't go over too well.
#187
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: An NPR mind living in a Fox News world
Posts: 14,160
A couple of more points about HR 6265
The bill also appears to formalize the "doggie-sniffing = ExtortionCheck screening in the regular lines" that we have all seen them do when things get bogged down, like afternoon "prime time" at IAD:
And, it incentivizes the TSA to offer more deals to join ExtortionCheck:
I can't imagine this bill is even close to being on the Senate's radar screen:
If the Senate doesn't act, a House-Senate conference committee meets to consolidate comments, the bill is sent back to both houses, is passed and is sent to Trump for signature before Dec 31, 2018, the bill dies a natural death.
But the legislation also orders TSA to develop a pilot program that provides "a risk modified screening protocol" for non-PreCheck lanes "to further segment passengers based on risk." It did not specify how TSA should do that. Those lanes would be for "low-risk" passengers as determined by "risk-based, intelligence-driven criteria," or passengers who have undergone "canine enhanced screening" – i.e., have been sniffed by dogs. (More about those dog sniffs here.)
The bill also calls on TSA to implement new programs that would increase enrollment in PreCheck. It suggests they do this by partnering with airlines to include PreCheck promotions in the reservations process, by developing a secure mobile enrollment platform, by adjusting the locations of existing enrollment centers to meet demand, and by considering pricing incentives such as discounts for families and small businesses that reimburse employees for PreCheck membership costs.
The bill now goes to the Senate, where it hasn't yet been scheduled for consideration.
#188
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: An NPR mind living in a Fox News world
Posts: 14,160
Even More Stuff in Bill
The House, unlike the TSA, has recognized that there's no reason why individuals who hold a U.S. security clearance shouldn't be given ExtortionCheck access:
This would significantly add to the numbers of DoD CAC holders who have clearances and work outside the DoD, including, presumably, contractors.
(2) seek to include in the PreCheck Program individuals who—
(A) hold a Secret, Top Secret, or Top Secret/Sensitive Compartmented Information clearance, unless such an individual has had his or her clearance revoked or did not pass a periodic reinvestigation; or(B) are current, full-time Federal law enforcement officers;
This would significantly add to the numbers of DoD CAC holders who have clearances and work outside the DoD, including, presumably, contractors.
#190
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Colorado
Programs: UA Gold (.85 MM), HH Diamond, SPG Platinum (LT Gold), Hertz PC, National EE
Posts: 5,647
As someone with Global Entry for the past 7 years, I fail to see how limiting who has access is a bad thing. Having worked in the security industry I'm aware of security concerns that I cannot disclose, and as a frequent traveler I cannot stand the idiots that are included in PreCheck that have no clue what they are doing, holding up those of us that know what to do. Some are suggesting that giving PreCheck to all is a good thing?
#191
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 28,078
As someone with Global Entry for the past 7 years, I fail to see how limiting who has access is a bad thing. Having worked in the security industry I'm aware of security concerns that I cannot disclose, and as a frequent traveler I cannot stand the idiots that are included in PreCheck that have no clue what they are doing, holding up those of us that know what to do. Some are suggesting that giving PreCheck to all is a good thing?
#192
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: YYF/YLW
Programs: AA, DL, AS, VA, WS Silver
Posts: 5,950
as a frequent traveler I cannot stand the idiots that are included in PreCheck that have no clue what they are doing, holding up those of us that know what to do.
Some are suggesting that giving PreCheck to all is a good thing?
#193
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,526
As someone with Global Entry for the past 7 years, I fail to see how limiting who has access is a bad thing. Having worked in the security industry I'm aware of security concerns that I cannot disclose, and as a frequent traveler I cannot stand the idiots that are included in PreCheck that have no clue what they are doing, holding up those of us that know what to do. Some are suggesting that giving PreCheck to all is a good thing?
TSA was certain 7 years ago that 25 million people would rush to enroll. That never happened and after 7 years, less than 7 million are enrolled. Recently, TSA cut the 25 million target in half. Hopefully, the program will die a natural death.
There is no reason not to screen all passengers at the PreCheck level as 99.99% of passengers are not a problem.
#194
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Colorado
Programs: UA Gold (.85 MM), HH Diamond, SPG Platinum (LT Gold), Hertz PC, National EE
Posts: 5,647
There is a cost to everything, and a different level of security risk. I chose to pay to gain a higher level, but I have no interest in subsidizing others with my tax dollars, nor do I wish to include people that ignore everything said, yet act like morons in the security line. I prep and plan for the line I'm in, those that don't get nothing but frustration from me. I know what I'm doing, as do the others that frequently travel and have PreCheck, but the once a year travelers that refuse to listen, or even bother to plan create frustration for the rest of us. I can make it from car to gate in 2 minutes, but some moronic traveler that has no clue can screw that up and make it take 10 minutes, or even more.
#195
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: YYF/YLW
Programs: AA, DL, AS, VA, WS Silver
Posts: 5,950
But that's the point: is regular screening cheaper than PreCheck? I highly doubt it; quite the contrary. So getting more people into PreCheck-style screening (however it's branded) saves tax dollars, I assert.