Originally Posted by
Qwkynuf
I admire your principle, I just don't share it. I guess I just see it as spending 20 bucks a year to reduce my personal inconvenience. It's definitely not that I have any confidence at all in their security theater, I don't. But I will happily pay extra for concert tickets to get priority seating - and often, early entry and/or a separate entry gate. I go to movie theaters where I can buy my tickets and reserve specific seats online so that I can avoid the lines there - and my favorite one has wait staff that take your order right from your seat and deliver before the movie starts.
We all have our cost/convenience thresholds - I won't pay the $250 or more that Delta charges for whatever they call their celebrity service that guarantees the Porsche transfer and expedited security, but there are those who do, and I bet their reasoning isn't that different from mine.
So, I see GE/Pre as a way to advantage myself over those who can't/won't/can't be bothered to utilize a tool that can make their trip a little tiny bit easier - and when I go through that GE or PreCheck line I am actually making things ever so slightly better for those who don't, by not being in their line.
So, it's a win/win!
You (and some of the other posters trying to compare boarding order or complimentary upgrades) are missing my point entirely.
My concern over "trusted traveler" programs have nothing to do with the application fee. There is nothing wrong with a government charging a use fee for a service, and I would argue that in most cases that use fees are great. Paying for accelerated processing of an application (e.g., Passport) is good. It allows people to determine the relative value of speed, which often times incurs an additional cost (higher staffing rates for example). I would have no issue with a program that cost $1000 a year and guaranteed me access to the next available CBP agent (i.e., no waiting in line) - assuming that this program had no other entrance criteria.
The issue is that these programs
do have other entrance criteria. The DHS has a risk score for pretty much everyone in the United States. These risk scores are generated using a secret (and often arbitrary) algorithm using inputs that are often incorrect, or derived from questionable sources. If your score is high enough, you end up on one of the various watch lists that the DHS maintains. The amalgamated "terrorist watch list" contains millions of people (a significant fraction of which are US citizens).
Most of the people on these lists have committed no crimes. Most of the people on this list are only there because of the people that they have communicated with, the places they have gone to, or the things they have posted or read online. All of these are things that are protected by the US constitution and generally recognized by most countries as a natural human right. Not that this is the only issue, but the distribution of people on these lists show highly disparate impact on certain groups (people of certain religions or national origin).
If you apply for a trusted traveler program and are on one of these lists (or otherwise have a high arbitrarily calculated high risk score) - despite having committed no crimes - you will be rejected from the program. And, while there is an appeal process within the DHS, this appeal process is purely an agency review and not a judicial review - an impartial court has no say in the matter of whether you are accepted to these programs.
That is my issue with Global Entry and Precheck. It has nothing to do with a $20/year fee.
If you want to talk about a strained metaphor to a frequent flyer program, imagine if Delta banned you from complimentary upgrades and forced you to board last because you happened to regularly call someone they didn't like. Oh, and all of the airlines share the same list, so you are treated this way by all airlines - not just Delta.
I won't post further on this topic here since it is better suited to other forums than the Delta forum, but hopefully this helps people realize that it is not the cost that is the fundamental issue with these programs.