There is a topic in the UA forum and apparently no one is going to move it, so let's start anew here.

When you sign up for a new prescription drug testing program, you get something out of it. You get free medical care and a possibly life-saving drug (or beauty-enhancing or happy pill as the case may be).

With the registered traveler program, though, you get absolutely nothing. In exchange for opening your life to the government, you get to spend more time going through the security checkpoint. Granted, it's only a few seconds, but you're still getting nothing out of it. I guess the TSA was hoping for some stupid people to sign up for it in the name of "patriotism", and they got their wish.

I would consider signing up for this program if undergoing a background check and submitting my e-mail address meant that I would be able to walk around the metal detector while holding my carry-ons. Since that is probably not the plan, I will not be signing up.

If you have to go through the same security everyone else does, what is the point?


Here's one possibility I could imagine where signing up for this program and going through a security screening would save time (not that it would make sense; this is just speculation):

Registered travelers go through a security checkpoint just like today's (metal detector and X-ray your belongings), and your ID and boarding pass is checked only twice.

Everyone else goes through a security checkpoint where you have to disrobe, have your genitals and bare feet wanded, and have your belongings strewn about, X-rayed, and wanded. Their IDs and boarding passes get checked five times. Following the physical check and quintuple ID/boarding pass check is a serious of stupid questions, such as "why do you have so much carry-on luggage?" and "why do you have so little carry-on luggage?"

Thus, you would "save" time by being a registered traveler (save, as in, not waste hours). Only problem is that no one except registered frequent flyers will ever fly, and the airline industry ceases to exist.

From what I've read, you are offered the membership in the program for free. After the test phase, it was stated that the background check cost could be reflected in a fee.

i know the original post was a sarcastic way to vent, but:

would the registered travellers program allow you to avoid the SSSS's?

the part about having too many or not enough carry-ons i assume was a hold-over from the previous thread where i floated the option of limiting carry-ons to "speed" up the security process. to which i state for the second time, no one said the security people would be hypothetically checking #'s of bags.

also waiting in line hasn't been that bad. 20 minutes sometimes, and a lot of times 10 minutes or possibly a little bit less. but i digress.

At SFO the screeners do indeed count the number of bags you're carrying. Someone else posted here that after taking her laptop out of her bag for screening, the screener said it counted as an extra item and so she had to put it back in the bag. Then she had to take it out again when she got to the belt!

The government is making no promises about SSSS screening. All the public releases speak in vague platitudes about shorter lines, but none seems to guarantee that registered travelers escape SSSS.

The thing that scares me is, what if I don't pass? I've never been in trouble with the law - but do speeding tickets count? What about my record of traveling on one-ways and changing my tickets at the last minute? What about my party registration? What about my status as a university student (everyone knows schools are hotbeds of radicalism)? What if my name is similar to somebody's who's wanted by Uncle Sam? How do I know what they're basing their decision on? The good folks at TSA have gotten very proficient at the "can't tell you that or it will compromise security" brush-off.
The official silence on the question of what happens to people who get rejected is truly frightening. Probably these names will get added to the yellow list of people like David Nelson who get major harassment on every trip to the airport, even beyond SSSS treatment to questioning by police.

Even in their original test at Minneapolis, they rejected some applicants. Only 2500 people signed up! That means nationwide, assuming no selection bias, there would be more than a million people who get rejected. Since people who signed up for this test are likely self-selected to be clean(!), there will almost certainly be multiple millions of Americans who are not "trusted" by their government to travel. Are there really multiple millions of people who are such a danger to aviation? Get real.

This was a test phase. We don't know the cost of the background check, and perhaps they didn't want to do it for someone who was not really a frequent traveller. The rejected applicants were possibly not rejected solely on a security basis.

Some European airports have begun to implement fast-tracking systems based on iris-scan technology (AMS, FRA) and officials have stated that "for now" they are still subjected to traditionnal security checks, without saying what will happen if/when the programs are officially open.

I would gladly enroll in a program that checks iris and bypass ID checks AND baggage checks. What would be the point of being background checked if it's to still be subject to the same security measures ? Where are the pax gaining time, really ?

The haraSSSSment on the BP shouldn't be there in the first place. Having to register for a background check to avoid haraSSSSment is nothing but extortion.

In exchange for submitting to a background check, participants should be able to access airside as if they were a law enforcement officer. That includes being permitted to carry a firearm on board like so many others are permitted to do so.

Otherwise, as I posted in the UA forum, it's nothing but extortion by a government drunk with power:

[soviet]

"Yes Comrade, is long line for bread. If you join Party, give information, maybe you wait in shorter line."

[/soviet]

Be careful to differentiate between those in the TSA uniform and those in the uniform (sometimes) of the failed airport security contractors like ITS or Globe.

At SFO the idiot who harassed you was a "maze dragon" who was not employed by the TSA. He or she is apparently so dense that the TSA would not hire him/her.

(Of course the "TSA" at SFO is infact something called "Team SFO" and is apparently a private contractor itself, allowed to prance about in a federal uniform, but they are not the same company as that of the "Maze Dragons")

isn't san francisco private?

i've heard not so nice stuff from their FSD...

or it could be that they were between a rock and a hard place with having to "check" people somehow. either with the old SSSS system or with the background check to fill that requirement.

highly doubtful if any measure to take the SSSS's place will take hold.

people don't like it, but won't support the alternatives-thus the SSSS's remain.

We FF'ers fully support the alternative of scrapping the SSSS nonsense altogether. As many even TSA'ers have agreed, it makes no sense to "extra-screen" some people based on outdated, no-longer-secret, criteria. Is the regular screening effective at removing banned items or not? If it is effective, then no extra screening is needed, but if the regular screening is ineffective, then every single traveller and worker needs to be extra-screened.

You suggest that maybe they "had to check some people somehow". But a program that does not apply to everyone has zero chance of being effective. They decided to check people who volunteered to be checked? Of course those will not be the people that you need to do background checks on. Just what kind of game is the TSA playing?

"We FF'ers fully support the alternative of scrapping the SSSS nonsense altogether."

which alternative do you support to take its place?

that was my main point, yes FF's and probably a lot in TSA would love to not have the SSSS system. neither the "evil" CAPPSII 'nor the registered travel program seems to be much of an alternative (no need to explain why, there are a few threads on that already). theres some disagreement whether there should even be an additional check, as well as if the carrot is big enough to entice them to join.

the registered travel program seemed to me like TSA trying to compensate for the frequent flyers who don't like the SSSS's. however right or wrong that may be.

if it gets rid of the SSSS's that are often the complaint, would you join?

lets assume that the SSSS system stays in place for now, and the reason for that being is that it covers everyone who buys a ticket.

secondly a system to replace the SSSS's was shot down, and its successor is at least a year away.

third, i would assume the SSSS's aren't going away 'till the next generation system takes place.

that leaves you with only one other option, in the form of the registered travel program. an option that may get rid of the SSSS's (remains to be seen) and is an option that each of us can decide on.

that alone was my point in my reply.

No, the alternative is NO background check and NO haraSSSSment.

Pass the WTMD, pass the x-ray check for baggage and hopefully soon, pass chemical test via Sentinel II or GE walkthrough tests.

That's it! No additional "security" whatsoever!

None!

It doesn't have to be one or the other. "Neither" is perfectably acceptable.

Okay, Robodeer. Even taking your assumptions, that registered traveler is the only way for FF's to avoid being SSSS'ed for now, that's still by far not big enough of a carrot. Remember, nothing in the government's agreement sets in stone these procedures for the future. They might sign up 80% of the public, and then change their minds about letting people avoid SSSS, or change the procedures for searching registered travelers to be more invasive than the current SSSS deal. But people who sign up have given their blanket okay for the government to continue to investigate them for years and years and keep those records in perpetuity. Registered travelers have zero bargaining chips left after they sign those papers, so what's to guarantee the government holds up its end of the deal?

Look, there's a reason, a very good reason, that CAPPSII got killed. There is, maybe a minority of people, but a very serious percentage of people who think government surveillance and investigation of law-abiding citizens is dangerous and un-American. The registered traveller program is obviously a repackaging of CAPPSII, but it makes no sense in current form. It only makes sense as part of a plan to eventually force everyone into this program.

If you really care, you can rearrange your travel plans to avoid one-ways, get a credit card, et cetera, to avoid the SSSS usually. Or you can just manipulate a BP in photoshop or buy a fully-refundable ticket to the same terminal.

doubtful that they would decide on "neither."