By James Plummer

Four hearty Alaskans have challenged the federal government in federal court (good luck on that...) over the coming CAPPS II system. CAPPS II is a program wherein the federal government trolls through corporate databases on every American who buys an airline ticket, in order to decide whether the traveler should be arrested, subjected to extra robust friskings, or just subject to the same run-of-the-mill indignities as everyone else.

The plaintiffs, two travel agents and two customers, lay out the reasons for their lawsuit against the Transportation Security Administration on their website, AlaskaFreedom: "Washington DC bureaucrats think we need their permission before we can get on a plane. . . They don't understand that up here in Alaska, we use airplanes the way you use taxis." The plaintiffs want the TSA to notify the public before they issue the administrative directives implementing CAPPS II so that proper judicial review can take place in order to make sure the rights of passengers aren't being violated.

After a series of lawsuits and bad publicity followed the revelation that some airlines had turned over passenger data to the TSA and/or its contractors, according to Wired News, "Adm. James Loy, then head of the Transportation Security Administration, threatened in September to issue a secret directive to force hesitant airlines to share the data. If it follows through, the TSA would require airlines to forward all passenger information to the system, including date of birth, home phone numbers and addresses."

That sensitive information -- credit card numbers, date of birth, address, etc. -- also goes to all the private companies the TSA contracts with. They're not supposed to keep it, but is that a realistic scenario? The TSA itself "anticipates" not keeping the data for more than a "certain number of days" -- whatever that means -- in regulations issued last year. (TSA would exempt CAPPS II from Privacy Act regulations mandating federal agencies only retain data on citizens when it is "relevant and necessary" to an agency's statutory purpose.)

In a list posted on their website of "what's wrong with CAPPS II," the plaintiffs point out that not only is the system likely to make air travel less safe, according to MIT researchers (because "all CAPPS II will do is to give terrorists and other bad guys a system that can be easily probed and defeated"), but that by entering information like date of birth into your travel record, it makes you even more vulnerable to identity fraud scams.

And getting back to the issue of physical privacy -- how likely you are to be searched and questioned by federal agents at the airport -- under CAPPS II, the electronic dragnet is now expanded to include anyone with "identifiable links" to "domestic terrorists." That is an undefined and overly broad category, particularly given the USA PATRIOT Act's broad definition of a terrorist. And what is an "identifiable link"? The definition is broad enough to include a donor to a pro-life organization that conducts a vigorous sit-in resulting in a scuffle or traffic tie-up. Or maybe even someone who lives with the donor. The scope has also been expanded to include individuals with outstanding arrest warrants for nonviolent crimes.

Travelers and consumers should not be involuntarily subjected to such madness. Air passengers can and should decide for themselves where along the continuum of security options -- from complete violation of one's history, body and mind by federal bureaucrats to simple metal detectors to armed pilots to armed passengers -- they're most comfortable traveling. This is most especially the case when it comes to Alaskans who need to travel by air from their state and even within it. This month's privacy heroes are doing what they can to preserve that choice.

government surveillance

medical privacy

financial privacy

online privacy

News | Press Releases | Online Privacy Tools | Privacy Principles | Experts | Links
About NCC | About Consumer Alert | Contact Us | NCC Privacy Home