Getting Off a Security Watch List Is the Hard Part

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

Begin forwarded message:

From: "Richard M. Smith" <rms () computerbytesman com>
Date: November 2, 2004 1:37:00 PM EST
To: EPIC_IDOF () mailman epic org
Subject: [EPIC_IDOF] Getting Off a Security Watch List Is the Hard Part

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/02/business/02trapped.html? 
pagewanted=print&p
osition=


November 2, 2004
BUSINESS TRAVEL
Getting Off a Security Watch List Is the Hard Part
By CHRISTOPHER ELLIOTT

Having your name added to the Transportation Security Administration's  
watch
list, a register of airline passengers the government wants to screen  
more
rigorously, is easy.

Just ask Harold Smith, who works for a specialty surgical-equipment
distributor in Fort Worth. One recent morning, as he checked in for a  
flight
to Austin, Tex., an electronic kiosk rejected his seat assignment  
request
and referred him to the ticket counter.

An airline employee quietly told him he was "watch-listed" and could  
only
board after law enforcement authorities were called. "I have no idea  
how my
name got on that list," said Mr. Smith, who describes himself as an
average-looking grandfather with a clean record. He was allowed to  
check in
after a brief wait.

Having your name taken off the security administration's watch list,
however, is not so easy. For three weeks, after being stopped every  
time he
tried to board a flight, Mr. Smith said he begged airline workers and
administration agents for help clearing his name. "The T.S.A. agents I  
spoke
with didn't know what to do, and they couldn't tell me who the ranking
officer was," he recalled.

Finally, a sympathetic airline worker offered him a phone number for the
administration's ombudsman, its passenger advocate. The watch list is a
generic term for at least nine government databases estimated to include
more than 40,000 names. The names are divided into a no-fly list of a  
few
thousand people suspected of terrorist activity or believed to be a  
threat
to national security and a much larger list of "selectees" who are  
required
to be questioned by the security administration before boarding.

Despite its size, that second database remains something of a mystery.
According to people with access to it, air travelers can be put into it  
for
activities like paying for a ticket with cash, booking a seat at the  
last
minute, flying one way instead of round trip and even arriving at the
airport without luggage.

There is no way to find out if you are on the list until you check in  
for a
flight. Worse, there may be no way off. Passengers can fill out a  
disparity
claim with the ombudsman's office, which acts as an intermediary between
passengers like Mr. Smith and the security agency. "If it's determined  
that
you're not the individual that is wanted for further questioning, then  
the
airlines will receive notification informing them that the specific
individual is not to be detained," a T.S.A. spokeswoman, Lauren Stover,
said.

But that does not mean they are off the watch list. The agency's Office  
of
Intelligence, which currently maintains the watch list, reports that in
September, 680 people filed so-called disparity claims indicating that  
their
names had been mistaken for individuals wanted by the government for
questioning. Of those, the government had cleared 250 people by October.

All that apparently means, however, is that their identities had been
clarified to prevent "false positives;" the names are not necessarily
removed from the databases. In some cases, the agency does delete a  
person
from the list after a waiting period, but it will not say how long it  
takes
or what the criteria are. Nor will it disclose the success rate of
passengers whose names are added to the lists for legitimate reasons or
their chances of having their names cleared.

Mr. Smith is still waiting to find out his exact status. More than a  
month
after he was tagged, the security administration e-mailed him a  
Passenger
Identity Verification Form requesting copies of his driver's license  
number
and voter registration card or military discharge papers, as well as his
height, weight and eye color. He filled out the form and returned it  
within
a day, but has not heard from the agency since. Then again, he is no  
longer
being stopped at the airport, and says he expects to be notified soon  
that
he has been cleared.

What if the government decides that a traveler has not been  
misidentified
and belongs on its watch list? According to the agency, there is no  
formal
appeals process. Travelers can either accept the decision or, as a last
resort, sue the government.

That is exactly what several travelers did in April, when they filed a
class-action challenge to the watch list with the assistance of the  
American
Civil Liberties Union. The A.C.L.U.'s lead lawyer in the case, Reginald
Shuford, said airline passengers were being subjected to repeated  
delays or
detentions and had "no way to clear their names."

Mr. Shuford said the watch list violated passengers' constitutional  
rights.
"There's no mechanism in place that would allow travelers to avoid the
repeated humiliation of being singled out as a suspect when they try to
fly," he said. "The watch list is a complete mess. Its purpose may be
laudable, but the way it's currently administered and maintained does  
not
achieve its purpose."

Critics of the current screening system agree that the watch list is
defective and that frequent travelers are suffering because of it. "The  
list
is obsolete," said Richard Eastman, a technology consultant in Newport
Beach, Calif. "There are more efficient ways of finding a threat."

He suggested that a smarter way to catch suspicious passengers would be  
to
identify them before check-in, which was the idea behind Capps II, a
proposal to prescreen airline passengers that has been abandoned, and  
its
successor, a modified concept called Secure Flight. Under the new  
program,
the responsibility for checking airline passengers' names against the  
watch
lists will shift from the airlines to the security agency, which the  
agency
says will eliminate most of the false alerts caused by what it calls the
"current outdated system."

Detractors also maintain that the secrecy shrouding the watch list is
pointless. "How do you get on the list?" asked Edward Hasbrouck, a  
privacy
advocate in San Francisco. "Nobody knows. How do you get off the list?
Nobody knows."

Ms. Stover of the security administration said passengers were added to  
the
secondary list if there was "a pattern in something they have done in  
the
past that merits future scrutiny," and were put on the no-fly list only  
if
they were wanted "for activities that may be terrorist-related or pose a
threat to national security." She declined to elaborate.

But Mr. Hasbrouck said even if the government could successfully argue  
for
keeping its reasons secret - and he doubted it could - there were still  
no
legal safeguards to prevent innocent passengers from being erroneously  
added
to the watch list. "The model is flawed," he said. "People should only  
be
placed on the list based on an order from a court of competent  
jurisdiction
following an adversarial evidentiary hearing. The burden of proof  
should be
on the government to show that someone is dangerous, not the other way
around."

He is hardly the only one frustrated by the lists. Frequent travelers  
like
Heather Marie Owens, a corporate travel agent in Norfolk, Va., are so
fatigued by their watch-list problems that they have resorted to
extraordinary measures.

"On every recent flight I have flown on since November 2001, they tell  
me
I'm on a watch list," she said. "When I ask why, they say it's random.  
But I
don't believe them anymore."

Ms. Owens said she had endured increasingly humiliating searches by  
security
screeners and had experienced a range of emotions from bewilderment and
helplessness to, finally, resignation. On her next trip to Miami, she is
bypassing the security agency altogether.

"This time," she said, "I'm driving."

Readers are invited to send stories about business travel experiences to
businesstravel () nytimes com.

_______________________________________________
EPIC_IDOF mailing list
EPIC_IDOF () mailman epic org
https://mailman.epic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/epic_idof

-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as interesting-people () lists elistx com
To manage your subscription, go to
 http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/