January 23, 2004 Letter to Senators Warner and Allen
and Representative Moran
and Representative Moran
PO Box 8208
Alexandria, VA 22306-8208
January 23, 2004
The Honorable John William Warner
United States Senate
225 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510-4601
The Honorable George F. Allen
United States Senate
204 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510-4604
The Honorable James P. Moran
U.S House of Representatives
2239 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515-4608
Dear Senators Warner and Allen and Representative Moran:
As your constituent, I urge you to oppose the CAPPS II program and enact legislation that would prevent it from being implemented. I am deeply concerned that this program will put the government on a path toward ever-more intrusive background checks, and hinder the security at our nation’s airports.
I have read that the Bush Administration plans to proceed with the program despite serious concerns raised by Congress, airlines and privacy advocates. I understand that the most intrusive and dangerous element of the program — the construction of an infrastructure for conducting background checks on people who fly — would depend on shadowy intelligence/law enforcement databases. The use of these secret databases would remove meaningful public oversight and control over these un-American background checks.
I have read that innocent people have already been stopped and banned from flying because their name appeared on government “no fly” lists — and have been unable to clear their names in the federal bureaucracy. This national system would only increase the delays and blacklist even more innocent Americans — regular people traveling for work or vacations.
Terrorists will learn how to circumvent the system. Identity thieves could easily sidestep this check by presenting a false driver’s license or passport, undercutting the system’s entire mission. And the constant false alarms might divert the attention of airport security officers from legitimate threats to security.
Furthermore, I am concerned that in this time of fiscal crisis, the government would spend money on a program that has no guarantee of making us any safer. I believe we should spend money fighting terrorism, but we should not waste it on flawed programs like CAPPS II.
Once again, I urge you to oppose this invasive and untrustworthy system.
I look forward to hearing from you on this important matter.
Sincerely,
James Landrith
Subject: Correspondence From Senator Allen
From: senator_allen@allen.senate.gov
To: james@jameslandrith.com
Date Sent: 1/26/2004 5:20:56 PM
January 26, 2004
Mr. James Landrith
Post Office Box 8208
Alexandria, Virginia 22306
Dear James:
Thank you for contacting me regarding the Intelligence Authorization Act. I appreciate your concerns and value the opportunity to respond.
As you may know, the Intelligence Authorization Act authorizes appropriations for entities such as the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Department of Defense, National Security Agency (NSA), Department of Homeland Security and other government agencies involved in intelligence gathering.
Since September 11, 2001, our country faces new security challenges. I believe this legislation will help provide the necessary resources to help combat terrorism both domestically and abroad. In addition, this legislation will help in other aspects such as stemming the illegal trafficking of drugs in and out of our country, providing our military with up-to-date reports on rogue states, and requiring more accountability with the projects undertaken by the intelligence community.
As evidenced by the capture of terrorists in Buffalo and Idaho, the USA Patriot Act has been successful in protecting innocent Americans from the deadly plans of terrorists dedicated to destroying America and our way of life. In fact, a federal grand jury recently indicted an individual in Florida, Sami al-Arian, for allegedly being the U.S. leader of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad, one of the world’s most violent terrorist outfits. Palestinian Islamic Jihad is responsible for murdering more than 100 innocent people, including Alisa Flatow, a young American, who was killed in a tragic bus bombing in Gaza. The Patriot Act assisted us in obtaining the indictment by enabling the full sharing of information and advice about the case among prosecutors and investigators. The USA PATRIOT Act has led to increased communication between government agencies, the updating of our technological infrastructure to reflect the digital and technological advances of today and increased criminal penalties for those who commit acts of terror. The President spoke of his call to renew the Patriot Act in his State of the Union address and we must do so. As President Bush orated, “the terrorist threat will not expire.”
We must take every possible step to ensure the security of our nation. However, in doing so, we should not endanger the basic civil rights of any American. We must carefully balance security measures with those freedoms that make us uniquely American. Our Founding Fathers worked tirelessly to instill the ideals of freedom, liberty, and representative democracy. I believe that freedom and security can coexist peacefully, and I will work to ensure that our laws and the actions of our government do not unduly sacrifice our rights for our security.
Thank you again for taking the time to contact me. If you would like to receive an e-mail newsletter about my initiatives to improve America, please sign up on my website (http://allen.senate.gov/). It is an honor to serve you in the United States Senate, and I look forward to working with you to make Virginia and America a better place to live, learn, work and raise a family.
With warm regards, I remain
Sincerely,
A George Allen
February 25, 2004
Mr. James Landrith
P.O. Box 8208
Alexandria, Virginia 22306-8208
Dear Mr. Landrith:
Thank you for contacting me regarding an airline passenger surveillance system, announced by the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), to assess the background and potential threat of air travelers. I appreciate hearing your views on this matter.
As you may remember, Congress passed the Aviation and Transportation Security Act (ATSA) shortly after the events of September 11, 2001, which was signed into law (P.L.107-71) by President Bush on November 19, 2001. The Act established a new Transportation Security Administration (TSA), responsible for the security of all modes of transportation.
TSA has implemented and continues to develop programs to ensure the physical safety of our nation’s travelers and aviation industry from terrorism. The Computer Assisted Passenger Prescreening System II (CAPPS I), which you mentioned in your letter, is an automated screening system authorized by Congress. It is designed to assess the background and potential threat of everyone who makes a reservation to fly. The computer network will authenticate the identity of every passenger, match the name against a government watch list, and determine whether that person’s background and behavior constitute a terrorist threat.
I understand many people have concerns regarding the privacy of air travelers, and CAPPS II is being designed with the utmost concern for the individual privacy rights of American citizens. TSA has accepted extensive public comment on this system. Significant changes have and will continue to be made to the CAPPS II system in light of those comments. It is a passive system activated by a traveler’s airline reservation request. When the system is implemented, airlines will begin asking passengers for a slightly expanded amount of reservation information: the passenger’s full name plus address, phone number and date of birth. This is the only public source information that TSA will collect for CAPPS II.
Please know that I will continue to monitor the development and implementation of CAPPS II. Should legislation regarding this matter come before Congress, I will be sure to take your views under consideration. If you have further questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.
With kind regards, I am
Sincerely,
John Wamer
JW/krw
March 3, 2004
Mr. James Landrith
PO Box 8208
Alexandria, Virginia 22306-8208
Dear Mr. Landrith:
Thank you for contacting me on the issue of airport screening and the implementation of the Computer Assisted Passenger Pre-Screening (CAPPS I) System. I appreciate your concern.
As you may know, a limited form of profiling has been employed by the Federal Aviation Administration for screening baggage and passengers since 1997. The original Computerized Assisted Passenger Pre-screening (CAPPS) System was intended to replace the traditional form of profiling which was more dependent on the discretion of individual airport security officers or airline personnel. Although the criteria used was never published, various reports have stated that having a Middle Eastern name or traveling to a country which sponsors terrorism (according to U.S. standards) may cause one to be singled out as a terrorist threat. Other criteria examined included when passengers bought their tickets, their method of payment and their travel histories.
While this program was in effect for several years, the air carriers and their airport screening operations didn’t always use the system. With passage of the “Aviation and Transportation Security Act,” (P.L. 107-71), the new Transportation Security Administration (TSA) is working to employ the system at all airports and considering additional measures to improve airport security. The federal government assumed full responsibility for all airport screening as of November 19, 2002.
In December 2001, TSA awarded a contract to Lockheed Martin Management and Data Systems to assist in developing CAPPS II. TSA has begun to test CAPPS II and plans to implement it throughout the U.S. commercial air travel system by the summer of 2004. Data used to perform the electronic pre-screening is limited to the same data airlines collect during the normal reservation and ticketing process. The information obtained is matched with other commercial databases which are routinely used millions of times a day by private enterprises in connection with job candidates or market research and which are already subject to legal and privacy protections. As proposed, TSA will not see the data used to generate and electronically screen prospective passengers. Once a passenger’s travel is complete, the scoring information is supposed to be deleted.
Critics have raised concerns that the electronic screening could result in some individuals with outstanding parking tickets or late credit card payments from being denied from flying. TSA has indicated that credit ratings, and outstanding parking tickets …”will not lead to enhanced scrutiny at the airport.” Despite these assurances, I harbor some concerns about how this information will be managed and ensuring due process protections when legitimate passengers are falsely identified as potential terrorists. Credit ratings are notoriously riddled with false information. While the CAPPS II system should dramatically reduce the number of travelers who undergo additional screening at the security checkpoint, it is unclear how TSA will handle the small percentage of passengers who receive scores in the “yellow” or “red” range.
I am supportive of congressional efforts to establish guidelines that would to ensure that the information obtained by TSA is properly managed and that passengers falsely identified as a potential threat can seek redress. I believe that with additional time and effort a better balance can be found between concerns for improved safety and security and individual privacy and civil liberties. As Congress begins to exercise its oversight responsibilities over the actions of the new Transportation Security Administration, I will keep your concerns in mind.
For your consideration, I invite you to visit my updated website at http://www.house.gov/moran that contains information on topics that may be of interest. Thank you again for contacting me.
Yours truly,
James P. Moran
JPM/int1
March 11, 2004
Mr. James Landrith
P.O. Box 8208
Alexandria, Virginia 22306-8208
Dear Mr. Landrith:
Thank you for contacting me regarding an airline passenger surveillance system, announced by the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), to assess the background and potential threat of air travelers. I appreciate hearing your views on this matter.
As you may remember, Congress passed the Aviation and Transportation Security Act (ATSA) shortly after the events of September 11, 2001, which was signed into law (P.L.107-71) by President Bush on November 19, 2001. The Act established a new Transportation Security Administration (TSA), responsible for the security of all modes of transportation.
TSA has implemented and continues to develop programs to ensure the physical safety of our nation’s travelers and aviation industry from terrorism. The Computer Assisted Passenger Prescreening System I (CAPPS II), which you mentioned in your letter, is an automated screening system authorized by Congress. It is designed to assess the background and potential threat of everyone who makes a reservation to fly. The computer network will authenticate the identity of every passenger, match the name against a government watch list, and determine whether that person’s background and behavior constitute a terrorist threat.
I understand many people have concerns regarding the privacy of air travelers, and CAPPS II is being designed with the utmost concern for the individual privacy rights of American citizens. TSA has accepted extensive public comment on this system. Significant changes have and will continue to be made to the CAPPS II system in light of those comments. It is a passive system activated by a traveler’s airline reservation request. When the system is implemented, airlines will begin asking passengers for a slightly expanded amount of reservation information: the passenger’s full name plus address, phone number and date of birth. This is the only public source information that TSA will collect for CAPPS II.
Please know that I will continue to monitor the development and implementation of CAPPS II. Should legislation regarding this matter come before Congress, I will be sure to take your views under consideration. If you have further questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.
With kind regards, I am
Sincerely,
John Warner
JW/kry