The Feds are weighing another change in airport security rules, which could create even greater bottlenecks at the security checkpoints that are the bane of travelers.
Thanks to pressure from some lawmakers and retail companies, the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) may open airport terminals once more to people who don’t hold airline tickets so they can greet or send off travelers.
Of course, this would mean many more people snaking through security lines, removing shoes, emptying pockets, and subjecting their bodies to pat-downs and wandings by TSA employees. Obviously this won’t enhance security, much less make traveling easier or faster, so what’s behind it?
Apparently, some companies and regional airport authorities are distressed the post September 11, 2001, security rules have ruined their plans to turn airports into shopping malls.
Don’t get me wrong — I like the convenience of retail stores in airports. I’m not the typical business flyer who gets to the airport at the last minute. I usually arrive at least an hour early and end up spending time — and money — in those stores. In fact, I do most of my book buying in airports these days.
But, I would rather do without the stores than spend two or three times as long in the security line, which is what will happen if airports reopen their terminals to nontravelers.
The idea behind terminals-as-shopping-malls seems to have come from the Duty Free shops that have been in most international airports for decades. Even before airlines added extra security measures to combat terrorism, most international flights required passengers to arrive at least two hours early, which left travelers with lots of time before their planes took off. Duty free shops filled the void and allowed international travelers to stock up on luxury items without paying often exorbitant duties or taxes due on certain items.
Now, similar shops have become ubiquitous in modern domestic terminals as well.
Pittsburgh International is a prime example. Once the least hospitable major airport, it is now one of the most modern, traveler-friendly in the country, thanks to a major $800 million overhaul in 1992, which brought in restaurants and stores galore. But like many airports, Pittsburgh has been struggling since September 11. It doesn’t help matters that Pittsburgh depends on one airline for the bulk of its revenues. U.S. Airways, which controls about 80 percent of Pittsburgh’s gates and has its own financial woes, has been threatening to leave if the airport doesn’t reduce its costly gate fees.
But the airport can’t lower gate fees unless it makes up the revenue with parking fees or merchant leases. In order to earn these, the airport needs more people to spend time in its facilities. So the Allegheny County Airport Authority, which runs Pittsburgh International, hopes to be the first test of relaxing the rules so family and friends can accompany passengers to and from the gate.
The TSA is reviewing a proposed plan to open the terminal to nonpassengers, which could happen this summer if the Department of Homeland Security approves.
Given increased concerns about terrorist attacks this summer, this may not be the best time for such a plan. Longer lines at checkpoints would be unavoidable, increasing the risk that harried TSA screeners might not be as thorough as necessary to stop would-be terrorists.
And, unless airlines reinstated photo-ID checks at the gate, which would take even more time, what would stop terrorists from having decoys buy tickets, check in and then pass off the boarding pass to someone who might be on a watch list?
A better alternative might be to redesign airports with larger check-in terminals and smaller wait areas past security gates. San Francisco and Reagan National outside D.C., have struck a good balance, with eateries and shops on the check-in side of the terminal as well as in the gate area, allowing friends and family to visit with passengers before they leave or await their arrival without clogging up security checkpoints.
Sure, airports need revenues, but making travel more time-consuming or less secure isn’t the way to go about it.
Linda Chavez is a nationally syndicated columnist.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.