Return to Transcripts main page

Live From...

Discussing Passenger Threat Profiling

Aired February 28, 2003 - 13:32   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.


LEON HARRIS, CNN ANCHOR: Information from computer databases would help decide if you are allowed to fly. But what if those databases contain errors, as they can do sometimes, life for instance when you're credit ratings are assigned.
But questions like that trouble the American Civil Liberties Union. The ACLU's Katie Corrigan joins us now live from Washington with her view on this.

Good afternoon. Glad to have you with us.

What do you think about this program as it's currently constituted?

KATIE CORRIGAN, ACLU: The ACLU believes this program believes serious civil liberties concerns. There's not much public information available about CAPS 2 (ph) or the passenger screening program. From what we do now, however, as you've described, every single airline passenger would have their personal information screened, and that means you and me, and the government would divide us into three categories -- red, yellow, and green.

One of the biggest problems is that a lot of innocent people will be put in the yellow and red categories.

HARRIS: How do you know that for sure?

CORRIGAN: We know that because based on computer error, human mistake, a false lead, databases are notoriously inaccurate in their data. Individuals would be limited in their ability to board a plane in a timely manner. They could even be denied boarding altogether.

HARRIS: But you know what, if you can't say for sure exactly how many times that will happen, and we have to concede there probably will be some human mistakes there made, how is that system any worse than the current one where everybody, just because the system, the way it's set up now, you can look over your shoulder and see an elderly lady being forced to take her shoes off. You see that happen on a regular basis now. It seems like if they'll going to flag things and assign certain color code levels or whatever, that would eliminate what we're going through right now, would it not?

CORRIGAN: There are two problems. One is basic effectiveness of the system. This system is based on the untested and, frankly, dubious presumption that by collecting a lot of personal information about an individual and putting it in a government database, the government is able to predict future behavior of that passenger. Indeed, for that reason, this is not unlike the theory behind Poindexter's total information awareness program. And the second piece to remember is that this system would be very difficult to fix when it makes a mistake.

So if I am labeled yellow or red in error, there's no meaningful way for me to get off the list. In a sense, it would create a permanent underclass of airline travelers who are constantly subjected to heightened search or even denied boarding, and there is absolutely no way to get the bureaucratic mistake fixed.

HARRIS: We only have a couple seconds left here. I'd like to know exactly what you think would be the middle ground here. A lot of people believe that just using an I.D. like a driver's license, which anyone can get made anywhere in this country for any amount of money, on a market that is not a legitimate one, that's not enough, and that's what we're working with right now. Between that and the new proposed system, where do you think we should be?

CORRIGAN: Well, I think, as a first step, Congress needs to get involved and provide meaningful oversight and ask the tough questions upset, and ask the questions about effectiveness and privacy, just as they did for the total information awareness program earlier this month.

HARRIS: Candy Corrigan of the ACLU, thank you very much. Appreciate that.

Let's turn to now Chet Lunner. He is the public affairs director of the Department of Transportation, which we have now learned, as least as of midnight tonight, is going to be absorbed into the TSA, which is the Homeland Security Department. Thank you for your time this afternoon, Mr Lunner.

What do you say then to these concerns here that we just heard Candy Corrigan mention, specifically the one about faulty information getting in there, and it being very difficult to get it corrected?

CHET LUNNER, DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION: Well, I'm glad you've given us this opportunity to discuss it, because that's one of the misunderstandings among many that we'll be having a discussion about if this is deployed. This system is much better than the current system for exactly the reasons you pointed out, Leon.

And in the case that there are people misidentified in the new system, it will incorporate its own ombudsman or complaint resolution department, so people who now have no recourse or have a very awkward recourse will be able to quickly and efficiently get those misidentifications resolved.

HARRIS: How quickly?

LUNNER: Well, the new system will be more dynamic, because we will own the system, as opposed to having it spread out over private airline terminals as it now is. It's sort of analogous with what we did with the screening force, took it from the private sector, gave it better training, made it a nationwide, consistent, centralized force. The new computer system will upgrade the current computer system so we can make those fixes very quickly.

HARRIS: Again, though, how quickly? If I happen to be traveling and find I am stopped as a code red or whatever the code level may be, and it turns out to not be the case, and I'm concerned about that, how quickly can I get my name off the list?

LUNNER: As quickly as we can humanly make it happen, and we'll be in a much better position to do it, because we'll be controlling the system that's now not directly under our control. There will be a lot fewer people selected for that random screening that you noted has been the subject of some complaint, and there will be very rare instances where anyone comes up as a red.

HARRIS: Well, let me ask about another situation, one that we heard about in the piece that was played here from Patty Davis. There's a big concern about the government having too much information on all of us. And there's some concern now that this -- this new program would essentially make any airport into sort of an ad hoc police station, and that if news or information comes up about a person who is traveling, that if he's a deadbeat dad or owes money on traffic tickets, that he could actually be arrested or held back some how, some way. Is that going to be the case?

LUNNER: That's a very common misunderstanding, and I'm glad you brought it up. This information that we're looking at currently exists in commercial database. We don't keep it. We'll look at it in the space of about five seconds, pretty much clear most of the people who go through, get rid of the information as soon as the person's identity is resolved, and they're through the system. We don't have any plans, the system doesn't have any capability of storing any more information. These are existing databases that are already operating under existing privacy law regulations.

HARRIS: Well, finally, real quickly, for those who are among the traveling public watching right now, is there some place they can go to get those details to quell any concerns they may have now going into this?

LUNNER: Sure, this is just the beginning of a public discussion period. The main contract is yet to be awarded. We had a federal registrar notice out for the past month, where we're collecting nationwide comments. We'll continue to have that discussion with privacy advocates and others. The congressional committees have all been briefed and are supportive. So we'll have the continuing discussion between now and when the system is deployed, in a much more narrower way, later this year.

HARRIS: Well, that discussion will continue on this network as well. Chuck Lunner, thank you, good luck with your transportation overnight tonight.

LUNNER: Thank you.

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com







Aired February 28, 2003 - 13:32   ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
LEON HARRIS, CNN ANCHOR: Information from computer databases would help decide if you are allowed to fly. But what if those databases contain errors, as they can do sometimes, life for instance when you're credit ratings are assigned.
But questions like that trouble the American Civil Liberties Union. The ACLU's Katie Corrigan joins us now live from Washington with her view on this.

Good afternoon. Glad to have you with us.

What do you think about this program as it's currently constituted?

KATIE CORRIGAN, ACLU: The ACLU believes this program believes serious civil liberties concerns. There's not much public information available about CAPS 2 (ph) or the passenger screening program. From what we do now, however, as you've described, every single airline passenger would have their personal information screened, and that means you and me, and the government would divide us into three categories -- red, yellow, and green.

One of the biggest problems is that a lot of innocent people will be put in the yellow and red categories.

HARRIS: How do you know that for sure?

CORRIGAN: We know that because based on computer error, human mistake, a false lead, databases are notoriously inaccurate in their data. Individuals would be limited in their ability to board a plane in a timely manner. They could even be denied boarding altogether.

HARRIS: But you know what, if you can't say for sure exactly how many times that will happen, and we have to concede there probably will be some human mistakes there made, how is that system any worse than the current one where everybody, just because the system, the way it's set up now, you can look over your shoulder and see an elderly lady being forced to take her shoes off. You see that happen on a regular basis now. It seems like if they'll going to flag things and assign certain color code levels or whatever, that would eliminate what we're going through right now, would it not?

CORRIGAN: There are two problems. One is basic effectiveness of the system. This system is based on the untested and, frankly, dubious presumption that by collecting a lot of personal information about an individual and putting it in a government database, the government is able to predict future behavior of that passenger. Indeed, for that reason, this is not unlike the theory behind Poindexter's total information awareness program. And the second piece to remember is that this system would be very difficult to fix when it makes a mistake.

So if I am labeled yellow or red in error, there's no meaningful way for me to get off the list. In a sense, it would create a permanent underclass of airline travelers who are constantly subjected to heightened search or even denied boarding, and there is absolutely no way to get the bureaucratic mistake fixed.

HARRIS: We only have a couple seconds left here. I'd like to know exactly what you think would be the middle ground here. A lot of people believe that just using an I.D. like a driver's license, which anyone can get made anywhere in this country for any amount of money, on a market that is not a legitimate one, that's not enough, and that's what we're working with right now. Between that and the new proposed system, where do you think we should be?

CORRIGAN: Well, I think, as a first step, Congress needs to get involved and provide meaningful oversight and ask the tough questions upset, and ask the questions about effectiveness and privacy, just as they did for the total information awareness program earlier this month.

HARRIS: Candy Corrigan of the ACLU, thank you very much. Appreciate that.

Let's turn to now Chet Lunner. He is the public affairs director of the Department of Transportation, which we have now learned, as least as of midnight tonight, is going to be absorbed into the TSA, which is the Homeland Security Department. Thank you for your time this afternoon, Mr Lunner.

What do you say then to these concerns here that we just heard Candy Corrigan mention, specifically the one about faulty information getting in there, and it being very difficult to get it corrected?

CHET LUNNER, DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION: Well, I'm glad you've given us this opportunity to discuss it, because that's one of the misunderstandings among many that we'll be having a discussion about if this is deployed. This system is much better than the current system for exactly the reasons you pointed out, Leon.

And in the case that there are people misidentified in the new system, it will incorporate its own ombudsman or complaint resolution department, so people who now have no recourse or have a very awkward recourse will be able to quickly and efficiently get those misidentifications resolved.

HARRIS: How quickly?

LUNNER: Well, the new system will be more dynamic, because we will own the system, as opposed to having it spread out over private airline terminals as it now is. It's sort of analogous with what we did with the screening force, took it from the private sector, gave it better training, made it a nationwide, consistent, centralized force. The new computer system will upgrade the current computer system so we can make those fixes very quickly.

HARRIS: Again, though, how quickly? If I happen to be traveling and find I am stopped as a code red or whatever the code level may be, and it turns out to not be the case, and I'm concerned about that, how quickly can I get my name off the list?

LUNNER: As quickly as we can humanly make it happen, and we'll be in a much better position to do it, because we'll be controlling the system that's now not directly under our control. There will be a lot fewer people selected for that random screening that you noted has been the subject of some complaint, and there will be very rare instances where anyone comes up as a red.

HARRIS: Well, let me ask about another situation, one that we heard about in the piece that was played here from Patty Davis. There's a big concern about the government having too much information on all of us. And there's some concern now that this -- this new program would essentially make any airport into sort of an ad hoc police station, and that if news or information comes up about a person who is traveling, that if he's a deadbeat dad or owes money on traffic tickets, that he could actually be arrested or held back some how, some way. Is that going to be the case?

LUNNER: That's a very common misunderstanding, and I'm glad you brought it up. This information that we're looking at currently exists in commercial database. We don't keep it. We'll look at it in the space of about five seconds, pretty much clear most of the people who go through, get rid of the information as soon as the person's identity is resolved, and they're through the system. We don't have any plans, the system doesn't have any capability of storing any more information. These are existing databases that are already operating under existing privacy law regulations.

HARRIS: Well, finally, real quickly, for those who are among the traveling public watching right now, is there some place they can go to get those details to quell any concerns they may have now going into this?

LUNNER: Sure, this is just the beginning of a public discussion period. The main contract is yet to be awarded. We had a federal registrar notice out for the past month, where we're collecting nationwide comments. We'll continue to have that discussion with privacy advocates and others. The congressional committees have all been briefed and are supportive. So we'll have the continuing discussion between now and when the system is deployed, in a much more narrower way, later this year.

HARRIS: Well, that discussion will continue on this network as well. Chuck Lunner, thank you, good luck with your transportation overnight tonight.

LUNNER: Thank you.

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com