A ccording to a recent study, researchers at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign argue that the Transportation Security Administration could potentially save millions of dollars — while simultaneously reducing longer lines — by providing free access to its TSA Pre✓ program to frequent travelers and decrease costs used for manpower and equipment for screening passengers at airport security checkpoints.
The lead author of the study is Sheldon Jacobson, whose research on screening based on the security profiles of passengers helped lead to the creation of the TSA Pre✓ program, which was originally reserved for qualified frequent travelers but became available to the general public in 2014. Jacobson — who is a professor of computer science at the University of Illinois — has been studying aviation security for greater than 20 years.
Eliminating TSA Pre✓ Program Fee For Frequent Fliers Could Save Millions of Dollars: Study
“Jacobson’s team, which used TSA’s 2017 budget figures for the cost of screening, calculates that having 25 million travelers enrolled in PreCheck would result in 300 million faster screenings per year and save the agency $459 million”, according to this article written by Mary Wisniewski for the Chicago Tribune. “If the TSA paid the PreCheck fees for frequent fliers, the cost would be $425 million per year, so the net savings would be $34 million, the report found.”
As an example of how to read the information included in the chart below, if 15 million passengers signed up for free TSA Pre✓ and averaged 18 security screenings a year, the Transportation Security Administration could potentially save an estimated $139 million.
| Travelers Enrolled in TSA Pre✓ | Money Spent or Money Saved |
|---|---|
| 10 Million — 6 average annual number of screenings per traveler | $91 million spent |
| 10 Million — 12 average annual number of screenings per traveler | $11 million spent |
| 10 Million — 18 average annual number of screenings per traveler | $73 million saved |
| 10 Million — 24 average annual number of screenings per traveler | $158 million saved |
| 15 Million — 6 average annual number of screenings per traveler | $127 million spent |
| 15 Million — 12 average annual number of screenings per traveler | $4 million saved |
| 15 Million — 18 average annual number of screenings per traveler | $139 million saved |
| 15 Million — 24 average annual number of screenings per traveler | $279 million saved |
| 20 Million — 6 average annual number of screenings per traveler | $163 million spent |
| 20 Million — 12 average annual number of screenings per traveler | $19 million saved |
| 20 Million — 18 average annual number of screenings per traveler | $206 million saved |
| 20 Million — 24 average annual number of screenings per traveler | $399 million saved |
| 25 Million — 6 average annual number of screenings per traveler | $199 million spent |
| 25 Million — 12 average annual number of screenings per traveler | $34 million saved |
| 25 Million — 18 average annual number of screenings per traveler | $273 million saved |
| 25 Million — 24 average annual number of screenings per traveler | $519 million saved |
The source of the information in the chart above is from When Should TSA PreCheck Be Offered at No Cost to Travelers? by Sheldon Jacobson, Arash Khatibi and Ge Yu of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign via the Chicago Tribune.
The Transportation Security Administration could achieve the savings by enrolling passengers who average at least twelve screens per year — typically six round trip flights — meaning that the free application would be limited only to frequent travelers.
Summary
There has been no official response to the study from the Transportation Security Administration; but I have always supported the elimination of the fee to join the TSA Pre✓ program for the reasons outlined in this article — and I believe that the results of this recent study is a good start towards that goal.
Bruce Schneier — who is a fellow at the Berkman Klein Center of Harvard University and is widely recognized as knowledgeable pertaining to security in general — apparently agrees with my position. Schneier has long criticized the enhanced screenings at airport security checkpoints after Tuesday, September 11, 2001 as “security theater” which do not make anyone safer and wants all travelers to have access to screening procedures similar to those of the TSA Pre✓ program. He worries that granting access to TSA Pre✓ program only to frequent travelers or those who pay “creates a class divide — the poor get invasive screenings, while the wealthy are in the faster lines”, according to the aforementioned article from the Chicago Tribune.
Some readers of The Gate would disagree with that statement — such as James, who opined in the Comments section that “When you’re paying $300+/pp for each plane ticket my guess is $19/yr for TSA Pre is a very small cost and the bigger burden for everyone is filling out the applications and going to the airport for interviews.”
I completely agree with Sheldon Jacobson with his reported claim that the enrollment fee of $85.00 — which covers background checks and other administrative costs — was “very intrusive” and a disincentive to people to join. The process of being fingerprinted and having a background check conducted by the Federal Bureau of Investigation of the United States does not exactly help the process become any less intrusive; and I am not sure that helps increase security among passengers of airlines. Those are some of the factors which have certainly deterred me from joining the TSA Pre✓ program — despite having been a frequent traveler for years.
Fortunately, I have experienced the use of the TSA Pre✓ line at airports more often than not — I do prefer to use them, as the airport security checkpoint experience is faster and more pleasant overall as a result — but I have never had to pay one penny for the privilege nor endure fingerprinting and a background check…
…and that is the way I prefer security screening to be at airports for me — but I would like it on a full-time basis.
Photograph ©2016 by Brian Cohen.
