As spring break travels grow closer, airline safety may be on student travelers' minds. In lieu of recent aviation tragedies, it is indeed on the minds of members of the Clinton Administration. Last week, a panel headed by Vice President Al Gore presented President Clinton with dozens of new proposals to heighten air safety and security. The panel made clear that the United States has been too lax with security measures in comparison to other countries around the world and that many changes are necessary. While some controversial items need to be carefully implemented, these new proposals are necessary for safe travel and peace of mind.
One item would radically change how the nation's air traffic system is funded. It urged spending $100 million a year on capital requirements identified by the Federal Aviation Administration. This would include a highly technical overhaul of the FAA's aging air traffic control computers. While lawmakers have already raised questions about where this would fit into the federal budget, money should not be the issue. Aviation security is a national security issue and the federal government should provide substantial funding for capital improvements linked to American citizens' safety.
"Safety at all costs" was the issue at hand during the panel report. Clinton said the government was already installing 54 sophisticated bomb-detection machines at key airports and training and deploying more than 100 bomb-sniffing dog teams. He also said that the FAA was hiring 300 new agents to test airport security, and that the FBI was adding 644 new agents and 620 support personnel to bolster its counter-terrorism efforts. Families of the victims of recent air disasters warmly received the proposed improvements. Many more should welcome Gore's plans as vast improvements to national security and as a Clinton Administration promise kept.
However, one counter-terrorism measure is causing controversy. The report endorses a computerized "profiling" system of all travelers to weed out potential terrorists, who would then undergo further inspection. With government officials instructing airlines to collect data in dozens of categories, such as how tickets are purchased, the number of traveling companions and flight destination, the proposal flirts with danger. It falls close to the fine line between public security and a violation of individual rights. Civil libertarians have already made noise. To alleviate the problem, the plan includes numerous safeguards that would bar airlines from collecting data on passengers' race, religion, or nation of origin; while heightened safety measures are necessary, they must not unfairly target specific groups.
The ultimate goal is to reduce the number of fatal air traffic accidents by 80 percent within the next 10 years. If the government can improve air travel safety by heightening security measures, that is what it should do. Often, airlines allow travelers to board without asking a single question or searching a single bag. The new proposals attempt to change that.
Proposals that could infringe upon personal liberties must proceed with caution. However, with increased air traffic safety and national security as the goal, travelers should be patient when dealing with new security measures. What might seem like a hassle to travelers today could mean increased safety and fewer fatal terrorist acts tomorrow.