TSA behavior detection a waste of $1 billion: Our view

The Editorial Board | USATODAY

Travelers girding for the Christmastime crush at airport security might find a little less girding is needed this year.

The government's goal — which it met last month — was to send 25% of passengers through "expedited screening," where belts, shoes and light jackets stay on, laptops remain in their cases and fliers move through faster dedicated lanes.

Various programs allow pilots, flight attendants, members of the military, passengers 12 and under, and those 75 and older to qualify for the less-hassle lanes. The biggest contributor is Pre-check, which includes select frequent fliers invited to join by any of nine participating airlines. Pre-check recently opened to others who pay $85, undergo a background check and go to a TSA center to be fingerprinted and enroll.

The changes are the product of the Transportation Security Administration's "risk-based" strategy, designed to stop treating every traveler like a terrorist and apply more common sense to airport screening.

That's all good. But one of those efforts has misfired: the TSA's behavior detection program.

In 2007, when the TSA launched the program in an effort to find terrorists by observing travelers' body language, mannerisms and facial expressions, it sounded like an idea worth trying. But after nearly seven years, the program called SPOT (Screening of Passengers by Observation Technique) has failed to prove its worth and justify its $1 billion price tag so far.

Consider SPOT's results last year: Behavior detection officers chose nearly 36,000 travelers for extra screening, then referred about 2,100 of them to law enforcement. Of those, a tiny fraction were denied boarding, and 183 were arrested on a range of charges, from fraudulent documents to suspected drugs. None for terrorism.

The agency points to the arrests as proof of SPOT's success. But consider that the TSA had to pick out 196 travelers, on average, for each one who ultimately merited arrest. Not exactly a big payoff for the effort and expense of keeping 3,131 officers at 122 airports. Nor is the TSA supposed to be in the business of detaining drunks or catching common criminals, unless they mean to blow up a plane. Airport security and airline personnel can handle the routine stuff.

Two government watchdogs and several members of Congress have questioned the SPOT program's effectiveness and the science behind it. Last month, for example, the Government Accountability Office reported that flagging travelers based on behavior is only slightly better than picking them out by random chance. Although a 2011 study by TSA's parent agency concluded the program is effective, the GAO found that the study's data were unreliable and its method flawed.

Travelers want to move through airports hassle-free every day, especially on the busiest times of the year. TSA is trying to make that happen with some savvy programs. It doesn't need one that pulls aside and inconveniences thousands of people who might look nervous or stressed, but pose no threat to aviation.

USA TODAY's editorial opinions are decided by its Editorial Board, separate from the news staff. Most editorials are coupled with an opposing view — a unique USA TODAY feature.