Senator Ben Nelson Wants to Take Away Your FF Priority Line
 

Ben Nelson (D-NE) says it's not fair to have priority security lines

http://www.flyertalk.com/the-gate/bl...that-fair.html

No one is safe when the legislature is in session.

(Cub fan since '43.)

Does Mr. Nelson want to give up all the privileges that his job gives him?

I agree with one point - I'd rather be going as fast as they are.

But, I do sort of agree with the Senator in terms of fairness in the security line. Being an elite flyer should come with all the perks the airline would like to give you. It's their program and their product.

But last I checked, the TSA is a government run operation, and charging each of us a fee with our for it's use, at that. We're all paying for it's use, whether we want to or not. To place some hireling of the airlines at the front of the line to filter and direct us to where we knew we were going anyway, just to add the velvet rope treatment, is hardly an added service most of us want or need. And, in the end, the front of the plane leaves about when the back end leaves anyway. So it's really that this particular perk is just a shakedown at security, making sure that the majority of us simply can't get to a percentage of the US government run security functions we all pay for.

Oh, suuuure you can get to school kid but first you're going to have to get through my neighborhood... hahaha. Gimme a dollar and I'll let you through.

Why should an airline perk affect how you move through a TSA line? They're two separate groups.


I really would rather the legislature spent time and focus on issues that actually matter.

Childhood lesson learned: Life is not always fair.

Us Cubs fans know a thing or two about the fairness in this world.

Methinks maybe Mr Nelson or one of his family members have spent a bit of time in an airline security line. I agree there are more important issues happening in Congress.

LOVE your screenname CubsFanAlways.

I actually agree with Ben Nelson, despite being an elite flyer with access to these lines. The provision of government services shouldn't be based upon how much money you spent with an airline.

The only argument I can see would be if some segregation of elite flyers helped improve the overall efficiency of the system. But that would seem to apply primarily to situations where you have separate checkpoints, rather than simply letting them cut the line.

It's good to see politicians focused on the more pressing issues of the day.

The federal government's part of the operation doesn't start until you get to the actual TSA employee who checks your ID and boarding pass. Prior to that it is the airline's responsibility to manage logistics.

I hate it when I agree with people like Ben Nelson.

If the airlines want to provide this service to their FFs, I think they should pick up the entire cost of the the TSA employees who screen them.

On the plus side, if it were not for priority screening, we would have missed our connection in AMS last year.

<<If the airlines want to provide this service to their FFs, I think they should pick up the entire cost of the the TSA employees who screen them.>>

Why should they pick up the entire cost of the TSA agents who screen them? They would have to screen them in any event. It's just a matter of do they move to the head of the line. Really, is this such a big deal? And unfortunately, I am not one of the priority customers.

How can the government take away my FF Priority Line when I don't have one in the first place?

So if I pay for going through security faster, it's OK, but if I pay slowly for my status it's not OK?

What's next? A law against using FF miles for upgrade?

People who buy a subscription to a concert or theatre series get better seats at the hall. Lots of stores give special concessions or even discounts to those who do more business with them. Regulars at a popular night club can go to the front of the line -- or skip the line altogether. Hotels and car rentals have special check in desks for those who frequently stay or rent there. Why is it such a big deal that those who give an airline the most business get some sort of special privileges?

<i>So if I pay for going through security faster, it's OK, but if I pay slowly for my status it's not OK?</i>

Why should the TSA give you a benefit for giving more business to an airline?

<i>Why is it such a big deal that those who give an airline the most business get some sort of special privileges?</i>

Because the privilege is not being conferred by the airline? Ben Nelson isn't arguing with how the airline provisions seats, just with how the TSA provisions security screening.

"People who buy a subscription to a concert or theatre series get better seats at the hall. Lots of stores give special concessions or even discounts to those who do more business with them. Regulars at a popular night club can go to the front of the line -- or skip the line altogether. Hotels and car rentals have special check in desks for those who frequently stay or rent there. Why is it such a big deal that those who give an airline the most business get some sort of special privileges?"

Because in all of your examples, the businesses are absorbing the cost of special treatment. In the case of priority screening, the businesses are getting the benefit but the government is picking up the cost. I would never have thought of you as a socialist.

what cost is there to the government?

and it is really TSA who decides this? Isn't it the airport's choice, along with the airlines that operate at that particular airport?

<<... the businesses are getting the benefit but the government is picking up the cost... >>

Wrong! Read my earlier post - the fed turf starts at the podium where the TSA agent checks ID's. Before that - i.e., the lines leading up to it - it's the airline's turf, and the airlines pay for or pay a contractor to manage that. And if anything, the benefit is in the exact opposite direction - having a line for more experienced fliers who are accustomed to TSA procedures shortens the overall process for all, reducing the need for staffing at the checkpoint.