stock_airplane_clouds

Since 9/11, when terrorists used commercial aircraft in attacks against U.S. targets, air travelers have increasingly faced a trade-off: undergoing time consuming and sometimes invasive searches at airport security checkpoints in exchange for security aloft.

A cost-cutting plan reportedly being considered by the federal Transportation Security Administration could change that. It would do so by eliminating screenings of passengers boarding commercial flights at smaller airports, including East Texas Regional and others in the area.

It is a bad idea, one that would put Americans at unnecessary additional risk every time they fly. We agree with East Texas Regional Airport Director Roy Miller, who told us: “You can’t put a price on safety. Safety has to be paramount, and security is part of safety. You don’t cut costs on security or safety.”

Last week, CNN reported that TSA officials were considering the idea of dropping passenger screening at about 150 airports that serve planes with 60 seats or fewer — a list that includes East Texas Regional Airport, Tyler Pounds Regional Airport and Texarkana Regional Airport.

The plan would have passengers from such airports screened when they arrive at larger hubs for connecting flights rather than at the initial point of travel. The costs saved — said to be about $115 million annually — would be used to strengthen security at major airports.

Official TSA documents obtained by CNN argue that cutting security at these airports would cause only a “small (non-zero) undesirable increase in risk related to additional adversary opportunity.”

But even a small increase in risk is too much, especially when it’s one that could harm East Texans.

Security experts have said that while passengers would still be screened before boarding the largest jets, terrorists could then more easily target regional planes at small airports.

Beyond that, critics of such a move have warned the risks would increase more than the TSA admits. The plan could give potential terrorists openings to target smaller aircraft or use them to destroy buildings. The Washington Post has pointed out that while it might affect only 0.5 percent of passengers on any given day, with more than 2 million passengers traveling by air within the United States each day, that would amount to more than 10,000 people.

We should not forget that terrorists, including on 9/11, have used smaller airports to gain access to aircraft before. If this plan is rolled out, what would stop terrorists or potential attackers from flocking to airports like ours, at which security has been slashed?

Since it became public, the TSA has said the idea is simply part of its routine budgeting assessments and no decision would be made without a proper risk assessment. While we agree every federal agency should be looking at ideas for savings, this is one idea we do not want to see going any further.

Passengers flying from airports like East Texas Regional are not second-class citizens, and deserve the same level of security as those flying from major hubs. TSA should be looking elsewhere for savings.