Travel Guru Speaks Out About the Passport Fiasco: (Privatization)

This is from Arthur Frommer, who surprisingly, is lately becoming very liberal in his views. (I get his daily travel-news letter.)

http://www.frommers.com/blog/

Jul 8, 2007
Some attempted explanations of the massive passport fiasco
My recent comments about the twelve-week backlog in processing passport applications, which has wrought havoc with the vacation plans of so many, provoked more reader comments -- pro and con -- than anything I've said on this blog to date. Some die-hard defenders of the State Department and Department of Homeland Security wrote that the fault lay with the public (the same people claimed that my criticism was due to radical political attitudes).

An investigative arm of MSNBC.com has now published a report on what they think happened, and I think you'll be amused by their discoveries (the report can be found at MSNBC's website). Note how the initial processing of applications was out-sourced to private enterprise, namely the Citigroup organization of Wall Street fame, and that State Department officials claim that Citigroup made a mess of it all. Note, second, how the appropriate officials were warned that an additional 468 staff members were needed for reviewing passport applications -- and yet failed to hire anywhere near that number.

But note especially (and disturbingly) that a union representing State Department staffers has argued that the time allotted for processing each application -- a big two and a half minutes -- is too short a time to weed out fraudsters or terrorists. Despite this, each “adjudicator” is required to process 24 applications an hour, which gives them 2 and a half-minutes per passport request, even assuming that they work without let-up or a five-minute break, throughout that hour.

What kind of protection is this against terrorists obtaining a passport?

I needed a passport in a hurry and went from application to passport in hand in 4 days using the private sector. It cost me, but it worked.

nt.

But I got what I needed using the private sector

The privitization of services will be done in such a way to not inconvienance (or even to benifit) those for whom money is no concern, but leave the general public in the lurch.

the money.

a private firm. 41 posts means that you may not know that DUers like some facts accompanying some claims.

You can find them in the phone book under "passports"

crush, was it because you had to make a rush trip and you were able to put it on an expense account? You don't have to answer. But little facts make a difference.

This you can answer - are you generally in favor of privitization - such as mercenary soldiers, mercenary intelligencia, data mining (gathering-storage-providing access), and social security?

That explains the massive screw ups.

Mine expired in April and I haven't renewed it.

Typical. Blame the customer/public for the private company's attempt to make lots of money by shorting on employee costs and we the taxpayers get reamed by it.

that no one will need a passport, because they can't afford to travel anywhere. :shrug:

guess I'll keep traveling to Mexico! (However, I took a fairly cheap trip to London last year...as long as you plan, you can do it relatively cheaply.)

to be tightened, but was actually loosened up.

Is someone writing a bouk about the fiascos of Homeland Security - any budding Michael Moore's out there? The pathose of being a U.S. citizens whose had their vote stolen from them and who have Katrina like catastrophes of justices and decency to the crap about getting visas and now the passports. The port issue - we tightened up foresign contracted port handling?