A new bill, the first of its kind in the U.S., would ban security screening company Clear from operating at California airports as lawmakers take aim at companies that let consumers pay to pass through security ahead of other travelers.

Sen. Josh Newman, a California Democrat and the sponsor of the legislation, said Clear effectively lets wealthier people skip in front of passengers who have been waiting to be screened by Transportation Security Administration agents.

“It’s a basic equity issue when you see people subscribed to a concierge service being escorted in front of people who have waited a long time to get to the front of TSA line,” Newman told CBS MoneyWatch. “Everyone is beaten down by the travel experience, and if Clear escorts a customer in front of you and tells TSA, ‘Sorry, I have someone better,’ it’s really frustrating.”

If passed, the bill would bar Clear, a private security clearance company founded in 2010, from airports in California. Clear charges members $189 per year to verify passengers’ identities at airports and escort them through security, allowing them to bypass TSA checkpoints. The service is in use at roughly 50 airports across the U.S., as well as at dozens of sports stadiums and other venues.

  • GiddyGap@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Every country in the world has something similar to the TSA. It’s an awful experience everywhere. But pay-to-win is not something I approve of in general, and certainly not in the security line.

      • GiddyGap@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        I certainly have. Most EU countries are part of the Schengen area, which often doesn’t have security at borders. You’ll encounter the Schengen “TSA” at external border. Also not a very pleasant experience.

        • Malfeasant@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          TSA screening is required for every flight, domestic as well as international. So no, not every country has an equivalent. Yes they all have some sort of airport security, but no they’re not as invasive and ineffective as the TSA.

        • rusticus@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          2 months ago

          You obviously have never taken a high speed train in the EU.

          There is essentially zero security at the train stations in the EU. You don’t know what you’re talking about.

          • GiddyGap@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            2 months ago

            We’re talking about the equivalent to the TSA, which is at airports. Not train stations.

            • rusticus@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              2 months ago

              No we’re talking about risks and benefits of having or not having TSA, which was a knee jerk response to 9/11 which has become excessive. Trains have risk (Madrid 2004) yet have virtually no security. Any reasonable person would agree that the amount of security at airports is excessive and can be done in a much more efficient and safe manner.