450
submitted 2 years ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world

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.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] WhatsThePoint@lemmy.world 38 points 2 years ago

I don’t trust a private company to do that screening. They will skimp on checks to save money the moment they have a bad quarter unless there are specific rules forced on them by TSA.

[-] tsonfeir@lemm.ee 9 points 2 years ago

What’s preventing one of their software developers from just creating a bunch of approved people? Probably not much.

[-] modifier@lemmy.ca 4 points 2 years ago

Clear sucks and I hate them, but:

I don’t trust a private company to do that screening

There are specific rules forced on them, and the real screening still happens at the checkpoint, by the TSA.

Keep in mind two things:

  1. Prior to the early 2000s, there was so such thing as the TSA, and all airport screening was done by various third parties, though still according to rules set forth by the federal government. But it was just a vendor doing the screening, usually the same vendor that pushes Wheelchairs.

  2. Since it's creation, the TSA has failed audit after audit after audit letting prohibited items through, so they are not a paragon of security

You could argue it's all moot, and this is largely security theater anyway, which wouldn't be fully wrong.

[-] WhatsThePoint@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

I flew before 2001 and man flying was so much faster and easier before TSA. I get it’s not perfect, I just trust something with no profit motive more than companies who will justify anything for a dollar. Either way, I prefer Clear not exist because there is enough pre-paid privilege in the American caste system.

this post was submitted on 23 Apr 2024
450 points (98.9% liked)

News

36221 readers
391 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS