450
submitted 7 months 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.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] RainfallSonata@lemmy.world 141 points 7 months ago

Either everyone needs TSA screening or we don't need it at all. Get rid of it. Problem solved.

[-] cbarrick@lemmy.world 72 points 7 months ago

Clear doesn't skip screening... It skips to the front of the line to be screened.

Everyone still gets screened.

[-] czech@lemm.ee 17 points 7 months ago

They are also pre-screened and interviewed to get into the program.

[-] cbarrick@lemmy.world 17 points 7 months ago

Yeah, but it doesn't really matter.

The federal government doesn't trust Clear enough to let them into the Precheck line.

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] mp3@lemmy.ca 82 points 7 months ago

Good Guy California getting rid of pay-to-win subscription for air travel.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] Furbag@lemmy.world 69 points 7 months ago

Kinda wish they would just take aim at the entire security theater complex that airport screening has become, but that's going to be a task destined for the federal level and god knows we can't get those fucking morons in congress to agree on anything, even if it's for their own benefit.

[-] eugene171@lemmy.world 10 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

It's not only theater, since Americans can't be trusted to remember they have loaded guns on their person

So many loaded guns.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] rusticus@lemm.ee 54 points 7 months ago

This is on brand. Government thinks the problem is the “for pay” scheme to make the process more tolerable while forcing us into a system (TSA) that has NEVER been shown to prevent anything other than happiness. The problem isn’t with Clear, it is with TSA asshats. How about make a system that works so that no one needs Clear?

[-] ech@lemm.ee 69 points 7 months ago

You are right, but having a system like Clear also incentivizes the whole system to be worse to increase sales. While it's not a whole solution, it's a good move, imo.

load more comments (10 replies)
[-] Not_mikey@slrpnk.net 16 points 7 months ago

Yeah, but the best way to get something like this to improve is to make rich people suffer through it too. Letting them bypass a system like this allows them, and the politicians who cater to them, to ignore the issue.

Its like when segregation ended and white kids were being sent to the black schools and tons of money poured into the schools as the white parents realized the conditions there kids would have to suffer through. Like tsa the ultra wealthy just went to private schools/jets but the broad middle to upper middle class still has a lot of sway politically and can change broken systems like this, if it effects them.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (18 replies)
[-] Socsa@sh.itjust.works 51 points 7 months ago

Holy fuck yes please. Clear serves literally no purpose besides laying the groundwork for the future of tiered airport security.

[-] Potatos_are_not_friends@lemmy.world 12 points 7 months ago

You don't like security theater and micro transactions to bypass annoyances?

[-] QuarterSwede@lemmy.world 43 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Everyone is beaten down by the travel process

TSA has been proven to be a sham time and time again. They’re ineffective at best. Just get rid of it already.

I also fail to see how this is really any different than paying for TSA pre check. The only main difference is skipping the security line but what difference is that really? Both are paid for services that allow the “rich” (yeah right) to get through security quicker. The real rich aren’t traveling in public transportation. Why don’t we ban private planes?

Oh and no offense to the, mostly, good people working there with the public on the front lines. They’re typically pleasant and great with the kids in my family’s experience.

[-] cbarrick@lemmy.world 19 points 7 months ago

TSA Precheck involves a background check and interview. This allows the actual screening process to be lighter.

load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
[-] dan@upvote.au 38 points 7 months ago

TSA Precheck is significantly cheaper than Clear ($75 for 5 years, vs $189/year for Clear) for what seems like essentially the same thing, and Precheck has extra benefits like the ability to keep your shoes, belt and jacket on, and keep laptops and liquids in your carry on bag. I've got Precheck and it's always been just as fast as the Clear line, if not faster..

Why do people use Clear? What am I missing?

[-] You999@sh.itjust.works 16 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Clear and precheck are two separate things, clear only let's you skip to the front of the line. If you want to enjoy the benefits precheck brings to the table with clear then you have to purchase both. It's worth mentioning that most people do not pay for clear as it's usually given out of a benefit for some credit cards and even some jobs that fly a lot.

[-] betterdeadthanreddit@lemmy.world 9 points 7 months ago

"Let's" = "let us", "lets" = "allows". The apostrophe shows where the words are joined and should not be used to warn readers that an "s" is coming next.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] Socsa@sh.itjust.works 14 points 7 months ago

Precheck actually increases throughput by relaxing the scanner requirements. Clear is literally just paying to skip the line.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Chainweasel@lemmy.world 35 points 7 months ago

What's the fucking point of the TSA if you can just pay extra to bypass it?
It doesn't really seem like a stretch that a terrorist organization could come up with a little extra money per ticket to make sure their plan pays off.

[-] cbarrick@lemmy.world 24 points 7 months ago

Clear doesn't bypass TSA. It just skips you to the front of the line.

load more comments (9 replies)
[-] Kit@lemmy.blahaj.zone 14 points 7 months ago

The company runs a background check to verify that the person isn't a terrorist. Then at the airport they use biometrics to verify their identity.

[-] WhatsThePoint@lemmy.world 38 points 7 months 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 7 months ago

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

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] SadSadSatellite@lemmy.dbzer0.com 18 points 7 months ago

Sounds like what tsa should be doing. Either security is necessary or it isn't. The airport is the most classist place in the country.

[-] brygphilomena@lemmy.world 8 points 7 months ago

That's the premise of TSA pre check. Clear just adds biometric verification instead of a TSA agent checking IDs.

Honestly, it's stupid and I've refused to use it because I don't trust companies with that biometric data. I saw TSA try to use similar at an airport once and I specifically opted out.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Theoriginalthon@lemmy.world 11 points 7 months ago

Ah so it's for drug trafficking not terrorism

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] ramble81@lemm.ee 8 points 7 months ago

So that means the TSA could do the same thing for anyone with Pre-Check or Global Entry since we already had to go through all that.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] vatlark@lemmy.world 29 points 7 months ago

If Clear is an equity problem, then the toll lanes that are going in all over California certainly are.

Toll roads would be equal. The toll lanes feel really bad.

[-] Raiderkev@lemmy.world 16 points 7 months ago

I came to say exactly this. Fuck those stupid lanes. Carpool was just fine. The fact that these were approved by Democrats is really disheartening. They also just approved speed cameras which should be up soon enough. These are blatant cash grabs along with the gas tax increase Jerry Brown shoehorned in before he left. We already have the highest income tax in the country. WTF does the state do with all our money? Everything is crazy expensive here, and shit like this doesn't help the working class that the Democrats are supposed to represent.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Subtracty@lemmy.world 9 points 7 months ago

I believe there was a study for the highways outside of Washington DC that had toll lanes. The fees were variable and higher during rush hour. This effectively was a small fee for the wealthy to pay in order to get to work on time and left everyone else to sit in traffic. As far as I know, the lanes still exist, but there is no variable charge.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] JCreazy@midwest.social 28 points 7 months ago
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] TankovayaDiviziya@lemmy.world 19 points 7 months ago

Jesus, paying to cut the line could not sound anymore American capitalistic. Good on California for banning this!

[-] Rexios@lemm.ee 17 points 7 months ago

So what’s the difference between this and TSA pre check? You have to pay for that too so the money privilege argument makes no sense here.

[-] kaitco@lemmy.world 15 points 7 months ago

This is my exact question, too. I have Pre-Check and I love it because it is like travelling prior to Sept-11.

Pre-Check is cheaper than Clear because it’s like $100 but it lasts for 2-3 years, so again, it’s a separation between those who can pay and those who can’t. Also, what’s next? Every airline removes First, Business, Basic Economy “classes”?

Banning Clear doesn’t resolve the “class” issue. What would be better is to just improve the entire TSA process so that it’s not so miserable for everyone, or let’s get more of those high-speed rails built so we have more travel options and airlines have enough competition to force improvement.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] cbarrick@lemmy.world 9 points 7 months ago

TSA Precheck involves a background check and interview performed by the government. This allows them to make the actual screening process lighter, because they've deemed you to be low risk.

With Clear, you still have to go through the full security check. And it also costs significantly more.

  • Precheck: $14/y
  • Clear: 190$/y

The cost of TSA Precheck is $70 for 5 years, so $14 per year (plus an additional $8 for the initial enrollment). If you travel internationally a lot you can upgrade to Global Entry for $100 for 5 years. Or if you travel to Canada frequently, you can get Nexus (a superset of Global Entry) at $50 for 5 years.

It's hard to make the money privilege argument with Precheck at that price.

[-] frickineh@lemmy.world 9 points 7 months ago

Kind of. TSA Precheck is <$100 for 5 years, so it's significantly cheaper. That amount is a lot more accessible to average travelers than CLEAR.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[-] gastationsushi@lemmy.world 15 points 7 months ago

Neoliberalism y'all, TSA's equipment and all the services that go along with it are actually revenue streams invented by mega donors. The "free" market in action.

[-] sylver_dragon@lemmy.world 14 points 7 months ago

I'm all for doing a risk based analysis of people and having a higher or lower level of scrutiny based on that analysis. "Ability to pay" shouldn't be part of that analysis. Of course, given the history of problems with building such system, I also don't expect that the TSA (or any group) is going to do well building a risk based system which isn't:

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] TheTimeKnife@lemmy.world 11 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Good, absolute insanity it was ever allowed in the first place. Hope more states follow the same path.

[-] Zink@programming.dev 10 points 7 months ago

This seems like a good step. If the security bottleneck is mandated for all of us by the government, then people who don’t like it should work to improve it. Though I guess the owner class proper doesn’t really have to deal with any of it, with special processes to get to private jets.

But, this is also air travel we’re talking about. Every single step of the process to get from A to B is as enshittified and monetized as possible. Zero surprise that it’s the same with security.

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] partial_accumen@lemmy.world 8 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Nobody (at the time of my writing) is reading the article or understand what Clear is or what this new law is doing.

  • No, its not banning Clear (in all forms, only its present one)
  • Clear is a private company NOT a government program. TSA Pre is a government program. Both allow a traveler to pay for extra background checks and biometric collection to allow them through the identity step of airport security faster. Neither of these skip the hand baggage and body scans.
  • Nothing in the law is about TSA Pre
  • No, its not removing the pathway for "pay to play" allowing those willing to spend more money to get through security faster. Its complicating it for the Clear company, but also perhaps ending a result which Clear subscribers get through even faster than today!

Important quote from the article:

"Newman said his bill, SB-1372, doesn't seek to prohibit Clear from operating its own dedicated security lines separate from other passengers."

Clear could set up their own end-to-end security (which would cost them more) but would be even faster to get through because they would bypass regular TSA security and scanning lines, which isn't what is happening today.

[-] bradorsomething@ttrpg.network 9 points 7 months ago

That would defeat the business model - they don’t want to pay to do security, they want to be paid to walk you to security. If they did security and took the liability associated, this would be a great service.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Maggoty@lemmy.world 7 points 7 months ago

Pre check isn't any better. I went through an airport last year that had 16 stations for pre check and 3 for everyone else. The line for those 3 stations wrapped around the airport.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 23 Apr 2024
450 points (98.9% liked)

News

23360 readers
1671 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 right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


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.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


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 or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. 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.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


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 1 year ago
MODERATORS