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.

  • greyhathero@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    Dislike this. I never saw it as a wealthy skip the line. It’s not that expensive . And they are on their private jets already. It’s great for those of us that travel enough for work that it justifies the cost. When you fly more than once a week it’s nice to be able to pay to not have to wait for those that do it twice a year(and are not as efficient due to lack of practice)

    • bradorsomething@ttrpg.network
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Once everyone is using it, no one is getting value from it. Then it’s just another unneeded fee you have to pay not to wait 2 hours. This is disney-like squeeze for more money.

      You always have to consider the insidious nature of things like this… once they’re common and you have to use them not to wait, everyone will be in the same place, minus $300 a year. Yes, I raised the price; once a large number of travelers are onboarded and you have to use it or wait forever, that’s what the company will do.

      • greyhathero@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        Not defending the company per se. I assume they are just as scummy as the next, but I don’t see why everyone would sign up. There’s next to no value there if you don’t travel alot

  • Chocrates@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    I don’t know why clear pisses me off so much but it does. It’s just not fair imo, but life isn’t fair.

  • Maggoty@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 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.

  • bradorsomething@ttrpg.network
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    I feel like this post was astroturfing that went horribly wrong for Clear. I’d like to thank all my fellow travelers who see this is a horrible additional fee that they want to make mandatory not to wait behind their pointless service.

    Anyone who thinks this is a good service deserves to wait in the regular line for every ride at Disney.

  • partial_accumen@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    3 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
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 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.

      • partial_accumen@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        I agree that their current business model wouldn’t work, but their current model only has limited value anyway. I would say it changes the best possible business model for Clear to choose to operate more like Delta SkyPriority where there is a whole separate line from beginning of security to the end, not just the first step of the line, which is what Clear does today.

        • LaLuzDelSol@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          Hmm I feel like it would be difficult for a private company to get approved to take over the TSAs job. It would create a conflict of interest- Clear would want to get people through as quick as possible for as cheap as possible.

  • phoneymouse@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    Having watched clear in action, I’m not even sure it’s worth it. I have pre check and I watch the clear line from my line. Clear works based on these kiosks that scan your face. You need to be waved in to a kiosk and everyone seems to need help from one of the onsite technicians anyway, so it’s not like those kiosks are in full use all the time or all that efficient. Also, a clear employee has to escort you to the TSA desk to be waved through. Clear users still need to go through the TSA screening, so they join the pre-check line where you don’t have to take off your shoes.

    Waiting for a kiosk, waiting for clear staff assistance; these things become a bottle neck and frankly the line doesn’t move much faster, if at all, than pre-check. Pre check costs less than $20/year. Clear costs nearly $200/year. You might save 5 minutes or you might actually take longer to get through. I just don’t see the value.

    Oh yeah, and there is also the fact that you’ve given your biometric information to a private company. I’m sure they won’t be tempted to exploit or sell that information to make more revenue when they’ve exhausted their airport line based growth. /s

    • Socsa@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      They are 100% selling the biometrics.

      The real business model is to get people used to paid tiered airport security. This is not the money maker. The money maker comes later when they will sell multiple tiers of on-demand line skipping in airports which are getting kickbacks to make the standard security tier as miserable as possible.

      • phoneymouse@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        Even the airlines are trying to grab that information now. I flew last week and United had these cameras in front of the gate like they needed to scan everyone’s face. I was like, no I’m not doing that and the gate agent was like “it’s the only way on the plane.” I had looked it up online and found that was BS, so I told him “not according to your privacy policy.” So, he goes “well, do you have a boarding pass?” Of course I have a fucking boarding pass, thats the way it’s done. I got on the plane without having my biometrics taken. So, everyone else on the plane just had theirs taken because United wanted that data, but they didn’t need it. People just go along with it because they’re scared to say no.

  • dogslayeggs@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    As annoyed as I get with Clear skipping the line, why is it any different with First Class/Sky Priority separate lines that skip to the front? This is just an extra fee to skip even that line. I’m a frequent traveler (both business and pleasure), so I get upgraded every flight. It annoys me when airports don’t have Sky Priority lines (I’m looking at you IND!) or the Sky Priority line doesn’t actually skip anything (Delta’s new LAX terminal design), so I don’t fundamentally have a problem with Clear. I’m just too cheap to pay for it. In DEN, Sky Priority is absolutely necessary because of how unbelievably stupid their security setup is.

    • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Also a frequent traveler and I don’t do any of that stuff. I sit in economy and I do the normal TSA line. Use my points for a free trip.

  • rusticus@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 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?

    • jkrtn@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      I want Clear gone along with everything else trying to scan my face. They all need to fuck off.

    • GiddyGap@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      3 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
          0
          ·
          3 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.

          • rusticus@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 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
              0
              ·
              3 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
                0
                ·
                3 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.

          • Malfeasant@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 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.

    • Pumpkin Escobar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Can I ask what the better working system would look like? I’ve seen plenty of the stories about TSA lapses, obviously security at the airports isn’t fun, but I’m not sure what an alternative system that works would look like.

      • rusticus@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        Disband TSA. It’s never been shown to improve safety and I’ve always argued congregating all the passengers in one place before screening is the greatest security risk in the entire airport. Anybody could walk into the security lines with a gun or explosive device, causing maximal damage.

        • Pumpkin Escobar@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          Just to check, is the suggestion to get rid of TSA and not replace it? i.e. no security screening at the airports?

          Is there any country on the planet anymore where that’s a thing? Any example of a working version of what you’re proposing (if I’m reading it right)?

          Also

          Disband TSA. It’s never been shown to improve safety

          That sounds pretty far from true. The only way this is true is if TSA procedures have never prevented a single gun, bomb, etc… past a security checkpoint.

          As reported by the TSA they stopped 6737 firearms, 93% of them loaded from getting into secure areas… in 2023 alone. They also conducted a passenger survey where 93% of passengers said they were satisfied with experience, 94% confident in TSA’s ability to keep air travel secure

          Conducted a passenger experience survey with a sample size of 13,000 travelers at multiple airports across the nation. Survey results revealed that 93% of travelers were satisfied with the passenger experience and 94% of the respondents were confident in TSA’s ability to keep air travel secure.

          I’m not sure what percentage of the 93% would feel the same way, but I will say if the TSA went away tomorrow with no replacement I’d no longer be flying on any airline that was unscreened.

            • jumjummy@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              3 months ago

              Are you trying to compare rail to air travel in terms of risk? Last time I checked into it, nobody hijacked a train and drove it into buildings.

    • Ech@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 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.

      • rusticus@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        I disagree. Clear gives wealthy an “out” and incentivizes the TSA system to NOT change. Clear is increasing sales but there is no relationship between their sales and TSA. TSA is not incentivized to make Clear more money. It’s a bad move.

        • GraniteM@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          If Clear’s entire business model is predicated on getting money from people who don’t want to deal with the standard security system, then they are 100% incentivized to keep security as unpleasant as possible. Suppose that Congressman Jones introduces the Make TSA Less Horrible Bill. That bill would be an existential threat to Clear, so they would absolutely lobby against it, even though it would objectively improve the lives of everyone who travels. By that same token, if Congressman Chudknuckle wanted a campaign donation from Clear, he might just so happen to introduce the TSA Now Can Stab You in the Ear with an Unfolded Paperclip Bill, and Clear would happily oblige.

          Clear may not have created the problem for which they are selling the solution, but they have every incentive in the world to keep the problem as bad as possible, and even make it worse if they can.

          • rusticus@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            Nothing you have said (which I agree with) disagrees with my comment. Clear only exists because TSA is terrible. Fix TSA and Clear goes away because no one will see value in it. In my airport, Clear is worse than preTSA and many have cancelled their Clear because a better option exists.

        • bradorsomething@ttrpg.network
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          If it gave the wealthy an out it would be $1000/yr. This is trying to onboard everyone cheap, so you either pay clear or wait 2 hours.

          • rusticus@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            Okay? It’s still a private sector solution to make a public sector shitshow tolerable. How does banning it help the shitshow that is TSA? This was my whole point - government thinks banning Clear is the solution to be “fair” when the problem is TSA. If they fix the TSA shitshow there is no need for Clear.

        • OneOrTheOtherDontAskMe@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          I’d day it’s still a good move as it prevents inequal wealth resulting in inequality treatment. We should ALL be moved to the front of the TSA line, with no extra cost, or none of us should.

          The ultimate solution is a change to TSA that makes it easier to board for everyone, but if the only option is to let people who pay a fee get a leg-up, I’m fine with just banning the whole service.

          • rusticus@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            You’re forgetting the best option: disband TSA. It’s never been shown to improve safety and I have always argued it’s a greater security risk to congregate all the passengers (before screening) in a central location anyway.

    • Not_mikey@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 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.

      • rusticus@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        Yeah, but the best way to get something like this to improve is to make rich people suffer through it too.

        Nothing like holding the lowest bar possible for TSA. Disband it. It’s never been shown to make anything safer. I have always argued that making thousands of people congregate in lines is a far greater security risk (firearm/explosive device) than anywhere else in the airport. And those lines are NOT screened for weapons at the airport entrance.

  • vatlark@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 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.

    • Subtracty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 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.

      • Raiderkev@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        When they installed these in my area in CA, the first month or so, they opened them to everyone while they were getting the toll system set up. It was wonderful. They fixed all the choke points and traffic was a breeze. Then when they started enforcing the toll, the traffic was back… Cunts

        • Moneo@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          The traffic would have gotten worse again eventually. Just one more lane bro, induced demand, etc etc.

    • Raiderkev@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 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.

      • BlueJayOakerson@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        When the cameras went up in RI they could not stop bragging that they made 2 million in the first few days as if we should be excited that they’re taking money from the lowest income areas and sending it to a billionaire in Colorado:

        • Raiderkev@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          Yeah, I’ve had 0 tickets in the last 10 years. But if I get a bullshit ticket in the mail for going with the flow of traffic, fuck right off. I remember seeing them in Arizona about 10 years ago and thought to myself wow, what an Orwellian shit hole AZ is. Glad we don’t have these in CA…

  • dan@upvote.au
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 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?

    • TexMexBazooka@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      The bar for identity verification is higher, because precheck you skip quite a bit of the security procedures, while clear just gets you to the front of the line

    • Socsa@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

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

    • You999@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      3 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
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 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.

      • dan@upvote.au
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        clear only let’s you skip you skip to the front of the line.

        The TSA Precheck line is usually very small when I travel, so it seems like it’s essentially the same thing. I fly out of SFO and SJC, and haven’t had to wait longer than 2-3 minutes in the precheck line even when the airport is busy.

        • You999@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          Its really only useful at certain airports that aren’t managed that well. Like at seatac when it’s peak time but only have one of the four checkpoints open because they are still short TSA agents. I should also add clear also let’s you line cut in places outside of TSA inspection points like at border crossing customs and some stadiums events.

  • Furbag@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 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.

      • Raiderkev@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        When I was in college, my lacrosse team was traveling to Florida for a game. My teammate went hunting the week before and forgot he had shotgun shells in his Carry on. They didn’t find the shells until the RETURN flight. He missed the flight back because he had to go through a ton of extra security/ interrogation. The fact that he made it on the first flight with live ammunition in his backpack always made me not very confident in the TSA security theater.

      • hessenjunge@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        Walking through a metal detector will sort that out, no need to remove shoes, etc.

        When you compare EU/rest of the world security screening to US ones the farce becomes obvious. Next they’re going to require a half striptease “for security”.

  • sylver_dragon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 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:

    • Maggoty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Hilariously, I constantly get pulled for secondary. On my last trip they had us in a separate line and I finally made the connection. We were all guys that ran hot. It’s the old heat=sweat=nervous idea. So a calm terrorist wouldn’t get caught by their automatic secondary selection system. Like someone about to commit suicide that’s made peace with their decision.

      • teamevil@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        I stopped getting pulled out for secondary scan after I asked if it said asshole next to my name. I’m fine if it does but I’d like to know. And no extra scans.

  • Socsa@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

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