Proposed bill would ban Clear users from skipping security lines at California airports

California lawmakers are looking to crack down on airport line-jumpers with a proposed bill that would ban security screening company Clear from general security lines across the state.

The bill is sponsored by state Sen. Josh Newman, a Democrat who represents the 29th Senate District.

Newman told CBS MoneyWatch the bill, which is set to come before the California State Senate's transportation committee on Tuesday, lets wealthier people skip in front of passengers who have been waiting to be screened by Transportation Security Administration agents, and that the bill aims to resolve a "basic equity issue."

Republican state Sen. Janet Nguyen told Politico she understands the frustration stated in Newman's bill and that "it becomes a haves vs. have nots" where people who can afford Clear jump in front of everyone else. However, a spokesperson for Nguyen sought to clarify to USA TODAY on Tuesday that Nguyen had not reviewed the bill in its entirety when she spoke to Politico last week.

"When it comes to making one’s way through airport security, the quality of that experience shouldn’t be contingent on a traveler’s income or willingness to pay," Sen. Newman said in an emailed statement to USA TODAY. "And yet, in many of California's airports, travelers who choose not to participate in the Clear concierge screening service are subject to the indignity of being shunted aside to make way for those who do," the statement continues.

"This is inequitable, especially in light of the fact that it's their tax dollars which fund airport security services in the first place," Newman's statement reads.

What is Clear?

According to its website, Clear charges members $189 a year and allows customers to verify their identities at kiosks upon arriving at airports, where customers can their boarding pass and eyes or fingerprints. After identity verification, a Clear ambassador will then escort customers to the front of the security line.

The service is currently being used in dozens of airports across the country and in major California airports in Los Angeles, San Diego and San Francisco, as well as in many sports stadiums and other venues.

"We are proud to partner with nine airports across California − creating hundreds of jobs, sharing more than $13 million in annual revenue with our California airport partners, and serving nearly 1 million Californians," a Clear spokesperson said in an emailed statement to USA TODAY.

"We are always working with our airline and airport partners as well as local, state, and federal governments to ensure all travelers have a safer, easier checkpoint experience,” the statement reads.

What does SB-1372 propose?

Newman's bill, SB-1372, would require third-party vendors like Clear to get their own dedicated security lane, separate from the one used by general travelers. The bill would apply to new agreements between public airports and third-party security services after Jan. 1, 2025.

He told Politico he is not trying to ban Clear but believes its system is neither efficient nor secure.

"SB-1372 doesn't seem to terminate the Clear concierge service at airports; instead, it seeks to have Clear and other third-party screening services operate separate lines for subscribers, thereby eliminating the friction and frustration caused by the current system," Newman said in a statement.

While the bill faces support from union groups representing flight attendants and TSA employees, it faces strong pushback from six major airline companies: Delta, Hawaiian Airlines, JetBlue, Alaska Airlines, Southwest and United.

The airlines, in a letter to Senate Transportation Committee chair Dave Cortese and published by Politico, said the bill "not only threatens to increase fees on air carriers but also severely restricts airports' ability to manage lines at the security checkpoint, resulting in a negative travel experience for our California customers."

The airlines argue that SB-1372 could eliminate millions in revenue dollars currently paid by Clear, which could further increase air carrier operating costs in the state and leading to increased fares.

The Northern California branch of the American Federation of Government Employees, a federal employee union group, argued in a letter to Cortese that "expedited screening service providers no longer make meaningful contributions to aviation security, and their continued presence at California's airports instead degrade the public's traveling experience."

Sarah Nelson of the Association of Flight Attendants, a union group representing flight attendants in the U.S., said it is concerned by "continuing reports about irregularities in Clear's verification of passenger identification," raising concerns about the integrity of aviation security, according to a letter to Cortese also published by Politico.

Gabe Hauari is a national trending news reporter at USA TODAY. You can follow him on X @GabeHauari or email him at Gdhauari@gannett.com.

This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Bill would ban Clear from California airports' general security lines