FASTER Act

Bill Number

S. 2795

Origin Chamber

Senate

Congress

119th Congress, Session 1

Policy Area

Transportation and Public Works

Status

Introduced

Latest Action

2025-09-11: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.

Last Updated

2025-09-24T11:40:38Z

AI-Generated Summary

Purpose

The legislation, titled the "Funding for Aviation Screeners and Threat Elimination Restoration Act" or "FASTER Act," aims to direct all revenues from passenger aviation security fees exclusively toward funding aviation security screening operations. It prevents a portion of these fees from being diverted to the U.S. Treasury's general fund, ensuring the fees fully support related security costs.

Key Provisions

• Amendment to Section 44940 of Title 49, U.S. Code:
• Removes paragraph (3) from subsection (c), which previously required a share of fees to be treated as offsetting receipts (a type of revenue credit that reduces spending needs in budget calculations).
• Revises subsection (f) to:
• Update the heading to "Deposit and Availability of Fee."
• Eliminate prior language tying deposits to certain fiscal rules in Title 31 of the U.S. Code.
• Redesignate and amend paragraphs to require all collected fees to be deposited into a dedicated Treasury account.
• Make these funds available to the Administrator of the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) for expenditure, bypassing restrictions like the Anti-Deficiency Act (a law preventing federal agencies from spending unappropriated funds), but only for aviation security activities and services tied to the fees.
• Deletes subsection (i) entirely, which likely contained related diversion or accounting rules.
• Conforming Change: Updates subsection (d)(4) to remove a reference to the now-deleted subsection (i), ensuring consistency.

Significant Changes to Existing Law

• Previously, under Section 44940, a portion of aviation security fees (collected from passengers for TSA screening) was credited as offsetting receipts and deposited into the general fund of the Treasury, reducing the need for separate congressional appropriations for security while freeing up general revenue for other uses.
• This bill repeals that diversion mechanism, redirecting 100% of fees to a dedicated account solely for aviation security screening costs, such as personnel, equipment, and operations. It overrides select fiscal constraints (e.g., sections 1341, 1512–1519, and 3302 of Title 31) to prioritize direct use of the funds.

Potential Impacts

• On Government Agencies: The TSA gains more reliable and targeted funding for screening operations without relying as heavily on annual appropriations, potentially improving efficiency and resource allocation for security. The Treasury and Congress may see reduced general fund revenue from these fees, requiring adjustments in broader budgeting.
• On Citizens: Airline passengers, who pay the fees (typically $5.60 per one-way trip), benefit from assurance that their payments directly enhance airport security rather than supporting unrelated government programs. This could lead to better security measures without immediate fee hikes, though long-term effects depend on fee levels set by the TSA.
• On International Relations: No direct impacts, as the bill focuses on domestic aviation security funding and does not address international travel, borders, or foreign policy.

Main Stakeholders Affected

• Passengers and Airlines: Primary payers of the fees; airlines collect and remit them, so they handle administrative aspects.
• Transportation Security Administration (TSA): Directly benefits from dedicated funding for screeners, technology, and threat detection.
• U.S. Treasury and Congress: Lose access to fee revenues as general funds, affecting federal budgeting and appropriation processes.
• Aviation Industry (e.g., Airports, Carriers): Indirectly influenced through improved security funding, potentially reducing operational disruptions.

Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications

• Legal: By explicitly overriding the Anti-Deficiency Act and other fiscal statutes for this purpose, the bill creates a narrow exception to standard federal spending rules, emphasizing dedicated funding for security—a post-9/11 priority under the Aviation and Transportation Security Act. This could set a precedent for earmarking user fees in other sectors.
• Constitutional: Aligns with Congress's spending power under Article I, Section 9, by reallocating existing revenues without raising new taxes, though it might invite challenges if seen as bypassing appropriation norms.
• Political: Reinforces bipartisan support for aviation security (introduced by Senators Markey and Blumenthal), potentially appealing to voters concerned with safety amid rising threats. It shifts fiscal responsibility from general taxpayers to fee-payers, which could spark debates on equity in funding national security.

This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.

Sponsor

Sen. Markey, Edward J. [D-MA]

Cosponsors (1)

Sen. Blumenthal, Richard [D-CT]

Recent Actions

• 2025-09-11: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
• 2025-09-11: Introduced in Senate

Bill Versions

• Funding for Aviation Screeners and Threat Elimination Restoration Act — issued 2025-09-11 — PDF (3 pages)