FASTER Act Streamlines Aviation Security Funding: Fees Go Directly to TSA Operations

The newly introduced FASTER Act—formally the Funding for Aviation Screeners and Threat Elimination Restoration Act—is a bill focused entirely on changing how the federal government manages the money collected from those pesky aviation security fees you pay every time you buy a plane ticket.

The Security Fee Shuffle

Right now, the process for getting the security fees you pay back into the hands of the people who actually run airport security can be complicated. Section 2 of the FASTER Act cuts through that red tape by repealing an old requirement that dictated how a portion of these fees had to be credited and deposited into the Treasury. Think of it like taking a convoluted, multi-step process for depositing a check and turning it into a direct deposit.

Under the proposed changes, all aviation security fees collected would now go into a dedicated, separate account within the Treasury. The key change is that the Administrator (likely the head of the relevant agency, like the FAA or TSA) gains the explicit authority to spend this money directly on "security activities and services" without being constrained by certain general government spending laws. Specifically, the bill waives restrictions found in 31 U.S.C. 1341(a)(1), which generally prevents agencies from spending money before it’s officially appropriated.

What This Means for Your Travel and Wallet

This isn't about raising or lowering the security fee you pay; it's about making sure the money collected is used more efficiently. If you’ve ever been stuck in a long security line because of staffing shortages or wondered why the equipment looks old, this bill aims to fix the funding bottleneck. By creating a direct pipeline for these funds, the agencies responsible for security can theoretically respond faster to needs—like hiring more screeners or updating technology—without waiting for the often slow Congressional appropriation process. The money is immediately available for its intended purpose.

For the busy traveler, the real-world impact is simple: the money you pay for security is more likely to be used quickly for security. The benefit is increased efficiency and responsiveness in the security system, which could translate into smoother operations at the airport.

The Trade-Off: Efficiency vs. Oversight

While the goal of direct funding is faster action, there’s a small but important detail in the fine print. By explicitly exempting this spending from certain general appropriation laws, the bill is trading a bit of bureaucratic oversight for operational speed. Waiving restrictions like 31 U.S.C. 1341(a)(1) means that while the funds are strictly earmarked for security activities, the agency has more latitude in how and when they spend it compared to other government programs. This is a common trade-off in dedicated funding mechanisms: you get quick access to cash, but you lose some of the general checks and balances designed to prevent overspending or misuse. Since the funds remain restricted to "security activities and services," the risk of misuse seems low, but it does reduce the standard level of budgetary scrutiny on this specific pot of money.