Pay TSA Act of 2026
- Sponsor
- Rep. Langworthy, Nicholas A. [R-NY-23]
- Committees
- Homeland Security Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Mar 17, 2026
Bottom line
The Pay TSA Act of 2026 aims to secure dedicated funding for the Transportation Security Administration and guarantee continuity of operations and personnel pay during government shutdowns by creating a new trust fund for passenger security fees.
What it actually does
This bill establishes a Transportation Security Trust Fund, into which all passenger security fees (the 9/11 Security Fee) would be deposited and used exclusively for aviation security, ending the current practice of diverting a portion to the general fund. It also ensures that funds from this Trust Fund are available to maintain aviation security operations, including paying TSA personnel, during any lapse in federal appropriations.
Proponents argue
Proponents argue that the bill ensures passenger security fees are used for their intended purpose: enhancing aviation security. They contend it provides stable, predictable funding for the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), allowing for better long-term planning and investment in technology. Furthermore, supporters emphasize that it protects frontline TSA personnel from working without pay during government shutdowns, thereby preventing disruptions to critical security functions.
Opponents contend
Opponents might argue that dedicating these fees to a trust fund reduces congressional flexibility in managing the federal budget and could impact deficit reduction efforts, as a portion of these fees currently contributes to the general fund. Some may also express concern that creating carve-outs for specific agencies during appropriations lapses could undermine the broader principle of congressional oversight and the power of the purse, potentially setting a precedent for other agencies.
The bill is concise and clearly structured, making it accessible for an informed reader to understand its core provisions and implications within a reasonable timeframe.
Section 2(a)
Repeal of Diversion of Passenger Security Fees
This provision repeals subsections (f) and (i) of section 44940 of title 49, United States Code. These subsections currently allow a portion of the 9/11 Security Fee, paid by airline passengers, to be transferred to the general fund of the Treasury for purposes other than aviation security, primarily deficit reduction. By striking these provisions, the bill ensures that 100% of the fee is dedicated to aviation security.
Supporters argue
Proponents argue that this repeal fulfills the original intent of the 9/11 Security Fee, ensuring that funds collected from passengers for security are exclusively used for that purpose, thereby enhancing public trust and aviation safety.
Critics contend
Opponents might contend that diverting a portion of the fee to the general fund is a legitimate mechanism for federal budget management and deficit reduction, and that ending this practice could necessitate cuts elsewhere or increase the national debt.
Tradeoffs
The provision balances the desire for dedicated funding for aviation security against the need for federal budgetary flexibility and deficit reduction efforts.
Section 2(b)
Establishment of Transportation Security Trust Fund
This section establishes a new 'Transportation Security Trust Fund' within the Department of Homeland Security. All amounts collected from the 9/11 Security Fee will be deposited into this Fund and made available to the TSA Administrator without requiring further annual appropriations and without fiscal year limitation. The funds are specifically earmarked for activities to strengthen aviation security, including personnel, screening operations, technology, and infrastructure.
Section 2(c)
Continuity of Operations During a Lapse in Appropriations
This provision ensures that if Congress fails to enact appropriations for the TSA, funds from the newly established Transportation Security Trust Fund (and the existing Aviation Security Capital Fund) will remain available to maintain aviation security operations. It explicitly prioritizes the use of these funds for the salaries, benefits, and overtime of Transportation Security Officers and other essential personnel, as well as staffing levels for screening checkpoints, before allocating funds for technology and infrastructure.
Section 2(d)
Aviation Security Technology and Infrastructure Account
This section establishes a dedicated 'Aviation Security Technology and Infrastructure Account' within the new Transportation Security Trust Fund. Funds in this account are specifically for modernizing and sustaining aviation security technology and infrastructure, such as computed tomography (CT) screening systems, credential authentication technology, and grants to airports for security improvements. Importantly, these funds are only available after the primary funding requirements for TSA personnel and operational aviation security activities have been met.
The bill repeals subsections (f) and (i) of section 44940 of title 49, United States Code. These are the specific statutory authorities that currently allow a portion of the 9/11 Security Fee to be diverted from aviation security purposes to the general fund of the Treasury for deficit reduction.
Section 2(a)
Why it matters:This is standard legislative practice for amending existing federal law by reference. It's not intentionally evasive but requires legal or policy expertise to fully grasp the 'before and after' effect.
Case for: Supporters argue that explicitly repealing these subsections ensures that the passenger security fee is used entirely for its stated purpose, enhancing transparency and accountability for how traveler-paid fees are utilized.
Case against: Critics might argue that these subsections provided a necessary mechanism for federal budget flexibility and deficit reduction, and their repeal removes a significant revenue stream from the general fund without identifying an alternative.
Estimated impact: Redirects approximately $1.3 billion to $1.5 billion annually from the general fund of the Treasury to the new Transportation Security Trust Fund, based on historical diversion amounts.
During a lapse in appropriations, funds available in the existing Aviation Security Capital Fund (established under 49 U.S.C. 44923(h)) are also made available to the Administrator of the Transportation Security Administration to carry out activities necessary to maintain aviation security operations, overriding existing limitations on that fund's use.
Section 2(c)(1)(B)
Why it matters:This is standard legislative practice for modifying existing statutory limitations. It's a technical amendment to ensure maximum flexibility for TSA during a shutdown, rather than an attempt to hide the provision.
Case for: Proponents argue that this provides an additional layer of financial resilience for TSA during government shutdowns, ensuring that critical aviation security functions can continue without interruption by leveraging all available security-related funds.
Case against: Critics might contend that diverting funds from the Aviation Security Capital Fund, which is typically reserved for long-term capital investments, to cover immediate operational shortfalls during a shutdown could delay crucial infrastructure upgrades and undermine the fund's original purpose.
Estimated impact: Enhances the financial buffer for TSA during appropriations lapses, potentially drawing from funds previously earmarked for capital improvements, but the exact amount would depend on the duration and scope of a shutdown.