PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.
H.R.1455 / 113th Congress

Contract Screener Reform and Accountability Act

Referred to the Subcommittee on Transportation Security.

Official summary

Version 00 · Introduced in House · Apr 10, 2013

Contract Screener Reform and Accountability Act - Repeals the authority of Under Secretary of Homeland Security (Transportation Security Administration [TSA]) to waive the requirement that a private screening company be owned and controlled by a U.S. citizen for any company that is a U.S. subsidiary of a foreign-owned corporation that has implemented a foreign ownership, control, or influence mitigation plan approved by the Defense Security Service of the Department of Defense (DOD).

Repeals the requirement that an airport operator, when submitting an application for a private screening company at the airport, to recommend to the Under Secretary which company would best serve the airport's security screening and passenger needs.

Prohibits the Under Secretary from: (1) entering a screening services contract that would allow for a subcontractor to perform such services, or (2) providing funding (for bonuses or other awards) to any private screening company in excess of the amount required for the performance of screening services.

Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.

Read full official summaryShow less

Repeals specified requirements to grant the Under Secretary discretion in whether to approve airport operator applications to have screening operations carried out by a private company.

Allows the Under Secretary to take up to 270 days to award a screening contract to a qualified screening company after approving the application.

Directs the Comptroller General (GAO) to provide to the Under Secretary guidance on how to analyze the total annual cost incurred by the federal government with respect to screening services by private companies. Requires the Under Secretary to use such guidance to identify costs incurred by the government from overseeing the performance of private screening companies, compared with costs incurred at airports using federal personnel for passenger and baggage screening.

Requires any airport operator using contract passenger and baggage screeners employed by a private screening company to display signs prominently to notify the flying public that screening is conducted by contract screening personnel and not by federal personnel.

Requires the Under Secretary to inform any airport operator opting to discontinue screening by a qualified private company in favor of screening by TSA personnel on how transition to TSA screening services will be carried out.

Directs the Under Secretary to develop and implement a system to enhance monitoring of private screening company performance by the contracting officer overseeing each respective company.

Requires a private screening company to report regularly to the Under Secretary each security breach at an airport where it conducts baggage and passenger screening.

Requires the Comptroller General to conduct annual covert testing of airports where private screening companies do the screening.

Makes it a condition for the Under Secretary on contracting with a private screening company to provide screening at an airport that neither the private screening company, nor its parent company, if any, has knowingly compromised any covert security testing, especially by notifying its employees that it was occurring.

Directs the Under Secretary to require each private screening company to provide all its employees with annual training for the proper handling of all sensitive information, including sensitive security information.

Adds to the qualifications of a qualified private screening company that it will provide the right of first refusal of employment to existing federal government personnel.

Requires each private screening company with a contract for screening services to provide the Under Secretary each month with: (1) information on retention rates of screeners and supervisory personnel it employs at each airport, and (2) a detailed description of adverse employment actions taken against any of such screeners or supervisory personnel.

Directs the Under Secretary to establish a process by which any person may report problems, deficiencies, waste, or vulnerabilities with respect to screening services provided by a private company. Prohibits a private screening company from discharging or otherwise discriminating against any employee with respect to compensation, terms, conditions, or other privileges of employment because of such reporting, or related testimony to Congress, or any refusal to engage in any unlawful practice.

Read the summary on Congress.gov
PlainBill analysis is coming later. This page presents official source data. We have not yet published a PlainBill explanation for this bill.

Who introduced it

Rep. Thompson, Bennie G. [D-MS-2] · D–MS

Committees

  • Homeland Security Committee
3 cosponsorship records, including any withdrawals

Actions

A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.

  1. Referred to the Subcommittee on Transportation Security.

  2. Referred to the House Committee on Homeland Security.

  3. Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E407-408)

  4. Introduced in House

  5. Introduced in House

Bill text & related measures

Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.

Related bills identified by Congress.gov

Source last updated: Aug 12, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.

Explore the bill from different angles

Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.

Neutral evidence review

Objective

Analyze H.R.1455 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.

View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact

Progressive lens

Examine H.R.1455 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.

View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope

Conservative lens

Examine H.R.1455 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.

View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power

Liberty lens

Examine H.R.1455 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.

View full prompt & sources