April 14th, 2010
04:12 PM ET
4 years ago

Senators fight airlines over carry-on baggage fees

Sen. Chuck Schumer introduced a bill Wednesday that he says will rein in the airline industry.
Sen. Chuck Schumer introduced a bill Wednesday that he says will rein in the airline industry.

New York (CNNMoney.com) – Senate Democrats are taking aim at carry-on baggage fees after Spirit Airlines became the first U.S. carrier to propose charging passengers to store luggage in overhead bins.

On Wednesday, Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-New York, introduced a bill that would amend the tax code to eliminate a loophole that he and four other Senators say allows airlines to avoid taxes on certain fees.

"This latest fee crosses the line and is a slap in the face to travelers," Schumer said in a statement. "Our legislation will rein in the airlines and keep air travelers from being gouged every time they board a plane."

That effort comes one day after two other Senators put forward a bill that would change how the Federal Aviation Administration regulates carry-on baggage fees.

Full story


Filed under: Charles Schumer
soundoff (41 Responses)
  1. JIm,VIRGINIA

    All political-they are just going to add the cost to the price of a ticket if forced to drop this from carry on baggage !!! Shumer been doing this for years.

    April 14, 2010 04:19 pm at 4:19 pm |
  2. Will

    The old adage rings true: The most dangerous place in Washington is between a TV camera and Chuck Schumer.

    The man's the biggest hot-issue populist the Senate's seen in years.

    April 14, 2010 04:21 pm at 4:21 pm |
  3. BeverlyNC

    Another example of Democrats standing up for the PEOPLE.

    Republicans are going "what are baggage fees?" since they fly around on private corporate jets provided to them by big corporate lobbyists, the banks who are fighting being regulated again (like they always were before Bush), and insurance companies who bought Republican NO votes.

    Republicans don't have a clue how real Americans live nor do they care.

    April 14, 2010 04:24 pm at 4:24 pm |
  4. Ann

    Charge by weight, including the passenger. I weigh 110 pounds – often find myself sitting between people who weigh more than twice as much, sometimes much more than twice. I don't put carry on luggage in the overhead because I can barely lift the bag up there and don't want to bother people to help me. I pay to check a single bag. There are lots of people flying who are also trim and don't bring along excessive baggage. Somehow it seems to me that we're not getting a fair shake in this deal. Unhealthily heavy people crowd into the seats and stuff the overheads. I feel like I'm subsudizing their bad habits. Freight is carried by weight. Why not people and their bags?

    April 14, 2010 04:26 pm at 4:26 pm |
  5. Ed, Santa Fe, NM

    Simple solution: BAN ALL CARRY-ON LUGGAGE....

    Planes will board and deplane FASTER without all this hassle....

    April 14, 2010 04:28 pm at 4:28 pm |
  6. Marie MD

    Good. It's about time that airlines stop fleecing the flying public. What's next paid bathrooms on planes?

    April 14, 2010 04:29 pm at 4:29 pm |
  7. steve

    teapartyers unite. the govt. has no business telling private companies what they should charge.. Come on lets get the govt. out of the airline business...

    TEA PARTYERS UNIT

    April 14, 2010 04:29 pm at 4:29 pm |
  8. barbra k

    I am not in favoring of paying a fee for carry on bags. I always thought
    a carry on bag was something small. For a woman it could accompany
    her pocketbook. Have you ever sat on a plane waiting for the passengers
    to board and watch what the passengers are carrying on the plane. It
    is unbelievable what is allowed as carry-on luggage. Most of it should be
    checked. It is too big, takes up most of the room in storage bins above the seats, and, if it is stored under the seat-it encroaches the area of the
    passenger next to them.
    I feel the airlines have created this situation. Now that carry-on luggage is out of hand the airlines say "Don't want to pay to check it? Well then, you can pay to carry it on!"
    Now for the sake of all the offenders, everyone loses!

    April 14, 2010 04:30 pm at 4:30 pm |
  9. Pete

    There MUST be something more important that deserves Schumer's attention.

    April 14, 2010 04:31 pm at 4:31 pm |
  10. richp the poconos

    WOW, I just love spending money on these elected buffoons wasting time on airline baggage. Where is the legislation that is designed to keep companies here, start up new companies, entice companies here and for companies here to expand ? You working on another NAFTA or CAFTA to loose more jobs, going to bury it in the airline baggage legislation. Do you freaking jobs instead of selling this country down the river with every session like you have done for the past 16 years.

    April 14, 2010 04:32 pm at 4:32 pm |
  11. Ivan Bial

    does Spirit expect passangers to purchase clothing at the end of the flight. the next fee will be for passangers that wear clothing.
    Or Spirt the Airline of nudity..

    April 14, 2010 04:33 pm at 4:33 pm |
  12. Dean

    Those travelers who carry a weeks worth of clothing as carry on baggage should be made to pay a fee.

    April 14, 2010 04:33 pm at 4:33 pm |
  13. Wisconsonite - Be Informed; Not Just Opinionated!

    Thank you, Sen. Schumer! Can't waid to hear how the Republican'ts try to block this one . . . . because we all KNOW they will!

    April 14, 2010 04:34 pm at 4:34 pm |
  14. Duck Fallas

    Please. The dubious outrage is embarassing. There are more important items to address. Just ask Fux News, they'll tell you what to care about.

    April 14, 2010 04:34 pm at 4:34 pm |
  15. Captain Crunch

    Go get 'em Chuck!

    April 14, 2010 04:35 pm at 4:35 pm |
  16. don

    Maybe the Senator could comment what he caused at Indy Mac Bank that took 10,000,000 from thousands of depostitors. People lost their life savings because or sen shumer.

    and now he fights for luggage laws.....Indy Mac will haunt him every day. His statements caused a bank to collapse. He is responsible

    April 14, 2010 04:43 pm at 4:43 pm |
  17. Anonymous

    Thank you! Finally, someone is willing to protect us from being gouged ...

    April 14, 2010 04:43 pm at 4:43 pm |
  18. Joe from CT, not Lieberman

    This makes me think we should overhaul one of St. Ronald of Reagan's most beloved items – the deregulation of the airline industry.

    April 14, 2010 04:43 pm at 4:43 pm |
  19. CEvans, Texas

    Good!!

    Need to also look into fees for checked baggage as well!!

    Please consider it!

    April 14, 2010 04:49 pm at 4:49 pm |
  20. Curmudgeon10

    I saw Schumer interviewed this AM about this issue. The question was "is this an appropriate issue for federal government involvement?"

    His answer: "we regulate everything up here. Why not this?"

    If this is your idea of heaven America, you are there.

    April 14, 2010 04:50 pm at 4:50 pm |
  21. Pedro

    And if Republicans ran congress they'd be pushing to have those fees doubled.

    April 14, 2010 04:51 pm at 4:51 pm |
  22. Jim

    Way to go Chuck! If they are going to charge money for carrying baggage of any kind, then they should have to advertise their higher prices and pay the taxes. Its like advertising low prices on cars and finding out that you have to buy tires and an engine extra.

    April 14, 2010 04:53 pm at 4:53 pm |
  23. Rick McDaniel

    The biggest insult is the "potty" fee. That one is just incredible.

    April 14, 2010 04:58 pm at 4:58 pm |
  24. Four and The Door

    Democrats need to stop wasting time political grandstanding and figure out how to encourage job growth. Outside of Washington DC, that's a real problem for the rest of us Americans! Do they think they have done enough already?!?

    April 14, 2010 05:01 pm at 5:01 pm |
  25. Donovan

    I wouldn't mind a law stating that airline tickets should be all-inclusive. Eliminate these fees ENTIRELY. Give customers the proper choices up front. Wouldn't that be better for the "free market"?

    April 14, 2010 05:02 pm at 5:02 pm |
1 2