Fee Free Carry On Baggage Is Apparently A “Right”

12 Apr, 2010 by William Teach

Print this article Font size -16+

Apparently, having solved all of America’s problems, Chuckie Schumer has nothing better to do

U.S. Sen. Charles Schumer said Sunday he’s trying to get the federal government to prohibit airlines from charging a fee for carry-on baggage, calling it a “slap in the face to travelers.”

The New York Democrat is making a personal plea to the Treasury Department to rule that carry-on bags are a necessity for travel, which would make them exempt from a separate fee outside the ticket price.

“Airline passengers have always had the right to bring a carry-on bag without having to worry about getting nickeled and dimed by an airline company,” Schumer said. “This latest fee is a slap in the face to travelers.”

Here’s an interesting thought: if people do not like it, they can choose to take a different airline. It is not a “Right,” though, I am sure, some liberal will find it somewhere in the “intentions” of the Constitution.

The fee, however, is legal. The first airline to try it, Spirit Airlines, announced last week it would charge up to $45 for a carry-on, but that it was also reducing the cost of most tickets by $40.

Spirit CEO Ben Baldanza has said having fewer carry-on bags will help empty the plane faster, and the fee is intended to get customers to pay for individual things they want, while keeping the base fare low. Charging for checked bags but not carry-ons also means many passengers lug as much as they can onto planes.

The thing is, this fee applies to bags going in the overhead bin. All Charles had to do was, you know, check their website number (sorry, that was Biden’s gag). If you bring a small backpack or some other materials, they are free (backpacks have to go under the seat). Otherwise, you can be charged. Big whoop. This is just the ever present hand of big nanny government intruding into private business.

Hey, I know. If Charles is just so darned worried about fees that are a slap in the face, perhaps he could work to reduce government spending so that the American people are not slapped in the face with massive tax increases.