Airport security is rarely a cup of tea, and while many would probably complain about the experience in the US, it’s actually pretty great compared to the experience in many other major travel nations. I’m looking at you, Great Britain.
Why? We in the United States know how to make products worth paying for, and if you pay, you can enjoy a truly competitive experience without many of the hassles found elsewhere. Global Entry is great and TSA PreCheck is very solid — also CLEAR.
Now there’s an idiotic plan to get rid of one of these paid options, because charging for things that some people won’t pay for is clearly completely wrong for everyone and should be banned — everyone suffers equally when going through airports.
Two state senators in California, apparently struggling to pay for subscriptions they could really use, decided that because they’re cheap, everyone should be forced to suffer through the same endless security lanes.
Motion to ban CLEAR: WTF?
The US has successfully implemented the TSA’s expertise in airport security while adding additional levels of security screening. At the very least, it created a revenue stream for US agencies and travel stakeholders.
In the dream world, this somehow benefits our travel, either as rents are paid to airlines and airports, or fees are used by government agencies.
Josh Newman and Janet Nguyen, two California state senators from Orange County from opposite ends of the aisle, agree that they should be able to pay for VIP fast lanes and still use PreCheck, but somehow CLEAR should be banned.
“It becomes the haves versus the have-nots when those who can afford it jump ahead of the rest.” They even cut off passengers with a boarding pass who have been screened by TSA in front of TSA.”
Janet Nguyen, co-author of this (idiotic) bill
They really don’t like that people who are less cheap than them or who have shown value to an airline can undercut them. They should be the most important civil servants in every room.
Expressways provide efficiency and revenue
By agreeing to pay and be screened, we can keep our laptops in our bags and our shoes and separate from the masses, who for the most part could also fully participate if they invested the time. It’s a nice deal that I’m happy to pay for and helps me spend more time at home before a flight.
As noted, airlines and airports make revenue by allowing companies like CLEAR to operate, and this actually helps free up resources for other TSA lanes.
In recent years CLEAR, a private company has emerged doing just that. CLEAR provides an additional layer of capability where you can effectively pay to move to the front of the TSA line and have your ID verified even more securely than the way TSA does with a standard ID, using retina to checking.
It’s a choice, and for many, it’s worth paying for. I pay for CLEAR. It’s line-jumping on line-jumping. That is, when it works.
Unfortunately the CLEAR airport experience is completely hit or miss these days and I actually had a superb check-in time just going to TSA PreCheck as the CLEAR lanes are often understaffed and full of people who don’t know how to operate the machines properly , thus slowing things down.
I appreciate the choice and added security
Even with some experiences using CLEAR, I appreciate the choice of having options to pay to speed up my journey or add simplicity. I appreciate not having to pull out my wallet to verify my identity.
Maybe it’s just me, but I also feel better about having my retinas matched than believing that every TSA officer is rigorously checking IDs against their bearer. It’s clear from the TSA that they’re happy with that, too.
What’s comedic about this latest stunt is that it really is a CLEAR successful job by these two state senators.
They like other VIP opportunities, but they are clearly not CLEAR. They have no problem with airlines having business class lanes or the TSA having PreCheck lanes.
If they really hate CLEAR so much, they should try to create a competing organization and use their government contacts as a marketing strategy instead of wasting taxpayer dollars on idiotic proposals to allow freedom of choice in travel.
