Anonymous
04/24/2024 08:26
Subject: Re:CA law looking to abolish Clear
Clear wouldn't be banned, just have a separate line. At some airpots (Atlanta and Houston), it's already like this. Not because they were required to, but just it was easier to do it that way when the airport security area was renovated.
As a frequent flyer, Clear is usually slower than regular Pre-check during busy times, especially at IAD. At moderately busy times, Clear is faster than Precheck. At slow times, it's about the same.
As a frequent flyer, Clear is usually slower than regular Pre-check during busy times, especially at IAD. At moderately busy times, Clear is faster than Precheck. At slow times, it's about the same.
Anonymous
04/24/2024 08:23
Subject: CA law looking to abolish Clear
Anonymous wrote:what is a pax?Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Equal access to a government security line- that’s socialism
It’s not about “equal access” because it has nothing to do with banning/abolishing Precheck, which by its very nature isn’t “equal”. Clear is a private company that gets you past even Precheck.
And even this bill doesn’t abolish Clear, it’s asking that they get their own line in order to keep operating, not cutting in front of other pax in the TSA lines. I see no problem here.
I’m a frequent flyer for work and my whole family has Global Entry/Precheck but we’ve never sprung for Clear. I was just somewhere, can’t remember where, in the Precheck line close to the front and then had to wait for a Clear pax, who had priority and got in front of me. Then another. Then another. Then another. Just when I would think it would be me, another person would come up, probably a dozen, at least. I see no problem with a private company having to pay for their own line, considering they make money from it.
I feel pretty certain you can use context clues to figure this out.
Anonymous
04/24/2024 08:22
Subject: CA law looking to abolish Clear
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Equal access to a government security line- that’s socialism
It’s not about “equal access” because it has nothing to do with banning/abolishing Precheck, which by its very nature isn’t “equal”. Clear is a private company that gets you past even Precheck.
And even this bill doesn’t abolish Clear, it’s asking that they get their own line in order to keep operating, not cutting in front of other pax in the TSA lines. I see no problem here.
I’m a frequent flyer for work and my whole family has Global Entry/Precheck but we’ve never sprung for Clear. I was just somewhere, can’t remember where, in the Precheck line close to the front and then had to wait for a Clear pax, who had priority and got in front of me. Then another. Then another. Then another. Just when I would think it would be me, another person would come up, probably a dozen, at least. I see no problem with a private company having to pay for their own line, considering they make money from it.
A line though a government line for people who can pay a third party usher them through is ridiculous.
Why? I genuinely don’t understand why people want to ban it.
+1 Same philosophy as paying a toll for the express lanes.
No, tolls paid for express lanes are collected by the government and used to improve the infrastructure for all. Fees paid to Clear are used to benefit Clear and the airlines, but are relying on federally-funded services (TSA). PreCheck is like an express lane, not Clear.
Anonymous
04/24/2024 08:20
Subject: CA law looking to abolish Clear
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Equal access to a government security line- that’s socialism
It’s not about “equal access” because it has nothing to do with banning/abolishing Precheck, which by its very nature isn’t “equal”. Clear is a private company that gets you past even Precheck.
And even this bill doesn’t abolish Clear, it’s asking that they get their own line in order to keep operating, not cutting in front of other pax in the TSA lines. I see no problem here.
I’m a frequent flyer for work and my whole family has Global Entry/Precheck but we’ve never sprung for Clear. I was just somewhere, can’t remember where, in the Precheck line close to the front and then had to wait for a Clear pax, who had priority and got in front of me. Then another. Then another. Then another. Just when I would think it would be me, another person would come up, probably a dozen, at least. I see no problem with a private company having to pay for their own line, considering they make money from it.
I didn't read the bill because I don't care enough but if it does this I'm 100% for it. I have Clear but it's really not always beneficial.
It’s effectively banning it because there is no room for their own line.
Well, too bad, so sad.
Anonymous
04/24/2024 07:35
Subject: CA law looking to abolish Clear
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Equal access to a government security line- that’s socialism
It’s not about “equal access” because it has nothing to do with banning/abolishing Precheck, which by its very nature isn’t “equal”. Clear is a private company that gets you past even Precheck.
And even this bill doesn’t abolish Clear, it’s asking that they get their own line in order to keep operating, not cutting in front of other pax in the TSA lines. I see no problem here.
I’m a frequent flyer for work and my whole family has Global Entry/Precheck but we’ve never sprung for Clear. I was just somewhere, can’t remember where, in the Precheck line close to the front and then had to wait for a Clear pax, who had priority and got in front of me. Then another. Then another. Then another. Just when I would think it would be me, another person would come up, probably a dozen, at least. I see no problem with a private company having to pay for their own line, considering they make money from it.
A line though a government line for people who can pay a third party usher them through is ridiculous.
Why? I genuinely don’t understand why people want to ban it.
Because it offends basic elementary school rules- nobody likes a line cutter.
+1 if the clear people just waited in line with the rest of pre-check I wouldn't care but I hate to get to the front of pre-check just to have these people cut in front. Get your own line or eliminate it.
Anonymous
04/24/2024 07:31
Subject: CA law looking to abolish Clear
I have clear, it’s mostly useless but actually at DCA it can be nice.
Anonymous
04/24/2024 07:25
Subject: CA law looking to abolish Clear
what is a pax?Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Equal access to a government security line- that’s socialism
It’s not about “equal access” because it has nothing to do with banning/abolishing Precheck, which by its very nature isn’t “equal”. Clear is a private company that gets you past even Precheck.
And even this bill doesn’t abolish Clear, it’s asking that they get their own line in order to keep operating, not cutting in front of other pax in the TSA lines. I see no problem here.
I’m a frequent flyer for work and my whole family has Global Entry/Precheck but we’ve never sprung for Clear. I was just somewhere, can’t remember where, in the Precheck line close to the front and then had to wait for a Clear pax, who had priority and got in front of me. Then another. Then another. Then another. Just when I would think it would be me, another person would come up, probably a dozen, at least. I see no problem with a private company having to pay for their own line, considering they make money from it.
Anonymous
04/24/2024 02:02
Subject: CA law looking to abolish Clear
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Equal access to a government security line- that’s socialism
It’s not about “equal access” because it has nothing to do with banning/abolishing Precheck, which by its very nature isn’t “equal”. Clear is a private company that gets you past even Precheck.
And even this bill doesn’t abolish Clear, it’s asking that they get their own line in order to keep operating, not cutting in front of other pax in the TSA lines. I see no problem here.
I’m a frequent flyer for work and my whole family has Global Entry/Precheck but we’ve never sprung for Clear. I was just somewhere, can’t remember where, in the Precheck line close to the front and then had to wait for a Clear pax, who had priority and got in front of me. Then another. Then another. Then another. Just when I would think it would be me, another person would come up, probably a dozen, at least. I see no problem with a private company having to pay for their own line, considering they make money from it.
A line though a government line for people who can pay a third party usher them through is ridiculous.
Why? I genuinely don’t understand why people want to ban it.
+1 Same philosophy as paying a toll for the express lanes.
Because of the way Clear people are literally escorted to the front of the line, it offends a sense of fairness. If it were a totally separate area it wouldn't be as obvious and people wouldn't react so negatively.
How is that any different than a toll road? I mean they are paying for it? 🤷♀️
I guess I’m somewhat biased in that the only person I’ve ever heard complain about the existence of Clear in real life is an absolute unhinged lunatic. But seriously, I can’t figure out why people want to ban a reasonable paid service.
Anonymous
04/24/2024 00:46
Subject: CA law looking to abolish Clear
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Equal access to a government security line- that’s socialism
It’s not about “equal access” because it has nothing to do with banning/abolishing Precheck, which by its very nature isn’t “equal”. Clear is a private company that gets you past even Precheck.
And even this bill doesn’t abolish Clear, it’s asking that they get their own line in order to keep operating, not cutting in front of other pax in the TSA lines. I see no problem here.
I’m a frequent flyer for work and my whole family has Global Entry/Precheck but we’ve never sprung for Clear. I was just somewhere, can’t remember where, in the Precheck line close to the front and then had to wait for a Clear pax, who had priority and got in front of me. Then another. Then another. Then another. Just when I would think it would be me, another person would come up, probably a dozen, at least. I see no problem with a private company having to pay for their own line, considering they make money from it.
A line though a government line for people who can pay a third party usher them through is ridiculous.
Why? I genuinely don’t understand why people want to ban it.
+1 Same philosophy as paying a toll for the express lanes.
Because of the way Clear people are literally escorted to the front of the line, it offends a sense of fairness. If it were a totally separate area it wouldn't be as obvious and people wouldn't react so negatively.
Anonymous
04/24/2024 00:38
Subject: CA law looking to abolish Clear
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Equal access to a government security line- that’s socialism
It’s not about “equal access” because it has nothing to do with banning/abolishing Precheck, which by its very nature isn’t “equal”. Clear is a private company that gets you past even Precheck.
And even this bill doesn’t abolish Clear, it’s asking that they get their own line in order to keep operating, not cutting in front of other pax in the TSA lines. I see no problem here.
I’m a frequent flyer for work and my whole family has Global Entry/Precheck but we’ve never sprung for Clear. I was just somewhere, can’t remember where, in the Precheck line close to the front and then had to wait for a Clear pax, who had priority and got in front of me. Then another. Then another. Then another. Just when I would think it would be me, another person would come up, probably a dozen, at least. I see no problem with a private company having to pay for their own line, considering they make money from it.
A line though a government line for people who can pay a third party usher them through is ridiculous.
Why? I genuinely don’t understand why people want to ban it.
+1 Same philosophy as paying a toll for the express lanes.
Anonymous
04/24/2024 00:26
Subject: CA law looking to abolish Clear
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Equal access to a government security line- that’s socialism
It’s not about “equal access” because it has nothing to do with banning/abolishing Precheck, which by its very nature isn’t “equal”. Clear is a private company that gets you past even Precheck.
And even this bill doesn’t abolish Clear, it’s asking that they get their own line in order to keep operating, not cutting in front of other pax in the TSA lines. I see no problem here.
I’m a frequent flyer for work and my whole family has Global Entry/Precheck but we’ve never sprung for Clear. I was just somewhere, can’t remember where, in the Precheck line close to the front and then had to wait for a Clear pax, who had priority and got in front of me. Then another. Then another. Then another. Just when I would think it would be me, another person would come up, probably a dozen, at least. I see no problem with a private company having to pay for their own line, considering they make money from it.
A line though a government line for people who can pay a third party usher them through is ridiculous.
Why? I genuinely don’t understand why people want to ban it.
Because it offends basic elementary school rules- nobody likes a line cutter.
Anonymous
04/24/2024 00:03
Subject: CA law looking to abolish Clear
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Equal access to a government security line- that’s socialism
It’s not about “equal access” because it has nothing to do with banning/abolishing Precheck, which by its very nature isn’t “equal”. Clear is a private company that gets you past even Precheck.
And even this bill doesn’t abolish Clear, it’s asking that they get their own line in order to keep operating, not cutting in front of other pax in the TSA lines. I see no problem here.
I’m a frequent flyer for work and my whole family has Global Entry/Precheck but we’ve never sprung for Clear. I was just somewhere, can’t remember where, in the Precheck line close to the front and then had to wait for a Clear pax, who had priority and got in front of me. Then another. Then another. Then another. Just when I would think it would be me, another person would come up, probably a dozen, at least. I see no problem with a private company having to pay for their own line, considering they make money from it.
A line though a government line for people who can pay a third party usher them through is ridiculous.
Why? I genuinely don’t understand why people want to ban it.
Anonymous
04/24/2024 00:02
Subject: CA law looking to abolish Clear
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Equal access to a government security line- that’s socialism
It’s not about “equal access” because it has nothing to do with banning/abolishing Precheck, which by its very nature isn’t “equal”. Clear is a private company that gets you past even Precheck.
And even this bill doesn’t abolish Clear, it’s asking that they get their own line in order to keep operating, not cutting in front of other pax in the TSA lines. I see no problem here.
I’m a frequent flyer for work and my whole family has Global Entry/Precheck but we’ve never sprung for Clear. I was just somewhere, can’t remember where, in the Precheck line close to the front and then had to wait for a Clear pax, who had priority and got in front of me. Then another. Then another. Then another. Just when I would think it would be me, another person would come up, probably a dozen, at least. I see no problem with a private company having to pay for their own line, considering they make money from it.
I didn't read the bill because I don't care enough but if it does this I'm 100% for it. I have Clear but it's really not always beneficial.
It’s effectively banning it because there is no room for their own line.
Anonymous
04/23/2024 22:43
Subject: CA law looking to abolish Clear
Anonymous wrote:I'm for it. Not sure why they are allowed to bump TSA Pre passengers who have paid TSA to be pre-cleared.
It's because of the weird dynamics of airport spaces, where everything up to the TSA ID checker is airport property and responsibility, and then the checkpoint itself is Federal/TSA "territory". TSA doesn't actually control the way the people get to them.
So the airports have this perverse incentive because Clear pays them a portion of the Clear fee to get the real estate at the airport for their machines and staff, and for the "cut the line" access. That's why it's not at every airport or terminal. Delta and United are major investors/partners of Clear, so it's in every terminal that they control/manage, if they have that authority from the airport agreement. But American has blocked Clear at its terminals in some airports.
So in a way it's an outgrowth of the balkanized levels of government in the US, and how each level sometimes has different priorities.
Anonymous
04/23/2024 22:18
Subject: CA law looking to abolish Clear
Anonymous wrote:I’ve always thought it was so ridiculous. A private company you can pay in order to get preferential treatment from a government agency? That’s so un American. I can’t believe it’s allowed and so I refuse to pay for it. TSA precheck makes sense and I do have that.
Completely agree. It’s such a weird concept in a heavily regulated space.