Slate Says CLEAR Is Awful. Are They Right?

by SharonKurheg

Clear Secure, Inc., often just known as CLEAR, is an American technology company that operates biometric travel document verification systems at major United States airports and stadiums. It was established in 2010, received certification under the SAFETY Act (Support Anti-Terrorism by Fostering Effective Technologies Act of 2002) by the United States Department of Homeland Security in June of 2012, and began its introduction in America’s airports soon thereafter.

With CLEAR membership, passengers have their own dedicated queue for the first step of the TSA security line – up to when the TSA officer checks one’s I.D. (you may not need to show your boarding pass anymore – here’s why). Once cleared by CLEAR, passengers are then funneled into the regular electronic/”X-ray” screening lines for either TSA PreCheck (if they have PreCheck membership), or the “regular” line (if they don’t).

CLEAR charges its customers $189 per year for this expedited service, however, the price can be lowered (or even free) if the user is a member of Delta SkyMiles®, United MileagePlus®, or holds various flavors of American Express credit cards.

CLEAR is essentially a “skip the line” pass, ahead of one’s fellow travelers who don’t have CLEAR, whether or not they have TSA PreCheck. And in a December 20th write-up, Slate, an online magazine that covers current affairs, politics, and culture in the U.S., devoted a post to how awful CLEAR was.

You can read the article here.

The author, David Zipper, explained that CLEAR’s entire hustle is, “Pay us money and give us your biometric data, and in return you can jump in front of other people to access an essential federal service.”

Zipper also explained how airports benefit from CLEAR offering access in their respective facilities:

According to an investigation by OneZero, airports receive 10 to 12 percent of the revenue from CLEAR members who sign up within airport property. An individual CLEAR membership costs $189 a year, which is 12 times the price of TSA Pre (though some credit cards and airlines offer CLEAR discounts). According to the OneZero report, airports continue receiving a cut of CLEAR’s membership fee for as long as the person remains subscribed. The income can be substantial; OneZero found that Clear Secure paid $3 million to Los Angeles International Airport in 2019.

Zipper acknowledged this isn’t the first time a government entity has, “brought the profit motive into a part of public life where it does not belong.” He used bail bonds and TurboTax as examples. He also suggested that, regardless of the annoyance of passengers who don’t have CLEAR, who watch CLEAR members get through the TSA queues faster than, and legally cut ahead of them, CLEAR will continue because it makes more profits for the government entities involved.

He ended his piece with, “Skewed incentives like these are predictable when a profit-seeking company acts as a gatekeeper for a public service. It couldn’t be clearer.

Zipper obviously thinks that CLEAR makes the playing field unfair for anyone who flies. Granted he acknowledged this isn’t the first time something like this has happened; not even to a public entity.

But if you think about it, “paying for better service” happens ALL the time.

For U.S. government agencies:

  • Want to get your passport faster? Pay for expedited service.
  • Want to get a Global Entry interview faster? Pay to travel to a place that’s doing interviews in the nearer future.
  • Want the Post Office to get something to its destination faster? Pay for overnight service.
  • Want your forms from the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services to be processed faster? Fill out form I-907 and pay for it.

For State and County government agencies:

In other words, it doesn’t matter if you’re paying to skip to the head of an actual line or a virtual one. It doesn’t matter if you’re paying the government entity directly, or paying a private entity for the access. Either way, it’s been going on, virtually everywhere, for a long, long time.

Is it “fair” to be able to pay and get a better position in a queue? Frankly, it’s a very Your Mileage May Vary situation. Chances are those who can and do pay for such position will probably say yes. Those who can’t and don’t (and those like David Zipper, who think about those outside of their own, small circle), are more likely to say no.

It’s like asking if it’s “fair” that some people can buy first class plane tickets from L.A. to Melbourne on Qantas, or Solid Gold OVO x Air Jordans, or multi-million dollar houses, while others are living paycheck to paycheck, or are having to accept handouts for food, clothing and shelter. Unfortunately, for better or for worse, our country is one of varying degrees of “haves” and “have nots,” and that extends to people having CLEAR membership, or standing in a longer queue.

Is it “fair?” Whether you say it is or isn’t, it’s still just an opinion, not fact. But we can agree that “it is what it is.” Profit-seeking entities (including the Federal Government) acting as gatekeepers for public services are willing to increase profits by offering expedited services, even at the expense of those who can’t or won’t pay for them. People with money to spare are willing and able to pay for said services in exchange for saving time, also at the expense of others. There’s nothing to disincentivize either, and “fairness” is secondary.

Want to comment on this post? Great! Read this first to help ensure it gets approved.

Want to sponsor a post, write something for Your Mileage May Vary, or put ads on our site? Click here for more info.

Like this post? Please share it! We have plenty more just like it and would love it if you decided to hang around and sign up to get emailed notifications of when we post.

Whether you’ve read our articles before or this is the first time you’re stopping by, we’re really glad you’re here and hope you come back to visit again!

This post first appeared on Your Mileage May Vary



Steve December 27, 2022 - 8:53 am

I read his article as him just being mad that he doesn’t have it and the other person got to go ahead of him so in his mind no one else should have it. Isn’t it his fault that he has no tapped some credit card or frequent flyer program to add clear it wasn’t that hard to get and he could have signed up for it right at the airport heck I signed up for it when I was sitting in a sky clubs before the pandemic. There’s always going to be 2 lines for people when it comes to traveling but I dont see them as rich/poor, advantage/disadvantage but more travel savvy and those who are not for whatever reason.

Alex Reedin April 23, 2023 - 10:54 am

I agree with the Slate article. If the federal government thinks there is a public benefit to a faster option with a higher cost like all the other programs you mentioned, they should establish it and administer it in a clean way themselves, without money going to airlines or airports from it. TSA Pre-check is a decent publicly run program. A higher tier on that model I would be perfectly fine with.

The CLEAR model – with money from subscriptions going to airlines and airports – causes a clear conflict of interest. If the TSA lines are longer at our airport, more people will sign up for CLEAR and give us money! It decreases the incentive for airlines and airports to advocate for and clear the way for TSA lines to be shorter.

Also, ain’t no one need CLEAR salespeople hassling folks in security lines. That’s just predatory. The TSA Pre Check line and sign there is a clear model of how to do it instead.


Leave a Comment