elCheapoDeluxe

I guess you are. All the airports I have used clear at didn't have elite lines I could use - with the exception being SFO, and I haven't yet noticed them disappear there.

DC-COFlyer

I've been informed by UA Global Services in DEN that the elite lines will not disappear.

Also used Clear for the first time in DEN today (probably my 10th time to use it overall) and I am still flabbergasted by the ID check. Clear has my biometrics and yet I'm stopped at the front of the Clear line and asked for DL and BP. Then, I inserted my card, thumb print cleared, and I head to the stack of bins. But wait, no, they (Clear) want my DL and BP AGAIN!!! They hand it to the TSA doofus who then checks it again.

I am assured by Brill (via the emails referenced before) that this will stop once the photos are put on the new ID cards. Anyone want to place a bet? I bet Clear still checks the BP/Clear w/ photo cards at the head of the line, and then again after the biometrics check by TSA.

The only advantage to Clear is (like this a.m. in DEN) is that it was quicker than going to the Elite line which was backed up. But, if Clear is successful, then it will be the same as the Elite lines at DEN - backed up.

But, watch out for the very helpful Clear employees who escort you to the front of the lines. This a.m. I had to explain to her (and I'm not being critical, just trying to help her be more careful) that she should not stack the bin with my shoes and coat on top of the bin with my laptop.

I am beginning to hate flying...

Spiff

You and your money can be parted in any way you see fit, Citizen.

However, we should not support Clear, aka Extorted Traveller. Instead, we should eliminate all government-mandated ID checks that prevent unnecessary harassment at the checkpoint. Then we should eliminate government participation at airports.

LessO2

People at the UA 1K counter told me there have been many GS and 1Kers who have said they won't sign up for Clear. They also told me that the elite lines will not be going away.

I've been seeing a few more people signing up for Clear as I walk by the kiosk. I think the most I've ever seen at one time was five. Only once have I noticed just staff there with no "customers."

They've been trying feverishly to promote themselves. One Denver station has already run about three or four separate "stories" on Clear on their web site over as many months.

nsx

The government will always be a participant, in that they will always set the rules. Unless you have a magic wand to eliminate courts' ability to hear lawsuits about unfair treatment, something that I doubt very many people would advocate.

Once the government specifies how the screening is to be done, what real difference does it make to travelers what uniform the screeners wear? Deregulation would make a difference, but a regulated service provided privately is very similar to a government provided service. Just look at the US Postal Service.

Spiff

That is why the government should be kicked out of airports and security should be returned to the airlines and the airports.

The government should not be permitted to dictate airport and airline security regulations. They've proven too often that they are incompetent, un-American morons.

nsx

If the elected legislative branch doesn't dictate these rules, the unelected judicial branch will. Is that really what you want? I don't see that as an improvement, and I don't see any way to avoid having courts fill the vacuum.

DevilDog438

(emphasis mine)
This only happens because our elected representatives don't have the stones to do their job - impeach the ASSHATS that legislate from the bench.

Spiff

I really want the airlines, not the government, to choose security procedures. That way, I can choose which airline(s) I want to fly based upon who offers the best security with the least harassment.

The government should not be permitted to interfere with this competition.

nsx

You mean that people should be able to choose an airline that aggressively screens middle eastern males, for example? Or an airline that allows passengers to carry concealed firearms? And the courts would have no say in this? I can't imagine that could ever happen. Can you?

Second, what would the airlines do if they alone were responsible for setting security rules? Wouldn't that make the airlines fully responsible for any shortfalls? The possibilities for civil lawsuits are limitless. How could an airline stay in business with that liability hanging over them?

Spiff

Violations of civil rights would still be illegal.

Sounds fine to me.

Yes, it's about time we had accountability. LLoyds of London will insure almost anything for a price. I'd rather the airlines elected to carry insurance rather than Big Brother doing it.

nsx

I guess this is the financial price of your proposal: higher fares for everyone with the money going to insurers of last resort.

I don't believe in making the airlines fully responsible for preventing terrorist attacks if the government is going to hamstring them with laws and lawsuits. I say that the one making the rules (government) has the reponsibility when those rules let an attacker slip through.

Rigid legal rules end up prohibiting the airlines from using common sense and gut feelings. So while you might be able to fly an airline with lax screening, I wouldn't be able to fly one where airline employees can refuse to fly anyone that looks the slightest bit suspicious to them. Because those employees would be fired for violating travelers
civil rights. Civil rights have a price, and part of the price is increased risk. If government forces airlines to honor civil rights, government is responsible for the increased risk.

Personally, I don't rate the terrorism risk as particularly high. Passengers will now fight terrorists to the death, and everybody knows it. For this reason, loosening up several aspects of security might be a smart move. But I don't see that hanging the responsibility (but not authority to act) on the airlines would help us get there.

flyingbrick

Higher fares, lower taxes since the government is now acting as insurer. Total costs balance out IF you assume "security" (search) costs stay the same. However, since the airlines would actually have incentive to do the job efficiently and expeditiously (so they can sell more tix), total costs would come down. Significantly in my estimation.

JaggedMind

I wonder if Frontier is worried the lines may go. They have announced free Clear registration for their Summit (top elite) members.

gregorygrady

That's honestly one of the best suggestions I've heard so far this year!!! Why is Clear partnering with Hyatt when they could instead partner with SWA and give 1 year free Clear membership to all Companion Pass holders (or better yet A-listers)? I'm sure business travelers on SWA would love something like Clear as it would save them lots of time waiting in security lines that they can't otherwise bypass. If Clear could get in at certain largers SWA operations (LAX/LAS/OAK/PHX/BWI/MDW/SJC/etc), I honestly think they could make some good money off SWA frequent fliers..............................^