How Pay-to-Pass Airport Security Divides Us
Going into the 21st century, the United States entered as the dominant world power, with a booming economy and unquestioned influence. Due to terrorist and economic crises, the nation’s confidence was shaken, replaced with fear and polarization.
One response to this fear was an increase in government power over individuals, the classic tradeoff that Thomas Hobbes championed. Initiatives such as establishing the TSA and the Patriot Act were recognized as necessary sacrifices in order to feel safe. Thus, privacy was threatened, and airline travel became an exercise as enjoyable as going to the DMV. On top of constant airline incompetence, consumers (and more importantly citizens) have to wait in hours-long lines just to move about the country.
Now, I would argue that we need some level of security at our airports. Nobody wants another terrorist attack to occur and, at the very least, the TSA provides a deterrent measure for any attempts. Another aspect of these lines is, much like voting or going to the DMV, waiting in security puts all of us in the same physical space, where we all get the privilege of witnessing government employees underperform their jobs. We would all prefer to not have long lines, but at least people from across the socio-economic and political landscape are in the same room having a common, albeit annoying, experience. We see each other in these spaces, something very uncommon nowadays. Where else do you get the “Back-to-Back World War Champs” and “My Body My Choice” t-shirts in the same place? No matter your wealth every vote counts the same, everyone has to wait for their spot in line… until they don’t.
Throughout the last year, as air travel volumes recovered, wait times for security and the frustration of air travel surged. At SEATAC for example, lines took as long as two hours back in September. Need I reference the nightmares of SouthWest during the holidays? However, there was one change to these wait times from the past. The government opened up free-market capitalism to the security lines, allowing a company called Clear into the fold. Now, going through security across the country requires solicitation from Clear representatives, advertising their biometric identification technology to get you through a separate security line. For just $189 a year, one is able to bypass the plebiscites and have a more seamless security experience. The magic of capitalism as a force for innovation appeared once again. Entrepreneurs were able to create a new identification technology that makes us all safer (putting aside the terrifying risks to privacy that a database of facial features entails) and now they’re cashing in. Airports, stadiums, and events across the country trust their product to reduce the risk of atrocities.
Clear works by using this identification technology to bypass the first part of security and move straight to screening. Rather than fumbling in their wallets and taking out their driver’s licenses these travelers with $189 dollars in their pockets are able to walk right by with one of Clear’s employees. The technology saves time and, in theory, makes this section of the screening process more foolproof.
Unlike check-in, boarding, or the food court, the security line isn’t supposed to be a free market. No more than the DMV, voting, or application of the law. In theory, when it comes to the government, we are all equal, even if we are vastly unequal in the economy. Of course, this isn’t always the case. Plenty of people are able to buy their way out of bureaucratic inconveniences through assistants, lawyers, accountants, and bribes. While these exceptions do happen, we generally reject the principle that this is acceptable. The bar has always been set in this country that all are created and should be treated equally by the government. Inevitably, this has never actually been the case, but it’s an important north star of our country’s character.
Clear is a publicly traded company, having hit the stock market in 2021. Their business, as it should be, is to make money. I’m not suggesting that there were any bad actors in their acquisition of patents or the permissions to use their technology at airport security, but wouldn’t it have been more in line with our nation’s principles if the TSA just purchased the right to use the technology? Why should it be allowed, at a government function, for wealthier individuals to bypass normal security measures? As far as I know, even Jeff Bezos has to either go to a voting booth or fill out a mail-in application, he can’t buy someone to do it for him. Is there any more of a stark reminder of the government failing to function than the rich buying it?
Another crucial part of this story is its economic context: the state of income inequality. So exasperated in the past few decades, I wouldn’t be making an original point in saying that it contributes to our anger and divisiveness. Income inequality begets frustration, and having something like Clear is even more disgusting because of the naked admission that the wealthy’s time is more valuable. Money should buy a bigger house or a faster car, not a spot at the front of a government-managed line. Maybe the wealthy’s time is more valuable in the eyes of the economy, but it never should be in the eyes of the government.
I’m not blaming individuals for buying a Clear pass. Given that it’s relatively inexpensive, especially for air travelers spending hundreds on tickets, it’s easy to brush it off as a small annoyance. It’s a small problem, but a representative one. There were ways to implement this biometric identification technology in a fair way for everyone. Even the most generous interpretation of Clear’s rise has a slight stench of corruption or ineptitude, a familiar smell. These pay-to-play security lanes for Clear take up space for normal security lines, increasing wait times for everyone. It’s a blatant example, even by an institution that claims equality, that the wealthy’s time is more valuable. Let Clear use its technology at sports stadiums, nightlife venues, and concerts. Keep it out of state-run affairs and let’s all be miserable in security together.
