I have certainly wondered about this. I never had anything as lofty as a government security clearance, but much of my adult life was spent in LE. When I retired, I turned in everything and no longer have any access whatsoever to internal computer systems, networks, anything internal,confidential, investigations, NCIC, criminal histories, etc., etc.. Makes no sense to me that these big shots keep security clearances after leaving Government service. Whether they were fired, resigned or retired should make no difference IMHO. Now this NBC reporter says Trump is trying to damage Clapper and Brennan, by taking away, what he describes as a "valuable commodity", their security clearance. Now what are they selling, feeding to news outlets, the DNC, or any other entity, that requires a security clearance to obtain??? Concerning to say the least.....

I always thought they kept it as a deterrent to giving out secrets to who ever. With the clearances they are subject to laws that governed them while in office. With “stricter” penalties if they divulge any secrets. Pretty much a bunch of hoey. It’s really so they will be paid top dollar to speak to corporate merica...
I had a secret clearance in the military I wonder if I still do?

quote:

Originally posted by rock185:
I have certainly wondered about this. I never had anything as lofty as a government security clearance, but much of my adult life was spent in LE. When I retired, I turned in everything and no longer have any access whatsoever to internal computer systems, networks, anything internal,confidential, investigations, NCIC, criminal histories, etc., etc.. Makes no sense to me that these big shots keep security clearances after leaving Government service. Whether they were fired, resigned or retired should make no difference IMHO. Now this NBC reporter says Trump is trying to damage Clapper and Brennan, by taking away, what he describes as a "valuable commodity", their security clearance. Now what are they selling, feeding to news outlets, the DNC, or any other entity, that requires a security clearance to obtain??? Concerning to say the least.....

A security clearance isn't "lofty," but it is something that one takes with, when leaving the job. It's not the same as taking agency equipment, tools, uniforms, or badges. The security clearance doesn't belong to the agency; it belongs to the person cleared. It's an assessment of that person, and is valid for a given time period.

A security clearance has a lot of value; if one seeks employment with a firm that requires a clearance, having a clearance means the difference between getting the job or not. A TS clearance, typically up to 100,000 in cost to get, means that an applicant without a clearance arrives at the interview table with a six figure liability. A TS clearance also takes about a year to get, and higher level, compartmentalized clearances are more time consuming, expensive, and valuable.

Clearances range from minimum-risk public trust all the way up to some higher level compartmentalized clearances, with the most common two being Secret, and Top Secret. TS is required by most contracting agencies these days, and having a TS or greater is a major asset in securing employment. The contracting machine is large and active and it's where many who separate from the military and intelligence wind up.

If someone has not violated the terms of their security clearance, there is no reason to rescind the clearance, particularly as that's not how it works. If you get a clearance that's valid for five years and you separate from the position in two, you have an active clearance for three more years.

Having a clearance doesn't mean one is getting, or can get classified information. That information is always available on a need to know basis, and then restricted according to the level of clearance. Further, many classified programs and information require being read into the program or data; one can't simply access it because one has a clearance. The clearance is nothing more than a statement that one has undergone a particular level of vetting and investigation, and has been approved by the clearing house, particular to classified information for a particular department or agency.

Additionally, a clearance doesn't grant access across the table. A DoD Secret clearance doesn't simply transfer to Dept of State, for example. If one held a TS clearance at DoD and applied for a contract position with DynCorp on a DoS contract, It's not a difficult process to get TS clearance under the DoS...but the dept of defense clearance doesn't grant the access. A new, DoS clearance would be required. The DoD active clearance simply makes it far less cumbersome and expensive, and is your stamp of approval. Again, the agency doesn't own the clearance: the agency isn't the one that's been cleared. You have. You've gone under the microscope, and the clearance follows you. It has great value when seeking other employment, whether full time, contract, or other, including consulting work, advisory work, and other duties.

It is not normal to cancel a clearance when someone leaves a job, and if done across the board, would make the very long process much longer. There is always a backlog on clearances. If people had to start from scratch, the system would become so impossibly bogged down as to bring a great deal of the military, intelligence, dept of state, and other functions to a near stand-still.

A clearance has nothing to do with public speaking, nor does it have impact on getting speaking engagements. It doesn't make one a more valuable speaker. Nobody uses a clearance for that, nor would they be able to use it for that.

sns3, Thank you for the detailed explanation. I now have a better understanding.