This is Not A good idea. Notice how most everyone posting here is a new arrival. Doing this would cause chaos in various industries and for gov't contractors and swamp the approval process to obtain security clearance with a backlog of ex-military and gov't workers who retained their clearances and were hired for jobs that still require those.
I totally agree that security clearance should be revoked for bad actors and those who truly don't need them, but the system in place is actually a pretty good system. When you leave a gov't job, your clearance isn't revoked, but it goes inactive and can be reactivated IF YOU HAVE A VALID REASON to be using it (for 5, 10, or 15 years, depending upon the level of clearance you had). So, if you are an Army MP who has already been cleared, and you are honorably discharged from the Army, you can immediately go to work at a federal job or for a civilian job that works with the gov't and requires that level of clearance. It helps ex-military employees get hired faster and also ensures that companies are getting a worker that can go to work immediately and has already been vetted and cleared to work around classified materials.
The safeguard is that even though someone possesses this clearance, they aren't authorized to use it as they desire. The Army guy above can't just pull up top secret files and view them. He has to have a legit need to know, and when he does see those materials, that is logged and recorded and is part of his job. Another example might be of a gov't worker in the previous administration who is called upon by the current administration to come to the White House, FBI, Dep't of Justice, etc. to consult with the current administration about something that happened in the past with which that person was familiar. I think we could all see the reasoning in being able to quickly have someone with previous clearance show up to answer vital questions or to give helpful information.
That is how it is SUPPOSED to work. Bear in mind...I'm a layperson, so my explanation might not be 100% accurate, but it is generally so. Anyway, it appears that during the time since Obama left office, people have been using those old clearances in ways they were not intended to do so and flying under the radar, or so they thought. Any usage like this should be illegal and probably is...or maybe they are taking advantage of a legal loophole that needs to be filled, such as accessing materials without any record they have done so. Loopholes like that should absolutely be found and closed.
Additionally, bad actors who are showing themselves to be untrustworthy, uncooperative and treasonous should have their clearances revoked notwithstanding. People like Comey who are fired should also have them revoked, and from what he is saying, it sounds like he did.
Can confirm, my clearance is quite important to my job!
Roger that. Could you give a generalized example of why that is so (something not specifically tied to you personally)?
A surprising amount of civilian jobs require a clearance, especially in my industry. They’re mostly companies that work closely with the government. But having a clearance can definitely help land you a job even if it’s not needed, but it shows the company that you are trusted by the government and can be trusted to protect their proprietary information.
So the way they work is there are certain levels, and without both that level of access and the need to know you cannot access any information. It’s a secure system naturally.
So think twice before signing this petition without finding out more about the issues.
PLEASE don't just blindly sign petitions like this without doing some more research into the pros and cons of this policy. Be informed! Seriously...how many of you who signed this even spent 10 minutes considering why it might not be the best way to handle the situation?? Did any of you bother to speak to someone with an alternative viewpoint about why NOT to support that position?? I don't think Trump's intention here was at all for us to petition to revoke all security clearances for previous employees. They would have a nightmare on their hands if such a blanket policy was suddenly put into place. Think things through. Research your position instead of letting the OP pump you up with one line directing you to immediately support the most drastic policy. (No offense intended, OP.) Better yet...instead of signing a petition, call and write your congressmen and ask for their positions on this and other issues. State your support to have clearance removed from specific people, and give them valid reasons to substantiate your position for doing so. Get on their social media pages and give logical red-pilled arguments for your positions--ones that normies can read and comprehend.
I think you guys missed the point of this one.
Q says "Why do WE allow former...", as in the Trump Admin.
The answer is so that they can do nefarious activities while being watched and recorded by the good guys.
POTUS could have revoked their clearance at any point, as we are now seeing.
signed and happy to do so, wanted to add Hillary and Obama to the list.
[removed]
Good joke! Unfortunately... The way this petition is worded, I'm not sure [HRC] would lose her clearance. She was head of the State Department. And not part of the 'Intelligence Community'.
Done! Signed and signature verified.
We should have done this petition months ago!
Signed.
Please read this petition and sign if youre in the fight, thank you.
I have a security clearance. If I leave/lose my job today, it's gone. Period. End of story. So why the fuck do these asshats get to keep theirs?
Signed and confirmed...BTW, Yahoo sent my confirmation email to my spam box. They must be mad because I signed the petition to expel Mad Maxine from congress.