Slashdot Mirror
US Lawmakers Eyeing National ID Card
According to Wired (and no big surprise, considering the practicalities of implementing massive changes in medical finance), US lawmakers "are proposing a national identification card, a 'fraud-proof' Social Security card required for lawful employment in the United States. The proposal comes as the Department of Homeland Security is moving toward nationalizing driver licenses."
I'm not sure why Slashdot is so afraid of this. You don't have a right to be anonymous to your employer. You don't have a right to avoid taxes. You just got the right to healthcare, but do you really want that going to illegal immigrants? We already drive around with standardized (yet customizable non-materially) license plates on our cars. You already need proof of government permission and proof somebody's going to pay if you hit something to drive a car. You aren't supposed to be able to get on a plane anonymously...
Let's not think of the things we'd be able to get away with with a fake id... and start thinking how we can make sure somebody else can't fake their ID for our mutual protection.
The awesome part about this is that it ought to cause the Tea Party types to blow a gasket. On one hand, you have the federal government making ID's that will make it tougher for undocumented aliens to get work, so finally all of those high-flight jobs mowing lawns and manning the grill at fast food restaurants will be safe for Real Americans(tm). On the other hand, you have the federal government making ID's that will allow them to do... Well, whatever wacky-ass conspiricy stuff the federal government supposedly does with ID's -- I'll have to wait for Glenn Beck to tell me exactly why it'll be such a problem, but I'm sure it will be. In reality, however, the big losers in any sort of forgery-proof national ID situation are going to tomorrow's 19 year-olds who won't be able to get into the bar with their "Hawaii driver's license" anymore. So really, this program only hurts the children.
Every year during my review, I just pray the words "slashdot.org" aren't mentioned.
Nice national ID cards for our safety and you know just to be on the safe side we need a DNA database too, to prevent people from misusing this program...and hey we need to start monitoring your internet usage to prevent people from pretending to be you and setting up appoitments or chaning your information.
Yeah its nothing to be worried about, Im sure it will be all OK.
It's good we're finally going to get a proper social security card that is only used for the purpose of social security, and not as a general identification number that's treated as secret yet widely shared. No more will a social security card be used for other purposes.
There's no such thing as fraud proof. Humans are involved in the process and humans are corruptible.
In fact, fraud proof makes it difficult to prove someone stole your identity if they some how manage to fraudulently apply for ID in your name.
I'll be glad when Obama is finally inaugurated!
"The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old......They literally know nothing." - Ben Rhodes
It's the same reason militia groups train in the woods. They like to pretend that they could defend themselves against the United States Armed Forces. It's simply a distraction against the things that really protect freedom, like voting, community organizations, or being an active citizen in the Athenian sense.
The standing army is used for foreign coup d'etats instead of civil wars on home soil. They learned a long time ago that giving you the "choice" of entertainment, fast food joints, cars, and clothes is far more effective distraction from participatory democracy than direct government violence.
In the fantasized bleak future, the government wins because they have a national ID card. In reality, you are already owned by your debt. You either plead fealty to the system in exchange for access to material goods, and live and die by your credit report, or you suffer the consequences.
Unfortunately, being the U.S. Government, they will no doubt pull the same sort of stupidity
Nothing is fraud-proof. Nothing is bullet-proof either. However you can make something bullet-resistant. How resistant is commensurate with the amount of effort you put into it.
People love saying government is stupid and can never do anything right, but that's not true with everything. Currency is one example: there is enough political will and a real-world need to prevent counterfeiting (fraud). Government puts a good deal of effort into preventing counterfeiting, and the penalty is quite harsh and is well-enforced. While not 100% fraud-proof, they have done a pretty good job. I have not had a problem with being given counterfeit money recently, and I don't know of anyone who has.
What, you think this National ID card idea spontaneously appeared when the health care bill was passed? LOL, haven't payed much attention for the last, um, forever, have you?
The Powers That Be are always looking for a reason to push a national ID card. After 9/11 there was a big push for it, and regularly ever since, but it was defeated because even at our most paranoid and batshit crazy we knew better than to let such a thing pass. Just like this proposal will go nowhere as well.
Look, you want to stop Obamacare from resulting in a National ID card? It's easy:
Stop caring that an illegal might receive medical treatment, just like you're going to have to learn to stop caring that a poor person will receive medical treatment. The only way the ID card has gotten any traction is as a way to stop illegals from receiving benefits, i.e. as a result of the same people who are against health care reform.
And if you're confused as to how treating illegal immigrants will fail to bankrupt us, it's the same as with poor people: They already are receiving treatment, but at the ER, not at a regular doctor.
The enemies of Democracy are
As the technology to collect and manage information becomes ever more inexpensive, it becomes more and more of an effort to AVOID having data available to the government in such a way that it can be abused. When things get to the point where the drivers-license level data for every person in the USA can be causally tossed onto a thumb drive and taken to the next meeting, it becomes VERY hard to NOT use that data.
Well intentioned uses of such data abound, and some will be not only well intentioned but actually helpful (it is quite probable, for example, that correct use of a national DNA database WOULD allow many crimes to be solved that are not currently solved, just as fingerprint databases have been so useful.) Abuse of this data (particularly if the correctness of the data is trusted too much) by those in power is the counterpoint, and that is equally real (and equally scary). The problem is, the easier it gets to collect data the harder it is to be SURE it's thrown away if its intended to be thrown away. From some of the stores Slashdot has run about Britain, once they get ahold of your DNA they hang onto it, period. From their point of view, it might be useful in the future and its harmless sitting there in a database if its never used. If the agents of the system and those making the laws could be fully trusted, this might even be true. The problem is neither requirement holds. Law enforcement isn't perfect, and laws aren't either.
The balance of society is between empowering enforcers of the law to catch criminals and limiting the damage they can do when those enforcers go astray. My guess is given technological trends, the balance in the information game is going to have to shift from restriction of available information to stronger punishment for misuse and weaker assumptions about the automatic correctness of any personal info database. It's going to become too easy to collect too much information, and once collected it's very hard to uncollect it. Eventually, things will reach the point where a desire to NOT have your information on record will be an automatic flag, kinda like how the fuzzy areas on Google Maps are an automatic flag of "hey, there might be something interesting there." No idea were all this will lead, but I have a feeling technology will compel us to find out.
One though that might be worth thinking about - if there has to be a national database of all this stuff, have it widely distributed and copied at many locations, so that it's extremely difficult to push a universal change through any mechanism except one that makes records of the change (sort of a subversion database for law enforcement records - no anonymous changes and every change logged, as well as all historical database states being preserved. If records are ever changed erroneously, make it extremely difficult to do this without it being clear WHO did it)
"I object to doing things that computers can do." -- Olin Shivers, lispers.org
...is more government power. Once the national ID is in place it will be expanded. First ID, then driver's license, then credit card, then key card, and so on, and it will not be long before the United States government has a record of everything you buy, every place you enter or leave, every place you can enter, and, eventually, everything you do or say. This is not a slippery slope argument because we are already far down that slippery slope sliding on our asses at bewildering speed to the rocks at the bottom. Picture yourself living in a world where everything you do or say or possibly, not too long hence, even think, is being continuously monitored by the almighty government. This isn't just a conspiracy theory any more. It's a policy. A $500 ticket every time your car drifts a couple of miles an hour over the speed limit, spot checks scanning your (effectively naked) body for weapons or contraband, not just at airports but lots of other places that "need security", the government monitoring your fat intake, your cholesterol level, how well your kidneys function, how much nicotine is in your blood. Don't think so? Socialized medicine is all the excuse needed to directly regulate everything you eat, everything you drink, every product you ingest, rub on, carry.
We live in a country with literally millions of pages of laws, rules, regulations, and requirements that apply to every citizen. Now picture what it will be like when the government is finally able to completely enforce every single tiny, seemingly inconsequential rule, law, regulation, or requirement that's on the books. Tell me how anyone will be able to get through a day without being cited for multiple violations of laws that you can't even know exist because no one can read that much material.
I'm sorry. That's not a free country. That's not America. That's not what our forefathers wanted to leave for their posterity. And it's no place I want to live. So where will we be able to go, those of us who still want freedom or privacy or the right to make decisions for ourselves? Why do any of you even want to live in such a country? Make no mistake. That is where Obama is going to end us up. If he's elected to a second term, you will see all of the above put into place.
And Congress did not "give us" the right to medical care. Rights are intrinsic to each and every person, they cannot be granted and when they are taken away there is tyranny. Rights are negative things, we need them so we can stop other people from doing things to us that we don't like. When you turn a right around and make it a positive thing, like the "right of medical care" then you also put into place a requirement of service from someone else to implement that right. You're "right" then enslaves that person. That's not freedom. And that's a fact.
Rights are an aspect of reality and apply to individuals.
If you lived as an isolated individual, you would have to build shelter, make tools, hunt and gather for food. No other person would be there to stop you. You would be free to preserve your life and well-being; you would be free to take the actions you saw fit to take; you would be free to keep the shelter, tools, and food that you produced. The only thing you would have to worry about would be animals, and the vagaries of nature.
When people choose to live together, they can recognize what it means to live as a human being, and apply that to a social setting. The rights to life, liberty, and property are the recognition of the life of a human individual in society with other human individuals.
People could live in close proximity, and wantonly steal or kill one another, but that's not society. That's living like animals.
Society cannot invent rights, only recognize them; government cannot grant rights, only protect them. Rights exist apart from society and government, and their existence is definite and specific.
If the social mores of a group of people reflect something other than life, liberty, and property -- so much the worse for them. What they're perpetuating has nothing to do with rights. Moreover, what they're perpetuating is something less than a human society.
quiquid id est, timeo puellas et oscula dantes.
Borders and nations are artificial, man-made. They enforce a low-brow, low-IQ "us vs. them"' mentality and thus belong in the dark ages.
Let's see how fast this gets modded down as a troll.
Really? I thought borders were to show where one government's laws end and another's begin. You know, there are governments that will force you to pray five times a day, by killing you and your family if you don't, right? Provided that those governments exist at the will of the people, I'm OK with that. But where does that government no longer have the right to force YOU to pray to Allah five times a day?
I bet it's a border.
There is no "I disagree" mod for a reason. Flamebait, Troll, and Overrated are not substitutes.
The correct term for such invaders is illegal aliens. Please stop referring to them as illegal immigrants, as immigrants enter the country legally. Illegal aliens do not.
The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
Why? Because diseases are communicable. And because keeping people healthy benefits everyone. And because it's the morally correct thing to do.
My former roommate was an ER nurse. At one of her jobs, she was the only nurse who spoke Spanish and, as such, treated a lot of the illegal immigrants that came in. She would complain to no end about how these people would come in with some gaping wound and only after treating that wound would she figure out that six other maladies including symptoms consistent with TB. Until she quit the job, she was taking a TB test a least once a month.
The thing is, when people don't have health care, they'll put off going to the doctor until it's unavoidable. Meanwhile, they're walking petrie dishes that interact with the rest of us and help spread disease. And by the time they do come in, their problems are worse and more expensive to fix than they would have been if they'd come in when they first noticed a problem. Sure, we'll attempt to bill them, but it's an almost futile effort. Unless we're ready to accept a health care system where people are denied emergency care unless they've got insurance, there's no way around this. If health care is universal and free, they'll get treated as soon as possible whenever they have something wrong.
Also, even though these people are likely doing menial work, keeping them healthy means they can continue to do that menial labor and we all benefit from that.
Lastly, some of us want to live in a world that's more compassionate than the selfish world that's typically the result of free-market ideals. If I'm fortunate enough to earn a comfortable living and others are not, I want to do my part to help them enjoy a more comfortable life. Not to the extent communism takes things, since that removes the incentive to work hard and try to improve your life, but defining a minimum standard of life to which everyone is entitled is not a bad thing. And I view access to health care as part of that minimum standard of life that I think everyone should have.
Lemme tell you a little story:
I have an "authentic, long-form birth certificate, signed by the physician who delivered him and bearing an authentic raised seal". It was issued in California when I was born.
You know who won't accept it of proof of my birth? The State of California. Or, for that matter, any of the other 49 states, nor the federal government.
Why? The thing is a forger's wet dream. The blank form was a xerox of a xerox of a xerox (and so on), that was filled out on an IBM Selectric typewriter. There is an indecipherable scrawl in the space for the doctor's signature. Yes there's a seal, but it's really hard to make out after being compressed by a stack of papers in my parent's safety deposit box for decades. And I could order a copy of that seal from thousands of places on the Internet for less than $40.
What will these states take as proof of my birth? A certified abstract of birth, issued by the State of California. Much like the one Obama put out on the Internet. Why? It actually has some anti-counterfeiting technology in it.
You know who doesn't have a birth certificate from a US state? John McCain. He was born in Panama (he's a citizen, since he was born to US parents).
So, can we stop the birther bullshit and get on with trying to govern?
Well said. Fact is, when some one is hurt the first thing EMS responders do is help the person, not check their ID. This card won't change that, or do folks think that we should wait on starting CPR or stopping bleeding until after we find their card and make sure that the government says it's ok to help these people? The law says we help every one, it doesn't say to let them die because they are not supposed to be in this country. With that in mind, the card changes nothing, except make it simpler for folks to keep track of people that may want to complain about having people always looking over their shoulders. Now, change the law so that it says no card and you get no help, then it would make a diff, but until then it is for tracking purposes only. Heck, I'm a white male with roots in the US going way back, and /I/ have a harder time getting health care then the illegal immigrants. This card isn't going to help the US, a country founded on freedom. It will help the folks that think every one needs to be tracked and watched because they may dare to think differently. I can't help but notice that our parents and grandparents lived quite well with out all this extra security and protections. They had planes, bombs, guns, drugs and all that other stuff for a long time and some how we survived. I don't believe that the world has suddenly become so much more of a danger that we need all this crap. Want to live in fear, fine with me. But it's time to wake up and tell folks to stop insisting that every one live in fear. It's the same world you lived in as a child, and your parents lived in all the way back. There have always been risks, there always will be risks. Use that brain a bit and chances are you'll be just fine.
Question reality.
I do provide an answer. I can provide dozens of successful nations working as I described, and working well. You'll find them in Europe and Asia (not China, think Japan or South Korea). It's been proven to my satisfaction that the way you describe things working is false in practice, and that collecting taxes and using that to provide a minimum standard of living and safety net (things such as universal health care and education) for the worst off in society is a better way to run things. Moreover, it's the morally superior way to do things, as it recognizes the humanity and dignity of everyone, not just the wealthy or the lucky.
If you build it, nerds will come. Soylentnews.org