FrankRep
04-25-2008, 11:16 AM
National ID Card Schemes - A Quick Recap
The John Birch Society
April 25, 2008
ARTICLE SYNOPSIS:
Real ID Act, SAVE Act, Social Security Identity Theft Prevention Act, North American Border Pass — Just as in the case of civilian disarmament initiatives, the problems these proposed laws purport to solve can be addressed by simply enforcing existing laws.
Follow this link to the original source: "Oppose H.R. 5405 Alertnative Plan for Implementing Real ID Act (http://www.capwiz.com/jbs/issues/alert/?alertid=11265456)"
COMMENTARY:
There are plenty of those in positions of authority in government and in positions of influence in the private sector who want all citizens registered with biometric identifiers in a central database. Make no mistake about the real objective: This is not about security, it is about control. When a smaller group desires to control a larger group, they must have some means to do so. Requiring a central government certified ID card to be able to function day-to-day in our society goes a long way to realizing such a desire.
Nevertheless, with resistance to implementing the Real ID Act now growing at both the state level and street level, those seeking to impose a national ID and related central database on America have had to start work on "plan b." This is a credit to the hard work of those who refuse to accept the phrase "show me your papers" as part of standard operating procedure in our United States.
Embattled though it is, our Constitution still places the power of the purse and "all" federal level lawmaking authority in the hands of our Congress. Therefore, even though they currently hold the trump cards of unconstitutional Presidential Directives and Executive Orders, the pro-surveillance state crowd has had to get its camp followers in Congress to move their national ID card schemes forward. Added now to the North American Border Pass (http://usinfo.state.gov/wh/Archive/2005/May/18-799399.html) being developed under the secretive Security and Prosperity Partnership, we have two new pieces of National ID card legislation to fight: The SAVE Act (http://www.jbs.org/node/6631) introduced by Democrat Heath Schuler (http://shuler.house.gov/) of North Carolina, and the Social Security Identity Theft Prevention Act (http://www.capwiz.com/jbs/issues/alert/?alertid=11265456) introduced by Republican Mark Kirk (http://www.house.gov/kirk/) of Illinois. Unfortunately, this demonstrates that there is bipartisan support for registering all American's with the a central authority.
SAVE act supporters allege that it will improve accuracy in searching social security databases for eligibility of employment. It makes the current Homeland Security e-Verify program (http://www.dhs.gov/ximgtn/programs/gc_1185221678150.shtm) mandatory for all employers. Additionally, it expands coverage from only new hires to all existing employees. Since database errors will trap many honest American citizens in its net, the SAVE act opens the door to quick fix calls to add biometric identifiers to a person's social security records.
If this Real ID Act Plan B route to a defacto national ID card does not pan out, the Social Security Identity Theft Prevention Act looks like Plan C or D. Under the guise of fighting identity thieves preying on the elderly, this act cuts right to the chase and adds photos and fingerprinting (http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-securitycard_12feb12,0,471611.story) to our current social security card system. This is simply the Real ID by another name.
So, how do we know that these various efforts are not possibly about the problems they claim to solve? Let's look at the SAVE Act.
This act seeks to attack the illegal immigration problem by taking away the job incentive vector for illegal immigrants. The reasoning is that fewer people would risk health and money to come to a place where it would be difficult to secure legal, higher paying employment. If border enforcement can't raise the risk, lower the benefit.
It does make sense — just as much sense as it did during passage of the 1986 "one-time" amnesty bill. To get that bill through Congress, the legislation included a mandatory employer initiated verification of eligibility for employment. The most recognized manifestation of this legislation is the Federal I9 form (http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=31b3ab0a43b5d010VgnVCM10000048f3d6a1RCR D&vgnextchannel=db029c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1 RCRD). This form must be filed by employers for all legally hired people in the United States. Every legal employer must obtain from every legal employee two pieces of identification: A government issued photo ID (usually a driver's license) and a tax ID number (usually a personal social security number).
So, why doesn't this system work? Real ID and other national ID card supporters argue that current ID's required are so easy to counterfeit that there is no other choice but to require all Americans to have federally standardized "hard to forge" biometric based ID cards. This is a lie. Like numerous gun ban laws, the problem is not insufficient burdens on honest people, it is enforcing existing laws on dishonest people.
Eighty to ninety percent of all illegal immigrants could be denied employment by simply enforcing the existing I9 system. If the federal government can't make a dent in illegal immigration with an 80-90% effective system, how can we believe claims that a supposedly near 100% effective national ID card is the answer?
Where does this 80-90% effectiveness number come from? Unlike arguments for many bills in Congress it is slightly better than an educated guess.
Most illegal immigrants in the United States have legally issued driver's licenses that states like New York and North Carolina have been handing out like candy for years. But, while this is certainly a significant cheat around the government picture ID obligation of the I9 form, there still remains the tax ID/social security card number component of the requirement.
There are four ways the SS# ultimately trips up illegal immigrants. (As a former employer, I have first hand knowledge of this.)
1) The SS# submitted is not valid.
2) The SS# is valid but does not match the name submitted with it.
3) The SS# is valid and the name matches but the birth date does not square with apparent age of person in driver's license photo (the employer is supposed to check that the worker and photo ID are a reasonable match).
4) The SS# is valid, the name matches and the birthday looks OK, but the Social Security Administration notes that number is also in use by another person working one or several other jobs for over 40 hours a week — often on the other side of the country.
Of course, this analysis requires due diligence both on the part of the employer and the Social Security Administration. And, to be sure, It is predicated on the accuracy of the social security number database. However, though we are admittedly no proponent of the social security number system, have you heard of any credible source in Washington claiming that the social security number database is off up by a greater than 5-10% error rate? An amount far beyond this is what it would take to make the current I9 system totally unworkable for reducing the availability of employment to the vast majority of illegal immigrants in the country.
So, our 80-90% effectiveness estimate comes from two known deficiencies in the system: An error rate in the social security database padded up to 10% and the ability for an estimated 10% of illegal immigrants to navigate (often with the help of employers) past the four trip-ups noted above. (Note the given here: Dishonest employers cheating the current system will eventually figure out how to cheat any future system.)
What national ID proponents are really arguing is that our 80-90 percent effective current system, that stops virtually no illegal immigrants from seeking employment in the United States currently, is somehow going to magically stop most of them if we simply require all people in the US to register their biometric identifiers into a federal government database. Think about the logic. If our federal government, after all these years of management, has not achieved a better than 5-10% error rate in the social security number database, on what grounds should we accept a national ID card as the fix to illegal immigration? Stopping illegal immigrants from gaining employment in the United States is not the result of a deficiency in any existing law or system. It is purely the result of the lack of will on the part of existing authorities to enforce existing laws.
We have illegal immigrants in the United States not because we don't have a national ID card but because people of influence want them here. Like most civilian disarmament laws, the real objective of National ID card efforts has nothing to do with controlling illegal residents of the United States. It has everything to do with controlling legal residents.
Additional useful items:
South Carolina Governor Sanford's letter (http://www.jbs.org/files/RealIDsanfordletter.pdf) to Homeland Security Secretary Chertoff explaining why South Carolina will not meet the Real ID compliance deadline nor request an extension of the deadline.
Secretary Chertoff's reply (http://www.jbs.org/files/RealIDchertoffletter.pdf) to Governor Sanford explaining why he is going to take the governor's categorical refusal to seek a Real ID compliance extension as grounds for granting South Carolina an extension anyway. (Note: This letter is dated the same day as Sanford's three and half page letter, thus indicating that when the Secretary's own butt is on the line HS is quite capable of planning, coordinating and executing on damage control.)
On March 27th increased penalties for employers caught using illegal immigrants went into effect. In 2007, the year of the great amnesty battle and promises to do better, 92 employers and 771 illegal immigrants were reported (http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/bus/stories/022308dnbusemployerfines.3792180.html) to have been nabbed in the federal government's dragnet response to illegal immigration. Without a change in enforcement attitude, the recent hike in penalties will have the same effect as doubling speeding fines when the chance of getting a ticket issued (let alone a conviction) is almost zero.
Open letter (http://www.newswithviews.com/DeWeese/tom105.htm) from our Block the NAU coalition partner Tom Deweese to Roy Beck at Numbers USA detailing why Beck's promotion of the SAVE Act needs to be reversed. (Full disclosure: While Numbers USA scored big points with patriotic Americans during last summer's fight against amnesty, be advised that they approach the illegal immigration issue not as a matter of national sovereignty but more as the export of excess population from a country short on planning for sustainable development. The urban and land use planners (http://numbersusa.com/about/advisors2.html) at Numbers USA see the bigger issue not as immigration control but population control — with emphasis on the word control. It is entirely in keeping with their organizational goals that humans be tracked/controlled with biometric records in a central database.
Since the SPP negotiations (http://www.jbs.org/node/5231) are secret we won't know what is involved with a North American Border Pass until it is likely a fait acompli. Here is a hint (http://usinfo.state.gov/wh/Archive/2005/May/18-799399.html) given out by the US State Department in 2005.
The technically still voluntary National Animal Identification System (NAIS) (http://animalid.aphis.usda.gov/nais/) is not unrelated to national ID card efforts. All systems being developed and deployed in the NAIS initiative are transferable to humans. This system is just as much about assuring our financially desperate government has traceability on financial assets that can reproduce themselves as it is about protecting us from Mad Cow disease or being able to export beef to Japan (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/5100986.stm). Similarly, National ID schemes promoted to protect us from illegal immigration will be used to trace our formerly private financial transactions.
SOURCE:
http://www.jbs.org/node/7874
The John Birch Society
April 25, 2008
ARTICLE SYNOPSIS:
Real ID Act, SAVE Act, Social Security Identity Theft Prevention Act, North American Border Pass — Just as in the case of civilian disarmament initiatives, the problems these proposed laws purport to solve can be addressed by simply enforcing existing laws.
Follow this link to the original source: "Oppose H.R. 5405 Alertnative Plan for Implementing Real ID Act (http://www.capwiz.com/jbs/issues/alert/?alertid=11265456)"
COMMENTARY:
There are plenty of those in positions of authority in government and in positions of influence in the private sector who want all citizens registered with biometric identifiers in a central database. Make no mistake about the real objective: This is not about security, it is about control. When a smaller group desires to control a larger group, they must have some means to do so. Requiring a central government certified ID card to be able to function day-to-day in our society goes a long way to realizing such a desire.
Nevertheless, with resistance to implementing the Real ID Act now growing at both the state level and street level, those seeking to impose a national ID and related central database on America have had to start work on "plan b." This is a credit to the hard work of those who refuse to accept the phrase "show me your papers" as part of standard operating procedure in our United States.
Embattled though it is, our Constitution still places the power of the purse and "all" federal level lawmaking authority in the hands of our Congress. Therefore, even though they currently hold the trump cards of unconstitutional Presidential Directives and Executive Orders, the pro-surveillance state crowd has had to get its camp followers in Congress to move their national ID card schemes forward. Added now to the North American Border Pass (http://usinfo.state.gov/wh/Archive/2005/May/18-799399.html) being developed under the secretive Security and Prosperity Partnership, we have two new pieces of National ID card legislation to fight: The SAVE Act (http://www.jbs.org/node/6631) introduced by Democrat Heath Schuler (http://shuler.house.gov/) of North Carolina, and the Social Security Identity Theft Prevention Act (http://www.capwiz.com/jbs/issues/alert/?alertid=11265456) introduced by Republican Mark Kirk (http://www.house.gov/kirk/) of Illinois. Unfortunately, this demonstrates that there is bipartisan support for registering all American's with the a central authority.
SAVE act supporters allege that it will improve accuracy in searching social security databases for eligibility of employment. It makes the current Homeland Security e-Verify program (http://www.dhs.gov/ximgtn/programs/gc_1185221678150.shtm) mandatory for all employers. Additionally, it expands coverage from only new hires to all existing employees. Since database errors will trap many honest American citizens in its net, the SAVE act opens the door to quick fix calls to add biometric identifiers to a person's social security records.
If this Real ID Act Plan B route to a defacto national ID card does not pan out, the Social Security Identity Theft Prevention Act looks like Plan C or D. Under the guise of fighting identity thieves preying on the elderly, this act cuts right to the chase and adds photos and fingerprinting (http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-securitycard_12feb12,0,471611.story) to our current social security card system. This is simply the Real ID by another name.
So, how do we know that these various efforts are not possibly about the problems they claim to solve? Let's look at the SAVE Act.
This act seeks to attack the illegal immigration problem by taking away the job incentive vector for illegal immigrants. The reasoning is that fewer people would risk health and money to come to a place where it would be difficult to secure legal, higher paying employment. If border enforcement can't raise the risk, lower the benefit.
It does make sense — just as much sense as it did during passage of the 1986 "one-time" amnesty bill. To get that bill through Congress, the legislation included a mandatory employer initiated verification of eligibility for employment. The most recognized manifestation of this legislation is the Federal I9 form (http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=31b3ab0a43b5d010VgnVCM10000048f3d6a1RCR D&vgnextchannel=db029c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1 RCRD). This form must be filed by employers for all legally hired people in the United States. Every legal employer must obtain from every legal employee two pieces of identification: A government issued photo ID (usually a driver's license) and a tax ID number (usually a personal social security number).
So, why doesn't this system work? Real ID and other national ID card supporters argue that current ID's required are so easy to counterfeit that there is no other choice but to require all Americans to have federally standardized "hard to forge" biometric based ID cards. This is a lie. Like numerous gun ban laws, the problem is not insufficient burdens on honest people, it is enforcing existing laws on dishonest people.
Eighty to ninety percent of all illegal immigrants could be denied employment by simply enforcing the existing I9 system. If the federal government can't make a dent in illegal immigration with an 80-90% effective system, how can we believe claims that a supposedly near 100% effective national ID card is the answer?
Where does this 80-90% effectiveness number come from? Unlike arguments for many bills in Congress it is slightly better than an educated guess.
Most illegal immigrants in the United States have legally issued driver's licenses that states like New York and North Carolina have been handing out like candy for years. But, while this is certainly a significant cheat around the government picture ID obligation of the I9 form, there still remains the tax ID/social security card number component of the requirement.
There are four ways the SS# ultimately trips up illegal immigrants. (As a former employer, I have first hand knowledge of this.)
1) The SS# submitted is not valid.
2) The SS# is valid but does not match the name submitted with it.
3) The SS# is valid and the name matches but the birth date does not square with apparent age of person in driver's license photo (the employer is supposed to check that the worker and photo ID are a reasonable match).
4) The SS# is valid, the name matches and the birthday looks OK, but the Social Security Administration notes that number is also in use by another person working one or several other jobs for over 40 hours a week — often on the other side of the country.
Of course, this analysis requires due diligence both on the part of the employer and the Social Security Administration. And, to be sure, It is predicated on the accuracy of the social security number database. However, though we are admittedly no proponent of the social security number system, have you heard of any credible source in Washington claiming that the social security number database is off up by a greater than 5-10% error rate? An amount far beyond this is what it would take to make the current I9 system totally unworkable for reducing the availability of employment to the vast majority of illegal immigrants in the country.
So, our 80-90% effectiveness estimate comes from two known deficiencies in the system: An error rate in the social security database padded up to 10% and the ability for an estimated 10% of illegal immigrants to navigate (often with the help of employers) past the four trip-ups noted above. (Note the given here: Dishonest employers cheating the current system will eventually figure out how to cheat any future system.)
What national ID proponents are really arguing is that our 80-90 percent effective current system, that stops virtually no illegal immigrants from seeking employment in the United States currently, is somehow going to magically stop most of them if we simply require all people in the US to register their biometric identifiers into a federal government database. Think about the logic. If our federal government, after all these years of management, has not achieved a better than 5-10% error rate in the social security number database, on what grounds should we accept a national ID card as the fix to illegal immigration? Stopping illegal immigrants from gaining employment in the United States is not the result of a deficiency in any existing law or system. It is purely the result of the lack of will on the part of existing authorities to enforce existing laws.
We have illegal immigrants in the United States not because we don't have a national ID card but because people of influence want them here. Like most civilian disarmament laws, the real objective of National ID card efforts has nothing to do with controlling illegal residents of the United States. It has everything to do with controlling legal residents.
Additional useful items:
South Carolina Governor Sanford's letter (http://www.jbs.org/files/RealIDsanfordletter.pdf) to Homeland Security Secretary Chertoff explaining why South Carolina will not meet the Real ID compliance deadline nor request an extension of the deadline.
Secretary Chertoff's reply (http://www.jbs.org/files/RealIDchertoffletter.pdf) to Governor Sanford explaining why he is going to take the governor's categorical refusal to seek a Real ID compliance extension as grounds for granting South Carolina an extension anyway. (Note: This letter is dated the same day as Sanford's three and half page letter, thus indicating that when the Secretary's own butt is on the line HS is quite capable of planning, coordinating and executing on damage control.)
On March 27th increased penalties for employers caught using illegal immigrants went into effect. In 2007, the year of the great amnesty battle and promises to do better, 92 employers and 771 illegal immigrants were reported (http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/bus/stories/022308dnbusemployerfines.3792180.html) to have been nabbed in the federal government's dragnet response to illegal immigration. Without a change in enforcement attitude, the recent hike in penalties will have the same effect as doubling speeding fines when the chance of getting a ticket issued (let alone a conviction) is almost zero.
Open letter (http://www.newswithviews.com/DeWeese/tom105.htm) from our Block the NAU coalition partner Tom Deweese to Roy Beck at Numbers USA detailing why Beck's promotion of the SAVE Act needs to be reversed. (Full disclosure: While Numbers USA scored big points with patriotic Americans during last summer's fight against amnesty, be advised that they approach the illegal immigration issue not as a matter of national sovereignty but more as the export of excess population from a country short on planning for sustainable development. The urban and land use planners (http://numbersusa.com/about/advisors2.html) at Numbers USA see the bigger issue not as immigration control but population control — with emphasis on the word control. It is entirely in keeping with their organizational goals that humans be tracked/controlled with biometric records in a central database.
Since the SPP negotiations (http://www.jbs.org/node/5231) are secret we won't know what is involved with a North American Border Pass until it is likely a fait acompli. Here is a hint (http://usinfo.state.gov/wh/Archive/2005/May/18-799399.html) given out by the US State Department in 2005.
The technically still voluntary National Animal Identification System (NAIS) (http://animalid.aphis.usda.gov/nais/) is not unrelated to national ID card efforts. All systems being developed and deployed in the NAIS initiative are transferable to humans. This system is just as much about assuring our financially desperate government has traceability on financial assets that can reproduce themselves as it is about protecting us from Mad Cow disease or being able to export beef to Japan (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/5100986.stm). Similarly, National ID schemes promoted to protect us from illegal immigration will be used to trace our formerly private financial transactions.
SOURCE:
http://www.jbs.org/node/7874