New National ID System

cawacko

Well-known member
For the Civil Libertarian folks does this cross the line from security to gov't overreach?



Policy Analysis No. 831


The New National ID Systems


Americans have long rejected a national ID, but many U.S. state governments are quietly developing national ID systems in a variety of forms. One is the uniform identity card system envisioned by the REAL ID Act. That federal law, passed in 2005, seeks to subject state drivers’ licensing to federal data collection and information-sharing standards that will facilitate identification and tracking.

State promotion of the E-Verify background check system, which is intended to control the employment of illegal immigrants, is another path to a national ID. Successful implementation of E-Verify will require a national ID, and some states are already sharing driver data with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security so that it can be used in federally administered worker background checks.

Less well known are several other programs poised to produce the same results as a national ID without the requirement of an identity card or other formalities.

These developments position states and the federal government to make once-ordinary behavior like driving on city streets and strolling the sidewalks of American towns into recordkeeping events for an overly attentive state. They compose what might be called the new national ID.

This paper summarizes the stances of each of the 50 states on various ID systems, including REAL ID, E-Verify, facial recognition, and license-plate scanning.

Together, those technologies—along with other initiatives orchestrated at the federal level—are the leading edge of a national identification and tracking infrastructure.

Officials and citizens in every American state should review their states’ identification, data collection, and data retention policies. The privacy and liberty of all Americans are threatened by such increasingly widespread surveillance systems.

Continue to full version


https://www.cato.org/publications/p...al&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer
 
Last edited:
I can see that it makes sense to have a tamperproof national ID to identify legal citizens and residents, from a security standpoint. But there is always a chance of government abuse of such a system.
 
I think it is time for all of us to re-evaluate our “expectations of privacy.”

We have almost none outside of the time we spend in our own homes…and that is not necessarily a bad or troubling thing.

If one lives in an urban area…chances are there are frequent encounters with CCTV.

Yeah, one can moan and groan about it…but on balance, it is probably more a plus for society than a negative…and SOCIETY is, and should be, more important than any single individual.

People reading this are on the Internet. By being on the Internet, you have already ceded lots of privacy…and that includes those posting under aliases and those using chat encryption and the like.

If you drive your car on a major thoroughfare…you are being photographed. Walk a street in the Big Apple, Chicago, or LA…and you are being photographed. Apply for a loan or for a credit line…rent something…use an ATM…and you’ve probably lost more of your "privacy" than you suppose.

Some of us do not especially care (I am one of those people); some fight it as though it is a life and death matter; and some lament the intrusions, but are willing to live with it.

In light of all this...a National ID is a minor thing...barely worth considering.
 
I just renewed my license a few months ago and I had a choice to go real ID or not. The requirements included multiple forms of identification: passport, original social security card, birth certificate, etc. By 2020 you won't be able to board a plane without one.
 
Either a national ID for citizens, or a law preventing the issuance of state drivers licenses to non citizens. Other countries have international drivers licenses for non citizens.
 
I think it is time for all of us to re-evaluate our “expectations of privacy.”

We have almost none outside of the time we spend in our own homes…and that is not necessarily a bad or troubling thing.

If one lives in an urban area…chances are there are frequent encounters with CCTV.

Yeah, one can moan and groan about it…but on balance, it is probably more a plus for society than a negative…and SOCIETY is, and should be, more important than any single individual.

People reading this are on the Internet. By being on the Internet, you have already ceded lots of privacy…and that includes those posting under aliases and those using chat encryption and the like.

If you drive your car on a major thoroughfare…you are being photographed. Walk a street in the Big Apple, Chicago, or LA…and you are being photographed. Apply for a loan or for a credit line…rent something…use an ATM…and you’ve probably lost more of your "privacy" than you suppose.

Some of us do not especially care (I am one of those people); some fight it as though it is a life and death matter; and some lament the intrusions, but are willing to live with it.

In light of all this...a National ID is a minor thing...barely worth considering.

Your post is practical, pragmatic, logical, and reality-based. That being said, something about the idea of a national ID card bothers me on an instinctive level.
 
Your post is practical, pragmatic, logical, and reality-based. That being said, something about the idea of a national ID card bothers me on an instinctive level.

Ditto. This whole ability to track everything we do and where we are is disconcerting. I understand times change and since it's going to happen I'm glad we have watch dog groups keeping on eye on inevitable overreach.
 
Your post is practical, pragmatic, logical, and reality-based. That being said, something about the idea of a national ID card bothers me on an instinctive level.

and it should bother you. it's not the governments business to have any of that information, but of course like a sheeple you'll look at it as practical, pragmatic, logical, and reality based because you don't know any better.
 
You GOP fucks should be ashamed of yourselves.
This is a direct result of your constant whining about non-existent voter fraud.

Fuckheads
 
I think it is time for all of us to re-evaluate our “expectations of privacy.”

We have almost none outside of the time we spend in our own homes…and that is not necessarily a bad or troubling thing.

If one lives in an urban area…chances are there are frequent encounters with CCTV.

Yeah, one can moan and groan about it…but on balance, it is probably more a plus for society than a negative…and SOCIETY is, and should be, more important than any single individual.

People reading this are on the Internet. By being on the Internet, you have already ceded lots of privacy…and that includes those posting under aliases and those using chat encryption and the like.

If you drive your car on a major thoroughfare…you are being photographed. Walk a street in the Big Apple, Chicago, or LA…and you are being photographed. Apply for a loan or for a credit line…rent something…use an ATM…and you’ve probably lost more of your "privacy" than you suppose.

Some of us do not especially care (I am one of those people); some fight it as though it is a life and death matter; and some lament the intrusions, but are willing to live with it.

In light of all this...a National ID is a minor thing...barely worth considering.
Typical Liberal
Shut the fuck up.

At this point in time, what is required is a pushback against privacy invasions, not quiet approval.
 
Truly you should shut up

We have less “privacy” today than we had yesterday…and tomorrow we will have less than we have today. That trend will continue into the future…and the dynamic is only a significant negative if you choose to make it one.

In any case, it is what is.

Granted, some, like you and that Smart fellow up above, will fight the inevitable…and that is your right. But you will be doing the equivalent of early 20th century people yelling , “Get a horse!” to people driving a car.

At some point you guys will be dragged kicking and screaming into the 19th century...and perhaps even further.



 
We have less “privacy” today than we had yesterday…and tomorrow we will have less than we have today. That trend will continue into the future…and the dynamic is only a significant negative if you choose to make it one.

In any case, it is what is.

Granted, some, like you and that Smart fellow up above, will fight the inevitable…and that is your right. But you will be doing the equivalent of early 20th century people yelling , “Get a horse!” to people driving a car.

At some point you guys will be dragged kicking and screaming into the 19th century...and perhaps even further.




Were you saying similar things when the Patriot Act passed?
 
I think it is time for all of us to re-evaluate our “expectations of privacy.”

We have almost none outside of the time we spend in our own homes…and that is not necessarily a bad or troubling thing.

If one lives in an urban area…chances are there are frequent encounters with CCTV.

Yeah, one can moan and groan about it…but on balance, it is probably more a plus for society than a negative…and SOCIETY is, and should be, more important than any single individual.

People reading this are on the Internet. By being on the Internet, you have already ceded lots of privacy…and that includes those posting under aliases and those using chat encryption and the like.

If you drive your car on a major thoroughfare…you are being photographed. Walk a street in the Big Apple, Chicago, or LA…and you are being photographed. Apply for a loan or for a credit line…rent something…use an ATM…and you’ve probably lost more of your "privacy" than you suppose.

Some of us do not especially care (I am one of those people); some fight it as though it is a life and death matter; and some lament the intrusions, but are willing to live with it.

In light of all this...a National ID is a minor thing...barely worth considering.

Now you think you speak for everyone, you old bastard. By the time it happens, at your age, you'll be maggot food.
 
We have less “privacy” today than we had yesterday…and tomorrow we will have less than we have today. That trend will continue into the future…and the dynamic is only a significant negative if you choose to make it one.

In any case, it is what is.

Granted, some, like you and that Smart fellow up above, will fight the inevitable…and that is your right. But you will be doing the equivalent of early 20th century people yelling , “Get a horse!” to people driving a car.

At some point you guys will be dragged kicking and screaming into the 19th century...and perhaps even further.



I used to wonder why the people allowed the cameras to be installed in their homes in Orwell's book.
Thanks for clearing that up.

By the way, you are incorrect. It is natural for this type of thing to be attempted, it is not natural to accept it, almost gleefully in your case.
 
Were you saying similar things when the Patriot Act passed?

Back then I was saying, "We have less “privacy” today than we had yesterday…and tomorrow we will have less than we have today. That trend will continue into the future…and the dynamic is only a significant negative if you choose to make it one."

That is what I will be saying in the future also.
 
We have less “privacy” today than we had yesterday…and tomorrow we will have less than we have today. That trend will continue into the future…and the dynamic is only a significant negative if you choose to make it one.

In any case, it is what is.

Granted, some, like you and that Smart fellow up above, will fight the inevitable…and that is your right. But you will be doing the equivalent of early 20th century people yelling , “Get a horse!” to people driving a car.

At some point you guys will be dragged kicking and screaming into the 19th century...and perhaps even further.

spoken like a true statist. the oppressive federal government thanks you for your support.
 
Back
Top