I wouldn’t disagree with anything in this statement. There should be a national ID that everyone is required to get. And people who can’t afford to pay, should get it for free.
But consider the implications: If there were such an ID, it could be keyed to correspond to a file in a database in Washington (or wherever) containing every single thing government at any level knows about you – current address, citizenship status, scanned copies of your birth certificate, marriage license(s), driver’s license and all driving-related records, school records, arrest records, tax returns, voting registration, draft registration, American passport if applicable, foreign passport if applicable, naturalization papers or green card if applicable, lawsuits in which you have been plaintiff or defendant, the records of any interaction with government you ever have had – all in one convenient click-accessible package. In the Information Age, it would not be at all difficult for an empowered agency to assemble some such thing.
I’m not saying I’m for that or agin’ it, I’m just saying it is a possible and logical next step from any national ID system.
One advantage is that voter registration would be unnecessary, or would be universal – your ID could serve as your registration, it already contains all information relevant to whether and where you can vote.
Yes, I agree. It would be great. One log in for everything.
Gotta say, the whole national id thing has long given me a case of the creeping Orwells. Strictly a visceral response, to be sure. Couple things would definitely help:
A national id is a voter registration by definition. When used, that voter cannot vote again, but that voter may vote in any legal polling place in any location. But everyone who possesses such a card is a registered voter.
Now, I don’t hold with cops stopping people for being brown and then inquiring as to their legal status. But if the card is at the federal level, then the card is federal level proof, and a state cop is obliged to regard it as such. Return the card, “Have a nice day”, tip your hat and vamoose!
The card will have a defined set of information encoded, and no information will be encoded without the knowledge of the subject. However, information can be included at the discretion of the subject: blood type, donor status, things like that.
Carrying the card will not be mandatory, being unidentified will not be criminalized, but the card will be required for any official interaction with the government.
I could support that. Still creep me out, but I could still support it.
They’d scan the card and the data in all the government databases would be available. Why would there be anything on the card other than your name, ID number and photo?
If all that data is available that easily, what difference does it make if the info is stored on the card?
The trouble is that the government fearing members of the right would rally with the ACLU to prevent a universal government ID.
I’d be all for a universal ID, but so much of America is stupid and or afraid that it’s not politically feasible.
The difference is that if the info is stored in the magnetic strip on the card, an identity thief who stole the card could access it with the right equipment. If the card merely corresponds to a database-file, only public officials (and talented hackers) could use it to access the information.
Granting, I’m assuming that such a database does not already exist . . .
Oh, wow, just imagine if Obama recommended that tomorrow morning. By mid afternoon, you step outside, sounds like popcorn cooking, what with all the tighty righty heads exploding. They would go into full spastic shit-fit mode.
Now, if President Romney had suggested it, they would pitch it the same way they always do, with fear and anger. National ID makes it easier to catch illegal immigrants and deport them, it makes welfare fraud harder for those Cadillac Queens, it will help prevent voter fraud especially by illegal aliens (who always vote Democrat!). Since felons and welfare bums will have a* provisional* ID, that means anyone who has the first class ID is a boney fido American, so the ID can double as a concealed carry license. Yeah, they could sell that. Same way they sell everything they sell.
And, yes, most of the information in question is publicly accessible, but only with a lot of work, not conveniently gathered and organized in one location. (I assume; see post #3969.)
Well, not necessarily, but the card would show or could be used to determine their status as felons or welfare recipients.
They should’ve driven a stake through Jim Crow’s heart and stuffed his mouth with garlic before they buried him upside down at the crossroads.
I suspect that this sort of “proof of citizenship” requirement might backfire on the Republicans. There are a few groups of people that are more likely to have proof of citizenship than most. Those who travel internationally (passports), recently naturalized immigrants, and those on public assistance (with the slew of Republican anti-illegal immigrant “citizenship requirements” most folks on public assistance have ready proof of citizenship). None of these are traditionally part of the republican base.
How many illegal aliens do they really think are voting?
That assumes that the new qualifications are actually enforced equally on all voters.
One assumes that those who were already registered to vote will be grandfathered in.
As with the original grandfather clause the goal is to freeze the current voting rolls as they are now in order to fight the coming demographic shift.
I wasn’t aware the ACLU had weighed in on the national-ID issue, nor of any reason they’d oppose it.
But yeah, let the survivalist nuts and fundamentalists resist. They’d probably vote Republican anyway.
A national ID that acted as a driver’s license, organ donor card, gun license, voter ID. Sounds good to me. Lets set up shop and pass them out.