On January 27, Cecil the Omniscient wrote about Social Security Cards being used as de facto national identification cards and neglected to mention that the I-9 certification required since 1985 of every employee specifies a Social Security card as one of the kinds of personal identification that may be used to establish the right to hold a job in the U.S. Passports and certain other kinds of ID can establish identity by themselves, but drivers’ licenses and other state-issued IDs must be backed up by other ID. Social Security cards are listed as a satisfactory ID. So in this respect, at least, SS cards are de jure as well as de facto.
It could be argued that the act that established this formally changed the U.S. into a “police state,” as there was no prior requirement to carry ID – heck, they couldn’t even require you to be able to read and write. Now there are governmental requirements that you show ID – but cleverly they got employers to administer it rather than the police, the way they do it in Europe. So perhaps it’s more accurate to say “employer state”?
Cecil feared feds mentioning national ID cards because “the right wing will freak”. Actually, the ACLU (somewhat left of center, wouldn’t you agree?) pounced on this idea, warning us all of "a slippery slope of surveillance and monitoring ":
The people in favor of a national ID card are concerned about identifying terrorists and criminals and rather than paranoid about conspiratorial civil servants administering Big Brother Hal 9000 databases in a smoke-filled room with shadowy Freemasons and Trilateral Commission members.
I am not so interested in why the card can or cannot be used as identification, but I am curious as to why such a flimsy piece of paper has the completely pointless and self-defeating instruction “Do not laminate this card”. Does the card become useless when laminated? And if so, how? And if such an important document is meant to not be protected in this manner, why is it made from such flimsy paper (still)? Isn’t it possible to make the cards out of longer-lived plastic by now (such as many or most states do with their identification/license cards)? Even my city’s bus line makes its transfers (which expire in about three hours) now out of a paper that will outlast the SS card by well over a tenfold. What is the deal with the non-lamination instruction on the flimsy piece of paper that barely outlasts a grocery store receipt?
My orginial SS card, which I got circa 1972, has been at the bottom of a lake since around 1979. Is there a reason I need a new one? I’ve just been telling everyone the number for the last 24 years.
I don’t think Cecil Adams’ answer does justice to the situation. Perhaps his stale answer has been buried beneath all the red tape of our bureaucracy - along with our right to privacy. His answer fails to say that the card itself was NOT meant as an ID. And, even if new cards do not mention this, what about those with the old card? Maybe the Feds should issue us all new cards with updated info about our moot right to privacy?
Over the ages, the Feds have royally screwed everything up! I neglected my SSN card because it clearly said it cannot be used as proof of ID! Somehow, the Feds have forgotten their eternal duty to guard our rights, including the right to privacy under the Privacy Act of 1974, IIRC - which the Republicans continue to slice like a deli slicer and sell off by the pound, left and right, every time you bat an eye!
I think the Feds should have sent a letter to each and every citizen explaining your SSN is now (vitrually) public domain and there is no vigil to protect your privacy. It’s tantamount to the selling of phone/address lists! Of course, the Feds are typically the worst offenders. I guess it’s do as I say, not as I do? Or, he who writes the law can break the laws (or re-write the laws, as needed)?
The worst part is, when you need Social Services, for one example, the Feds won’t even talk to you without that STUPID little card that WAS NOT intended to be an ID…and PROVES NOTHING! Cecil, please update us on what the heck has happened here! I’m surprised we’re not writing SSNs on bathroom walls in lieu of phone numbers!
Really? I've never had a problem getting a job without the
card. I just tell them my SSN and use my passport as proof
of citizenship/work eligibility.
Yes, on the I-9 form, a passport is by itself considered sufficient proof of possessing the privilege of having a job; but for other picture I.D., such as driver’s license, a second I.D. is required, and the Social Security card is listed as one of the acceptable second I.D.'s.
Can anyone explain why it seems that just about the only time the ACLU has any problem with governmental expansion/intervention/regulation/control is in the area of “personal” privacy–search & seizure, national ID cards, abortion rights, etc.? This also seems like the same area where normally conservative folks often prefer MORE governmental intrusion.
Is it because “cracking down on crime (especially drugs and terrorism, of course)” is a cause that both the right and left can champion when the timing is right?