WTF is this bullshit!? :bleeding:
http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/95235-democrats-spark-alarm-with-call-for-national-id-card
Quote
Dems spark alarm with call for national ID card
By Alexander Bolton - 04/30/10 06:00 AM ET
A plan by Senate Democratic leaders to reform the nation's immigration laws ran into strong opposition from civil liberties defenders before lawmakers even unveiled it Thursday.
Democratic leaders have proposed requiring every worker in the nation to carry a national identification card with biometric information, such as a fingerprint, within the next six years, according to a draft of the measure.
The proposal is one of the biggest differences between the newest immigration reform proposal and legislation crafted by late Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) and Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.).
The national ID program would be titled the Believe System, an acronym for Biometric Enrollment, Locally stored Information and Electronic Verification of Employment.
It would require all workers across the nation to carry a card with a digital encryption key that would have to match work authorization databases.
"The cardholder's identity will be verified by matching the biometric identifier stored within the microprocessing chip on the card to the identifier provided by the cardholder that shall be read by the scanner used by the employer," states the Democratic legislative proposal.
The American Civil Liberties Union, a civil liberties defender often aligned with the Democratic Party, wasted no time in blasting the plan.
"Creating a biometric national ID will not only be astronomically expensive, it will usher government into the very center of our lives. Every worker in America will need a government permission slip in order to work. And all of this will come with a new federal bureaucracy — one that combines the worst elements of the DMV and the TSA," said Christopher Calabrese, ACLU legislative counsel.
"America's broken immigration system needs real, workable reform, but it cannot come at the expense of privacy and individual freedoms," Calabrese added.
The ACLU said "if the biometric national ID card provision of the draft bill becomes law, every worker in America would have to be fingerprinted."
A source at one pro-immigration reform group described the proposal as "Orwellian."
But Senate Democratic Whip Dick Durbin (Ill.), who has worked on the proposal and helped unveil it at a press conference Thursday, predicted the public has become more comfortable with the idea of a national identification card.
"The biometric identification card is a critical element here," Durbin said. "For a long time it was resisted by many groups, but now we live in a world where we take off our shoes at the airport and pull out our identification.
"People understand that in this vulnerable world, we have to be able to present identification," Durbin added. "We want it to be reliable, and I think that's going to help us in this debate on immigration."
Implementing a nationwide identification program for every worker will be a difficult task.
The Social Security Administration has estimated that 3.6 million Americans would have to visit SSA field offices to correct mistakes in records or else risk losing their jobs.
Angela Kelley, vice president of immigration policy at the Center for American Progress, a liberal think tank, said the biometric identification provision "will give some people pause."
But she applauded Democrats for not shying away from the toughest issues in the immigration reform debate.
"What I like about the outline is that Democrats are not trying to hide the ball or soft-pedal the tough decisions," Kelley said. "It seems a very sincere effort to get the conversation started. This is a serious effort to get Republicans to the table."
Reform Immigration for America, a pro-immigrant group, praised Democrats for getting the discussion started but said the framework fell short.
"The proposal revealed today [Thursday] is in part the result of more than a year of bipartisan negotiations and represents a possible path forward on immigration reform," the group said in a statement. "This framework is not there yet."
Democrats and pro-immigration groups will now begin to put pressure on Republicans to participate in serious talks to address the issue. The bipartisan effort in the Senate suffered a serious setback when Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) pulled back from talks with Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.).
"We call on Republican Senators to review this framework and sit down at the negotiating table in good faith," Reform Immigration for America said in a statement. "This is a national problem that requires a federal solution and the input of leaders in both parties."
Durbin said Democratic leaders are trying to recruit other Republican partners.
"We're making a commitment to establishing a framework to work toward comprehensive immigration reform, and I think it's a good framework and now we're engaging our friends on the other side of the aisle to join us in this conversation," Durbin said.
Ugh.
That's almost as bad as allowing the government to spy on phone calls or email.
Are you guys being ironic in your responses? How is this even remotely problematic? :huh:
Quote from: Martinus on May 01, 2010, 12:19:19 AM
Are you guys being ironic in your responses? How is this even remotely problematic? :huh:
The government can do no wrong.
:rolleyes:
Quote from: Martinus on May 01, 2010, 12:19:19 AM
Are you guys being ironic in your responses? How is this even remotely problematic? :huh:
You serious/mad?
Is this going to legalize black helicopters as well? :angry:
Quote from: JonasSalk on May 01, 2010, 01:12:08 AM
Quote from: Martinus on May 01, 2010, 12:19:19 AM
Are you guys being ironic in your responses? How is this even remotely problematic? :huh:
The government can do no wrong.
:rolleyes:
:bleeding:
Your country, right or wrong. Since championing the official and widespread use of torture is OK this shit should be just fine.
Quote from: Martinus on May 01, 2010, 12:19:19 AM
Are you guys being ironic in your responses? How is this even remotely problematic? :huh:
Anglo-Saxon countries dislike ID cards; Labour's scheme here in the UK has been dogged by massive opposition, and is to be scrapped should the Tories win.
OMFG TEH MARK OF TEH BEAST!!!1111
That's something I don't quite get. You guys are fine having a camera every corner, your every move on the Internet monitored and carrying a driving license. But OTOH ID cards (which I've only had to use when paying with credit card) are evil. :hmm:
Quote from: Iormlund on May 01, 2010, 06:07:14 AM
That's something I don't quite get. You guys are fine having a camera every corner, your every move on the Internet monitored and carrying a driving license. But OTOH ID cards (which I've only had to use when paying with credit card) are evil. :hmm:
The camera bit is getting to be more of a problem over here, actually. Specifically speed cameras, but the backlash is growing a little in general. Driving licenses have never been a problem because it is your choice whether you learn to drive or not. As for the internet, people are still getting used to it and a lot of them don't really realise how much of what you do the government can see. I expect that to change in the next few years.
ID cards, being compulsory, are seen as intrusive and oppressive, and a sign of excessive state control.
Quote from: Martinus on May 01, 2010, 12:19:19 AM
Are you guys being ironic in your responses? How is this even remotely problematic? :huh:
Indeed. Some people get way too worked up about this sort of thing.
The ID card is effective in preventing stuff like ID theft too.
I never understood the paranoia about national ID cards. Are there any non-idiotic arguments against it?
Quote from: Agelastus on May 01, 2010, 06:15:17 AM
Driving licenses have never been a problem because it is your choice whether you learn to drive or not.
In practice, everyone needs to have a good piece of ID, or your life would be very difficult in many circumstances. Those who don't have a driver's license can get a non-driver's ID that looks a lot like the driver's license, and it's a good idea to get it.
Indeed.
My sister doesn't drive and doesn't want to. She has had to get a provisional driving license though or else she'd be never allowed to buy alcohol.
In the UK a driving license is really pretty much the only ID that is universally accepted, even other supposed purpose made proper proof of age IDs are not taken everywhere (as I discovered to my great annoyance on my 18th birthday night out <_<), its either a driving license or a passport you need; and the latter doesn't fit neatly in a credit card slot of a wallet.
As to ID paranoia- I think a lot of it stems from people thinking it means the police can stop you at any time and demand your ID (as is technically the case in a few European countries I think) and this of course will inevitably lead to a totalitarian police state of constant 'your papers please' and all that.
I don't hate the National ID idea completely. I would like to see the American Motor Vehicles Departments get out of the Proving Citizenship Business and back into the Deciding Who Can and Cannot Drive business.
Not needed--we can just profile brown people as being illegal immigrants and arabic people as being terrorists.
Quote from: DGuller on May 01, 2010, 12:11:35 PM
I never understood the paranoia about national ID cards. Are there any non-idiotic arguments against it?
Do you mean arguments that an idiot could understand? Probably not.
I don't understand paranoia, but I understand the logical arguments against a national ID card. They are not fully persuasive, but they give any non-idiot pause.
Is the opposition against the concept of an ID card in general, or that it would be biometric?
It does sound like idiotic paranoia. I've had an ID for 20 years and have never been asked for it for no reason, even though AFAIK (not a lawyer) cops can ask for it when they please.
I have been asked to produce it when acting as witness, entering certain official buildings, dealing with the public school system, our IRS and DMV. Which to me sounds entirely logical.
By far most of the people that I've showed it to were not officials of the State, but rather gate security guards and other employees at office or manufacturing premises, banks, shops or supermarkets.
Quote from: Martinus on May 01, 2010, 02:36:13 PM
Is the opposition against the concept of an ID card in general, or that it would be biometric?
I think the opposition is based around 3 main objections:
1. Compelling law-abiding citizens to carry an ID card and punishing them if they don't/forget/lose it and don't replace it
2. Cost to set up and enforce
3. The guarantee that the government will fuck up the database and force some lawful employees to jump through hoops just to prove their right to hold down their own jobs.
I am not totally convinced by these arguments, but I think non-idiots can probably recognize that they are legitimate. Idiots will call them paranoia, of course.
Quote from: grumbler on May 01, 2010, 02:04:54 PM
Quote from: DGuller on May 01, 2010, 12:11:35 PM
I never understood the paranoia about national ID cards. Are there any non-idiotic arguments against it?
Do you mean arguments that an idiot could understand? Probably not.
Huh, really? Do you actually think that it was a clever play on words on your part?
Quote from: DGuller on May 01, 2010, 03:07:13 PM
Quote from: grumbler on May 01, 2010, 02:04:54 PM
Quote from: DGuller on May 01, 2010, 12:11:35 PM
I never understood the paranoia about national ID cards. Are there any non-idiotic arguments against it?
Do you mean arguments that an idiot could understand? Probably not.
Huh, really? Do you actually think that it was a clever play on words on your part?
Grumbler is autistic. He's trying the best he can.
The thing is, he doesn't need to try so hard. He's very naturally gifted, so there is no need for him to force it in such a ridiculous manner.
Is the American proposal that you should be forced to carry the card at all times?
Edit: and is the American proposal that it should be mandatory to own an ID card?
Quote from: The Brain on May 01, 2010, 04:04:37 PM
Is the American proposal that you should be forced to carry the card at all times?
Edit: and is the American proposal that it should be mandatory to own an ID card?
I'm not sure why people assume that the first thing has to be the case. What's the connection between having a centralized system of giving people IDs, and forcing them to carry it with them at all times? Seems like scaremongering to me. I also don't see why the ownership has to be mandatory, although as with driver's/non-driver's licenses, you can make it mandatory in practice by requiring it to be presented in various places, like DMVs and such.
Quote from: DGuller on May 01, 2010, 03:26:59 PM
The thing is, he doesn't need to try so hard. He's very naturally gifted, so there is no need for him to force it in such a ridiculous manner.
Oh, noes! I am being double-teamed by the two most credible and intellectually honest posters on the board! :o
If Hans will jump in here and join them, we will have the trifecta! :cool:
Quote from: The Brain on May 01, 2010, 04:04:37 PM
Is the American proposal that you should be forced to carry the card at all times?
Edit: and is the American proposal that it should be mandatory to own an ID card?
Yes, and yes, effectively. The goal is to make employment of illegals very difficult, and that means that legal workers will have to carry their cards at work so that they can be checked during ICE sweeps. I don't think you would have to carry it outside of work, but why wouldn't you?
And, obviously, if the system isn't mandatory, then the purpose of it (to isolate illegals as the only ones without the ID) is lost.
Quote from: grumbler on May 01, 2010, 04:33:53 PM
Quote from: DGuller on May 01, 2010, 03:26:59 PM
The thing is, he doesn't need to try so hard. He's very naturally gifted, so there is no need for him to force it in such a ridiculous manner.
Oh, noes! I am being double-teamed by the two most credible and intellectually honest posters on the board! :o
If Hans will jump in here and join them, we will have the trifecta! :cool:
I'm not sure why you're trying to start a flame war out of nothing, but in any case, I'll stake my credibility and honesty against yours any day of the week.
Quote from: DGuller on May 01, 2010, 04:47:41 PM
I'll stake my credibility and honesty against yours any day of the week.
That's stupid.
Quote from: garbon on May 01, 2010, 04:50:05 PM
Quote from: DGuller on May 01, 2010, 04:47:41 PM
I'll stake my credibility and honesty against yours any day of the week.
That's stupid.
Why? You actually find grumbler more credible and honest?
Quote from: DGuller on May 01, 2010, 04:57:36 PM
Why? You actually find grumbler more credible and honest?
Without a doubt.
I think you are the wacko if you think most would think otherwise.
grumbler's credibility is indeed suspect since his breakdown. :hmm:
Quote from: DGuller on May 01, 2010, 04:47:41 PM
I'm not sure why you're trying to start a flame war out of nothing, but in any case, I'll stake my credibility and honesty against yours any day of the week.
Please. I generally think you're a standup guy but in this case there was absolutely no doubt who tried to start some shit.
hilarious
Quote from: Admiral Yi on May 01, 2010, 05:02:27 PM
Quote from: DGuller on May 01, 2010, 04:47:41 PM
I'm not sure why you're trying to start a flame war out of nothing, but in any case, I'll stake my credibility and honesty against yours any day of the week.
Please. I generally think you're a standup guy but in this case there was absolutely no doubt who tried to start some shit.
Really? Was I the one who intentionally misread the post in the most unconvincing way possible, in order to call someone an idiot? Or was my post implying that there is dearth of rational arguments against national ID the act of stirring up shit?
Isn't this what Obama wants us to do? Fight among ourselves?
Quote from: DGuller on May 01, 2010, 12:15:05 PM
Quote from: Agelastus on May 01, 2010, 06:15:17 AM
Driving licenses have never been a problem because it is your choice whether you learn to drive or not.
In practice, everyone needs to have a good piece of ID, or your life would be very difficult in many circumstances. Those who don't have a driver's license can get a non-driver's ID that looks a lot like the driver's license, and it's a good idea to get it.
[Also reply to Tyr]
I have neither a driving license or a passport, and have never had a problem or been inconvenienced.
Nor did I ever have an age ID card (and they were around, just, when I could have needed one) and I would never have needed one, assuming my memories are accurate. Admittedly, given the paranoia around "under-age" products these days, that may possibly no longer be true...but only possibly.
A national ID card wouldn't bother me too much.
1) I need my driver's license to vote, drive, fly, buy beer, etc.
2) I also need a birth certificate or passport for any new job.
3) I tend to be no more worried about the federal govt. than the Georgia govt. I know the latter is totally insane already.
Damn, this was a sucky time to run out of popcorn.
Quote from: ulmont on May 01, 2010, 05:27:09 PM
A national ID card wouldn't bother me too much.
1) I need my driver's license to vote, drive, fly, buy beer, etc.
2) I also need a birth certificate or passport for any new job.
3) I tend to be no more worried about the federal govt. than the Georgia govt. I know the latter is totally insane already.
Exactly, so why do I need another? I'm IDed out at this point. :wacko:
Quote from: Agelastus on May 01, 2010, 05:23:58 PM
Quote from: DGuller on May 01, 2010, 12:15:05 PM
Quote from: Agelastus on May 01, 2010, 06:15:17 AM
Driving licenses have never been a problem because it is your choice whether you learn to drive or not.
In practice, everyone needs to have a good piece of ID, or your life would be very difficult in many circumstances. Those who don't have a driver's license can get a non-driver's ID that looks a lot like the driver's license, and it's a good idea to get it.
[Also reply to Tyr]
I have neither a driving license or a passport, and have never had a problem or been inconvenienced.
Nor did I ever have an age ID card (and they were around, just, when I could have needed one) and I would never have needed one, assuming my memories are accurate. Admittedly, given the paranoia around "under-age" products these days, that may possibly no longer be true...but only possibly.
IIRC, many government agencies need a good ID. It's possible that you can get around not using your driver's/non-driver's license, but it's a big pain in the ass. You'll have to haul a combination of certificates, utility bills, social security card, etc. I imagine the standards only get more strict with time. My parents, who don't drive, had to get a non-driver's ID just avoid such annoyances.
Quote from: Martinus on May 01, 2010, 02:36:13 PM
Is the opposition against the concept of an ID card in general, or that it would be biometric?
I have no problem with a national ID card, but it feels completely unnecessary. We have enough IDs. Use a passport, instead. Or find a way to restrict state drivers' licenses and IDs to only legal residents.
I do, however, have a problem with the idea that I would have to have a biometric ID card. For years, the government has tried to create a law that everyone must submit a fingerprint or other biometric data for a national database. And for years I have argued against them. There is no need for the government to have biometric data on every citizen of the United States. In addition, there is far too much cost and red-tape involved in creating this type of database. As the article said, it would result in some 3.6 million people heading to the Social Security office to correct mistakes on their information. Ask anyone who's changed their name how much of a PITA getting those kinds of changes made is.
It seems unnecessary and an immense invasion of privacy.
Quote from: merithyn on May 01, 2010, 05:49:05 PM
Quote from: Martinus on May 01, 2010, 02:36:13 PM
Is the opposition against the concept of an ID card in general, or that it would be biometric?
I have no problem with a national ID card, but it feels completely unnecessary. We have enough IDs. Use a passport, instead. Or find a way to restrict state drivers' licenses and IDs to only legal residents.
I do, however, have a problem with the idea that I would have to have a biometric ID card. For years, the government has tried to create a law that everyone must submit a fingerprint or other biometric data for a national database. And for years I have argued against them. There is no need for the government to have biometric data on every citizen of the United States. In addition, there is far too much cost and red-tape involved in creating this type of database. As the article said, it would result in some 3.6 million people heading to the Social Security office to correct mistakes on their information. Ask anyone who's changed their name how much of a PITA getting those kinds of changes made is.
It seems unnecessary and an immense invasion of privacy.
So you feel that the problem of illegal immigration and employment isn't severe enough to go through the hassle of a biometics collection and employment verification process?
That's probably not a moronic objection.
I am still pretty neutral on the idea, though. I would have to see more details about how it would work and how the mistakes that were made in its implementation would be corrected before I took a stand. I'd also need to be convinced that these cards couldn't feasibly be forged, or the database cracked pretty readily.
Anyone who thinks an ID card will put a dent on illegal immigration is out of his mind.
Quote from: Iormlund on May 01, 2010, 06:11:14 PM
Anyone who thinks an ID card will put a dent on illegal immigration is out of his mind.
How extraordinary unconvincing. :mellow:
I agree with Iormland, to be honest. I know more than my fair share of illegal immigrants, and it really doesn't take much for them to get forged documents. I can't imagine that new biometric cards will be any harder.
As to your question to me, grumbler: No, I do not believe that illegal immigration and employment cause enough distress to the nation as a whole to warrant implementing this type of ID system.
Quote from: merithyn on May 01, 2010, 06:16:28 PM
I agree with Iormland, to be honest. I know more than my fair share of illegal immigrants, and it really doesn't take much for them to get forged documents. I can't imagine that new biometric cards will be any harder.
On what basis do you conclude that the new card will be as easy to forge as a plain paper birth certificate of social security card?
It seems to me absurd to conclude at this point that the ID program will not have the slightest bit of its desired effect because the card will be easy to forge. The purpose of the biometric data is to make the card harder to forge.
As long as my ID card says "AKA Lucullus" on it, I am good with the idea.
My plan for solving immigration involves machine guns, mines and proscriptions.
Quote from: Ed Anger on May 01, 2010, 06:49:00 PM
My plan for solving immigration involves machine guns, mines and proscriptions.
How does machine guns, yours, and proscriptions help?
He kills the immigrants with his machine guns, then takes their stuff.
Quote from: grumbler on May 01, 2010, 06:13:03 PM
Quote from: Iormlund on May 01, 2010, 06:11:14 PM
Anyone who thinks an ID card will put a dent on illegal immigration is out of his mind.
How extraordinary unconvincing. :mellow:
Spain has had ID cards for as long as I can remember and we've received millions of illegal immigrants.
As long as someone is willing to hire an illegal worker for peanuts you will get illegal immigrants. Even if you managed to detain every single one of them, which is doubtful, what are you going to do then? Where are you going to expel them to? If they have half a neuron they won't have passports and won't reveal their countries of origin. And even if you do expel some, how are you going to keep them there?
Quote from: Iormlund on May 01, 2010, 07:43:58 PM
Quote from: grumbler on May 01, 2010, 06:13:03 PM
Quote from: Iormlund on May 01, 2010, 06:11:14 PM
Anyone who thinks an ID card will put a dent on illegal immigration is out of his mind.
How extraordinary unconvincing. :mellow:
Spain has had ID cards for as long as I can remember and we've received millions of illegal immigrants.
As long as someone is willing to hire an illegal worker for peanuts you will get illegal immigrants. Even if you managed to detain every single one of them, which is doubtful, what are you going to do then? Where are you going to expel them to? If they have half a neuron they won't have passports and won't reveal their countries of origin. And even if you do expel some, how are you going to keep them there?
I think thats where the machine guns and mines come in.
Quote from: Jaron on May 01, 2010, 07:49:04 PM
I think thats where the machine guns and mines come in.
Sadly, most illegals are intelligent enough to buy a plane ticket and simply overstay their tourist or student visas rather than crossing the border at Ceuta or risking the Straits.
Our problems would be solved if all our illegal immigrants hopped on a plane bound for Ceuta
Quote from: Iormlund on May 01, 2010, 07:43:58 PM
Quote from: grumbler on May 01, 2010, 06:13:03 PM
Quote from: Iormlund on May 01, 2010, 06:11:14 PM
Anyone who thinks an ID card will put a dent on illegal immigration is out of his mind.
How extraordinary unconvincing. :mellow:
Spain has had ID cards for as long as I can remember and we've received millions of illegal immigrants.
And it is impossible for anyone to succeed where Spain has failed? :hmm:
Quote from: Iormlund on May 01, 2010, 07:54:16 PM
Quote from: Jaron on May 01, 2010, 07:49:04 PM
I think thats where the machine guns and mines come in.
Sadly, most illegals are intelligent enough to buy a plane ticket and simply overstay their tourist or student visas rather than crossing the border at Ceuta or risking the Straits.
:huh:
You said in the post before this that
Quote
As long as someone is willing to hire an illegal worker for peanuts you will get illegal immigrants. Even if you managed to detain every single one of them, which is doubtful, what are you going to do then? Where are you going to expel them to? If they have half a neuron they won't have passports and won't reveal their countries of origin. And even if you do expel some, how are you going to keep them there?
If they are coming in on visas, surely they must have passports. And if they had to submit passport information to get a visa, surely the authorities can use that information to identify these people.
You are not making any sense to me.
The purpose of the US identification system is to ensure that employers who hire illegals cannot claim they didn't know they were illegal. Since knowingly hiring illegals will likely cost you your business if caught, this should reduce employability of illegals by a bunch - provided the databases cannot be hacked and the cards cannot be readily forged.
The argument that cutting illegal employment drastically will not "put a dent on illegal immigration" is going to be a hard sell, I suspect. Good luck with that.
Fuck it, let anybody in to work who has a passport and stops at the border station. That way I can get my all you can eat salad bar.
Quote from: Jaron on May 01, 2010, 08:33:39 PM
Our problems would be solved if all our illegal immigrants hopped on a plane bound for Ceuta
I don't think Ceuta's airport is equipped to handle that much traffic.
Edit- Apparently it doesn't even have an airport.
Quote from: PDH on May 01, 2010, 08:54:21 PM
Fuck it, let anybody in to work who has a passport and stops at the border station. That way I can get my all you can eat salad bar.
:thumbsup: