National ID Card?

[IndependentlyPoor]

There are those who believe we have some right to or reasonable expectation of privacy -- they are those who did not grow up in or ever live in a small town.

Wow. You might be on to something. I grew up in a small Texas town where everybody knew everybody else's business. The stereotypical "Who's yer daddy?" kind of place. I never got away with anything.

The idea of somebody in Washington knowing my name and address was nothing compared to the perils of what [-]might[/-] would surely get back to my mother.

 

[Alan]

So... your fingerprints are not on file somewhere? Is your photograph not on your driver's license? You don't have a credit card? You don't have a cell phone?

Unless you have been able to avoid all of the above... "they" already know everything there is to know about you.

I agree, but it's actually having my fingerprint on my card and using my fingerprint to identify me that is one one my objections. Fingerprints are way too easy to copy and then forge.

I think the National ID card is just an upgraded Social Security card to be used only for employment and dealing with the Social Security Administration.

I believe this proposal is part of the new legislation on immigration. Less easy to fake than the current SS card and numbers.

So it would not be a substitute for a passport, but would be required for employment or receiving social security.

Audrey

I agree. While a US passport is proof of the right to work, there are a great many that are not citizens but are allowed to work, and there are many legal residents that are not allowed to work. e.g. for the first 5 years here DW and my kids were legal aliens but were not allowed to work as they were accompanying me and their SS cards were stamped "Not Eligible For Work".

However, employers today are required to examine and record that each worker they employ is eligible to work. The National ID card is an expensive replacement plus something else to lose or be stolen.

I-9 Form: What Matters to Employers About the Employment Eligibility Verification Form for Employers

It is against the law for any employer to knowingly hire employees who are not authorized to work in the United States. As part of the employment eligibility verification process, on the first day of employment, employees must provide proof that they are U.S. citizens or nationals, lawful permanent residents, or people otherwise authorized to be employed in the United States.
Within three days of hire, every new employee must show their employer documentation that establishes both proof of their identity and proof of their eligibility to work in the United States. The I-9 Form must be completed for every new employee, regardless of their national origin or whether or not the employee is a U.S. citizen. Under IRCA, if an employer fails to verify the identity and employment authorization of a new employee, by completing the I-9 Form, the employer has violated federal immigration law.

Acceptable Documents: List A - Documents that Establish Both Identity and Employment Eligibility

1. U.S. Passport (unexpired or expired.
2. Certificate of U.S. Citizenship (Form N-560 or N-561).
3. Certificate of Naturalization (Form N-550 or N-570).
4. Unexpired foreign passport, with an attached Form I-94 indicating unexpired employment authorization.
5. Permanent Resident Card or Alien Registration Receipt Card with photograph (Form I-551).
6. Unexpired Temporary ResidentCard (Form I-688).
7. Unexpired EmploymentAuthorization Card(Form I-688A).
8. Unexpired Reentry Permit (Form I-327).
9. Unexpired Refugee Travel Document (Form 1-571).
10. Unexpired Employment Authorization Document issued by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) that contains a photograph (Form I-688B).

 

[Lazarus]

Well I hate the idea that anyone can ask me for id. I am afraid that once there is a national id card then it will be required for everything. Even though it really doesn't change anything the idea repels me.

Since 911 the Pilots license has been upgraded to a plastic card with holographic security and a magnetic stripe. Still have my old paper one. You have to also have a picture ID now. They haven't figured out how to get the pilots pictures on the card yet. Not enough pilots to have an office to go to to get photographed.

No one has ever asked to see it other than when I rent a plane.

 

[Westernskies]

I think having a national identity card would be a good idea. Biometrics, fingerprints, retina scan, DNA- bring it on, the more proof the better.
Legal immigrants, resident aliens, and guest workers would be issued a similar card, but with status and term clearly defined. Foreign passports would work for visitors.

We already have to show ID to use a credit card, board an airplane, vote, serve on a jury, cash a check, check into a hotel, etc. Having a national identity card would not be that big of a deal.

Understand the possibilitiy of civil rights implications, but cannot understand why so may folks get so riled up over the idea of proof of citizenship, with 14 million people in this country illegally; the number growing daily. We need to be able to positively determine who is in this country illegally; providing documentation to those who are natural born citizens or are here legally will allow us to make headway on this issue.

I see this as a step forward, and am sick of all the hand-wringing and pontificating by those who would rather do nothing than risk offending someone who shouldn't be here in the first place.

But, maybe that's just me.

 

[lets-retire]

I don't know what the requirements for DL are in your state but I don't recall submitting proof of citizenship ever when obtaining a Drivers license and I have had one for close to half a century (maybe my memory is going too). I guess 12 million illegal immigrants would argue against the State Drivers license working well as an ID

Actually there are several border states that have an enhanced DL/ID that does work for proof of USC/LPR status. They are relatively new and I'm sure there are many bugs that need to be worked out with them, but they do exist.

 

[traineeinvestor]

So... your fingerprints are not on file somewhere? Is your photograph not on your driver's license? You don't have a credit card? You don't have a cell phone?

Unless you have been able to avoid all of the above... "they" already know everything there is to know about you.

As an occasional visitor to the US, my fingerprints are on file - presumably forever - merely because I visited the country. Strangely, they take a complete set every time I enter the country.

I also got fingerprinted for my Hong Kong Identity Card - and now use a thumb print to enter and leave HK without having to queue in front of an immigration officer. This actually saves me time at the airports and the ferry terminal.

 

[lets-retire]

Strangely, they take a complete set every time I enter the country.

There is a good reason for this. Part of your fingerprints are the scars you get from little nicks and scrapes due to living. Every time you meet the requirements of having your prints taken, they are taken to ensure the most accurate prints are on file. I used to hate doing them to the inmates in jail when I knew they just got out a couple weeks or days earlier (we had many frequent fliers), until this was explained. One of the other benefits for immigration is proper id of the traveler. Requiring prints to be given ensures nobody has stolen your id and is attempting to use it to gain entry.

 

[glippy]

I just have some confusion about how you prove citizenship. If you're 80 years old and the hospital you were born at can't find your birth certificate, and neither can you, and you never had a passport or drivers license, how does that 80 year old prove to the card issuer that they were born in the US?

For that matter, what if you're an 18 year-old orphan and your birth certificate is lost? Or you were born abroad in a foreign hospital but to U.S. Citizen parents? Are we going to have special tribunals where you round up your child-hood friends to come testify that, while they're not sure where you were born, they do know they played tee-ball with you when you were 6 in Syracuse?

I don't like it. Seems to me it will be putting a lot of our most-vunerable citizens through a HUGE hassle in order to do what? Why does an 80 year old southern lady with a drawl, as American as apple pie, need to be bothered with the headaches of trying to track down a document she hasn't seen in sixty years? It just seems like one more way to punish good people who would prefer to be minding their own business.

 

[RonBoyd]

It just seems like one more way to punish good people who would prefer to be minding their own business.

That sounds a lot like life in general. How is this different?

 

[audreyh1]

Um - people have to prove citizenship to get their first driver's license. And you don't contact the hospital for a birth certificate, you contact the state where you were born. The state maintains the records. You can always get more copies when needed.

You are not going to get very far without a birth certificate once you are an adult. All this stuff has already been figured out well before now.

Audrey

 

[Westernskies]

I just have some confusion about how you prove citizenship. If you're 80 years old and the hospital you were born at can't find your birth certificate, and neither can you, and you never had a passport or drivers license, how does that 80 year old prove to the card issuer that they were born in the US?

For that matter, what if you're an 18 year-old orphan and your birth certificate is lost? Or you were born abroad in a foreign hospital but to U.S. Citizen parents? Are we going to have special tribunals where you round up your child-hood friends to come testify that, while they're not sure where you were born, they do know they played tee-ball with you when you were 6 in Syracuse?

I don't like it. Seems to me it will be putting a lot of our most-vunerable citizens through a HUGE hassle in order to do what? Why does an 80 year old southern lady with a drawl, as American as apple pie, need to be bothered with the headaches of trying to track down a document she hasn't seen in sixty years? It just seems like one more way to punish good people who would prefer to be minding their own business.

So, let's legislate for the 1/2 of 1% who might be inconvenienced instead of ensuring the other 99.5% enjoy all the rights and responsibilities of citizenship, unencumbered by the social burden of those who are here illegally?

 

[Bestwifeever]

As someone who was born overseas, it was a real PITA when I first applied for a passport and my birth certificate, which I had, was not enough--I had to get a copy of my mother's birth certificate too (since she was already deceased, another PITA) and my father's, who was also born overseas but still a U.S. citizen from birth (and that one was an unbelievable PITA). I wonder if I would have to go go through it all again for a mandatory national ID. Oh joy, oh rapture.

 

[Brat]

Have you gotten a new job recently

You have to get an I-9 (IIRC... not exactly sure of the form number)... you have to provide two different forms of ID... one that is acceptable is your SS card...

Now, I wish I KNEW where my SS card is located... I have not seen it since I was about 8....

As a person who examined 1,000s of I-9s maintained by employers I am familiar with the documentation requirements.

The new employee must provide documentation that they are authorized to work in the US. A SS card is but one form of evidence. A certificate of birth issued by a state, protectorate, or the State Department are suitable as well. Pick a document from the list. None of these documents establish that the name on the document attaches to the person presenting it.

The employee must also produce identification, a State issued driver's licence or ID card is sufficient. Again, there is a list to choose from. The form provides an area for name changes to assist in resolving differences between the types of documents.

There are some documents that meet both requirements such as a "Green Card" (which is no longer green) or a passport.

Many employers require the production of a SS card because payroll requires it. This is because people make mistakes when providing this information and they get tired of bird-dogging problems when SS Administration says there is an error. Often it is because name differences, sometimes a "borrowed" SS number, but more often because of name changes stemming from marriage or use when SSA hasn't been informed. This document cannot be required as a part of the I-9 process.

 

[kyounge1956]

Um - people have to prove citizenship to get their first driver's license. And you don't contact the hospital for a birth certificate, you contact the state where you were born. The state maintains the records. You can always get more copies when needed. (snip)
Audrey

But there's a risk people may not believe you when you've only got a copy from the state rather than your original certificate.

 

[RonBoyd]

But there's a risk people may not believe you when you've only got a copy from the state rather than your original certificate.

Every copy I have ever seen has had an Official Seal (Notary, etc) -- generally embossed on the document.

 

[audreyh1]

As someone who was born overseas, it was a real PITA when I first applied for a passport and my birth certificate, which I had, was not enough--I had to get a copy of my mother's birth certificate too (since she was already deceased, another PITA) and my father's, who was also born overseas but still a U.S. citizen from birth (and that one was an unbelievable PITA). I wonder if I would have to go go through it all again for a mandatory national ID. Oh joy, oh rapture.

I expect your passport is all you need. You've already done all the work!

Audrey

 

[audreyh1]

But there's a risk people may not believe you when you've only got a copy from the state rather than your original certificate.

Fortunately, I don't have to prove anything to "those people". The govt agencies will accept it.

Audrey

 

[Brat]

The State is the issuing authority for a birth certificate. There is not ONE certificate of birth, States routinely produce multiple copies for various needs to those who are entitled to receive them. This document is produced as a result of a document issued by the hospital and signed by a physician and sent directly to the State agency responsible for maintaining the data. No one else is entitled to that document, the parents are not given a copy. A certificate issued by a hospital with a embossed seal, even if it has the infant's footprint and delivering physician's signature is not a legal birth certificate, they can easily be forged. I have cited employers for failing to comply with I-9 requirements when they used the hospital certificate, unless that hospital is a State or military facility.

By the way, the same is true of death certificates.

 

[Westernskies]

The State is the issuing authority for a birth certificate. There is not ONE certificate of birth, States routinely produce multiple copies for various needs to those who are entitled to receive them. This document is produced as a result of a document issued by the hospital and signed by a physician and sent directly to the State agency responsible for maintaining the data. No one else is entitled to that document, the parents are not given a copy. A certificate issued by a hospital with a embossed seal, even if it has the infant's footprint and delivering physician's signature is not a legal birth certificate, they can easily be forged. I have cited employers for failing to comply with I-9 requirements when they used the hospital certificate, unless that hospital is a State or military facility.

By the way, the same is true of death certificates.

People try to make this into a big deal, but getting a certified copy of your birth certificate is simple- I ordered one from the county clerk's office in the state where I claim to have been born...
A state-certified copy is as good as an original- all I needed for getting my US passport - proof of citizenship, as far as the feds are concerned.

 

[Alan]

A certified copy of a birth certificate issued from the State you were born is as good as the original. When our children were born in England we opted for the much cheaper "short form" of birth certificate as we liked to LBYM and had no idea we would ever need more than the short form. These were not good enough once we applied for "Green Cards" (actually they were pink back in 1992) so we applied for certified copies from the UK Registrar and these were acceptable to the INS.

Once you have a US Passport or Certificate of Naturalization you don't need to produce the birth certificates again.

As to finger printing, the FBI used to claim not to keep them on record once they've been used to do a background check - I think the privacy laws prevent retention of biometric data such as fingerprints, DNA etc for people with no criminal record. This was true in 1998 when we applied for our US Citizenship. My interview came through 9 months after applying, and after the interview and test I asked about the status of DW's application. The official went off to check. When she came back she said the application had not gone through because the fingerprints taken and submitted by the State police were not good enough and that the ones taken when we got our Green Cards were destroyed after the cards were issued. (even though the card itself contained one of the prints). btw, you (or your lawyers) cannot call the INS to check on progress of any application.

I can relate multiple stories of agony trying to deal with the INS, and that is just me and my family, including the first two applications for a Green Card. The applications were handled by the company lawyers. In the first instance, after 6 months I got a one line letter saying that I hadn't stated that I was not a member of the Nazi party between 1933 and 1945. the fact that they accepted my birth certificate showing that I was born in 1955 was irrelevant. (okay, my fault for missing a check-box, but, sheesh!)

After re-applying it took 7 months and I got a single line letter of refusal because my I-94 submitted with the application had expired - this was true, an I-94 is only good for 12 months and before it had expired I had re-applied and got a new one (as I did several times a year because a new one is issued every time you enter the country and I traveled a lot on business), but their process didn't seem capable of managing this. For the 3rd attempt my company (which existed in Louisiana and their law firm firm was in New Orleans) hired an immigration specialist lawyer out of Philadelphia who said that although the INS office for Louisiana was in New Orleans, she recommended applying through Lincoln, Nebraska, where they were much less busy. That worked like a charm.

Since our children (both under 18) were automatically citizens once we were citizens, we applied for their papers and 6 weeks after we had taken them in for their final interviews their papers had still not come through, even though they had been promised same or next day. As a new US Citizen I called the office of my Congressman, left a message and received a reply 2 days later saying that they had been onto the INS who had said the person that types up the certificates had been off sick. Two days after that message we received the certificates in the mail.

I would expect the expansion of whatever government office to manage the National ID system to be just as over-worked and inefficient as the INS.

 

[Trek]

I've had a national ID card now since 2007 when I got my second citizenship here in Europe. I think it's great, but I do understand why people are hesitant about it. But as pointed out before, if you have a credit card, a drivers license, a bank account, etc, then the Feds have everything they need on you anyway, so why not simply things for the government to help reduce spending.

Here's why I like it - it has a chip in it so with an ID card reader attached to my computer I can, from my computer anywhere in the world: vote in local and national elections, I can digitally sign any legal document sent to me via email (using DigiDoc), I can purchase tickets on public transportation (the train attendant just reads my card to see I paid), I can pay and/or amend my taxes online, I bank more securely using it in combination with my user name and passwords plus loads of other things. Basically it's my official ID online and I can do virtually anything from my computer with it that would normally require me to be somewhere in person and sign a document. In a way, it's gives me much more freedom, which is opposite of what you might think it does.

Is there potential for abuse. I presume there is with anything, but don't know of any particular problems with the national ID. They've been around a long time and in use in most modern countries, so they are well aware of any problems.

Speaking from a European point of view, personal privacy and personal information is very restricted here in the EU and privacy laws are much more stringent than in the U.S. (since the Patriot Act for sure) so there are tough laws in place as to what information can be stored and retained by government agencies. Not to say that abuse doesn't happen, but it wouldn't be any worse than what happens in the U.S. today from what I can tell.

Here's what I don't like about my national ID: My drivers license isn't incorporated into it. I wish they would do that so I only have one important card to carry around.

I've heard the argument that America is big and diverse so it would be hard to implement, but almost all 27 EU countries so far as I know have one and that population is more than the US with an even more diverse illegal population.

 

[lets-retire]

Trek--Is your card an EU card or a national card?

 

[Trek]

Trek--Is your card an EU card or a national card?

It's an Estonian national ID card, but as I understand it, it can be used as ID in any EU country, though a passport is still recommended when traveling.

My Estonian passport however is an EU document and in fact says European Union on the cover.

 

[MichaelB]

A national ID card has advantages. A single common identification is much easier and less costly for business to implement. Training is simpler for ID review and approval, and more difficult to produce a fraudulent ID. Much easier for recording, analyzing and sharing data for law enforcement. Much easier to enable and control voting. Implementation would generate jobs.

Of course, some folks feel that there is a privacy issue – as if they had some privacy now that they would lose. It’s more fear of conspiracy than real loss.

One very negative experience I have had with national ID cards – in Venezuela expired cards have been denied renewal and lost cards have been denied replacement to individuals that are considered opponents or are on a “black list” which is not at all secret and is very large. They are then unable to conduct certain transactions or denied opportunities - a nasty and very dangerous situation.

 

[lets-retire]

Training is simpler for ID review and approval, and more difficult to produce a fraudulent ID. Much easier for recording, analyzing and sharing data for law enforcement.

I think your first sentence is incorrect. There isn't an ID out there that can't be altered or forged. The big difference is when it is a state ID, only a small portion of the US population has to have a replacement made. If it is national ID then everyone must get a new one. Typically those are in the form of a DL and have to be replaced every four to 10 years anyway. I don't think I've received the same form of DL any time I've renewed my license, it always changes. Passports are changed every few years, when the forged documents start getting too good. Or new updates are developed that would make the document more difficult to alter or forge.

The second sentence is one of the reasons many people are against it. Having LE have easy access to much of your information, puts a lot of power in the hands of the government.

If the national ID is required then by all rights the government should have to provide it "free". That would mean increases in costs somewhere else. If the national ID is voluntary then I don't think many people would get one unless there is a huge carrot offered.