US Immigration Bill May Bring a National Biometric ID Card 619
schwit1 sends this quote from the Wall Street Journal:
"Lawmakers working to craft a new comprehensive immigration bill have settled on a way to prevent employers from hiring illegal immigrants: a national biometric identification card all American workers would eventually be required to obtain. Under the potentially controversial plan still taking shape in the Senate, all legal US workers, including citizens and immigrants, would be issued an ID card with embedded information, such as fingerprints, to tie the card to the worker. ... A person familiar with the legislative planning said the biometric data would likely be either fingerprints or a scan of the veins in the top of the hand. It would be required of all workers, including teenagers, but would be phased in, with current workers needing to obtain the card only when they next changed jobs, the person said. The card requirement also would be phased in among employers, beginning with industries that typically rely on illegal-immigrant labor."
Papers Please! (Score:5, Insightful)
I must see your papers.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Wonderful how only the workers need ID-card.
Maybe Benito Mussolini was on to something with the comparisons between corporatism and fascism, now you'll find out in USA.
Re:Papers Please! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Papers Please! (Score:5, Insightful)
The ultimate goal is that illegal immigrants won't be allowed to work here. The unfortunate side effect is that immigration is going to be even more of a nightmare for people who are legal to work in the US. And suddenly, many Americans are going to find themselves having to get lawyers and work out paperwork when their cards don't come up valid, or they lose them, etc.
Re:Papers Please! (Score:5, Insightful)
The idea being that illegal immigrants can't get "papers" and will therefore be unable to work
Yeah, that'll work. Just the other day I stopped at the corner and picked up a guy named "Jose" to help me put up drywall, alas he didn't have a social security card and wasn't able to accept the greenbacks I was offering him. Guess I'll have to hire someone with papers next time.
And suddenly, many Americans are going to find themselves having to get lawyers and work out paperwork when their cards don't come up valid, or they lose them, etc.
Why would that bother anybody in Congress? Most of them are lawyers after all. You scratch my back and I'll scratch yours.....
Back in the USSA! (Score:3, Funny)
Back in the USSA!
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
3. Needed a job done, found a person who was looking for one and paid him an amount that both agreed to. Capitalism, pure and simple. If only governments and large corporations could understand this.
Re:Papers Please! (Score:4, Insightful)
Why should someone fear the consequences of coming to the US for work or just to live? Rumor has it that it's a country with "liberty and justice for all" and "the land of the free" and things like that.
Of course, I figure you're trolling, as no serious person would suggest battering, defacing, enslaving and then murdering a person simply for crossing a line on a map.
--sabre86
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It's considerably different. For one thing, merely crossing the border doesn't deny you of or remove any of your property or resources. There are definitely immigrants who steal and/or defraud the government, but those are crimes the justice system can handle. For another, concept of a domicile doesn't scale up to a state level because it's rooted in private ownership. Places accessible to the public are public and in a free country, that means anyone can travel there.
Govern
Re:Papers Please! (Score:4, Interesting)
t's considerably different. For one thing, merely crossing the border doesn't deny you of or remove any of your property or resources.
Bullshit. Soon as he crosses the border, he's breathing my air, drinking water, eating food, driving on roads, etc. He IS taking up resources simply by being there. A small amount, sure, but put him and his 20 million buddies in the U.S. side by side and suddenly the amount is not quite so small is it? When 20 million people drive over our roads, how much more quickly do they wear out, and who's paying to fix them? And when a van full of Mexicans driving at twice the speed limit (not a single valid drivers' license to be found amongst them) crashes and seriously injures all 23 inside, who gets to pay their $800k worth of surgery and medical charges? You and me of course, because the illegals damn sure aint paying for it.
There are definitely immigrants who steal and/or defraud the government, but those are crimes the justice system can handle. For another, concept of a domicile doesn't scale up to a state level because it's rooted in private ownership. Places accessible to the public are public and in a free country, that means anyone can travel there.
No, it doesn't mean "anyone can travel there." It means that property is owned by the public, i.e. the citizens. The people of the U.S. own this land, and we can come and go as we please. We reserve the right to allow others to visit our land as well provided certain conditions have met. Illegal immigrants are those who did not meet our requirements for immigration yet who snuck in anyway, or overstayed their welcome. I know times are tough in Mexico, but this is OUR fucking land, so go your ass home and make something happen there instead of running away from your problems like a coward.
Governments are neither private individuals, with living rooms to protect, nor corporations. They don't have owners or stockholders to whom they have an obligation to provide profit or gain to. Governments, specifically the US Government, are put in place to ensure the liberty and welfare of all they have jurisdiction over to the best of their ability.
One of the U.S. government's biggest and most important obligations is to PROTECT AND DEFEND this nation's property. Allowing anyone to come and go as they please, using up our nation's resources freely and limitlessly, living outside the law, is NOT acceptable to me or to the vast majority of American citizens who have any common sense.
You know what the difference between Americans back in Revolution days vs now is? It's like the difference between a 16 year old who, after saving up money from summer jobs for years, buys an old project car and fixes it up, vs the 16 year whose millionaire daddy buys him a Ferrari for his birthday. Which one do you think better appreciates what he's got? There are people in other countries who would give anything, risk it all to have what we have here in America. Despite what other governments may think, I can tell you there are a LOT of peoples in the world that look up to us and who want to follow our example.
What do you think they dream about when they imagine America? They think of beautiful homes and people, clean, sparkling cities, fabulous wealth. They don't dream about an L.A. ridden by gang problems (many of them immigrants, legally or not), outrageous health care costs (due in part to illegals), outrageous car insurance costs (due in part to illegals), higher taxes (needed to improve roads and other infrastructure worn by the extra use), etc, I'd imagine.
This nation has a lot of problems. Instead of lamely sitting by while they continue to pile up, it's time for our government to take action to solve some of them. Illegal immigration is a big problem, one that most Americans would be happy to see solved. This new legislation doesn't stand a chance, though, I can guarantee that. It will FAIL, or pass only against stiff opposition. Remember the big stink against the Real ID Act a few years ba
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
The ultimate goal is that illegal immigrants won't be allowed to work here.
I really don't see corporate America ever allowing this to happen. It'll either be painfully easy to circumvent these cards, or there'll be so many loopholes and exceptions that they won't have any power.
Wake up (Score:5, Insightful)
The unfortunate side effect is that immigration is going to be even more of a nightmare for people who are legal to work in the US
You think that is the only unfortunate side effect, or even the most significant?
The potential for government abuse of this system is very high. The government can use it to track its own people without warrant, to further the current problem if lifetime punishments for every crime, and to silence anyone with an unfavorable opinion. Furthermore, this increases the risk of identity theft victimization, since swiping this card, or the information on it, is all such a thief will need to do (and don't think for a second that this unique identifier won't be used for credit applications, phone service, and everything else that the SSN is used for today (and more)).
This has "bad idea" written all over it, but is being sold as a solution to a problem that only exists because the government refuses to enforce its CURRENT POLICIES (and not due to their expense, but rather, due to the high demand for cheap foreign labor among donating businesses).
If I had mod points, I would mod that up (Score:5, Informative)
Re:If I had mod points, I would mod that up (Score:5, Insightful)
For those of you who contact your senators or representatives, please try to be civil. If you have appropriate qualifications in the field (advanced degrees, etc.), please politely offer your assistance to your senator's staff to help them understand the technical complexities of the proposal. That is exactly what I have done, and I have had significant success with this approach with Senator Jim DeMint. I am on his "call list" and I occasionally receive calls from his office when proposals like this come up and I am asked for my input on the matter. (I have not received a call on this one, so I will contact Senator DeMint's office once I've had a chance to read the bill. Often they do not recognize that there is a "computer security" component to a bill such as this - they just think "ID card" and do not think of the databases behind the cards.)
If you are polite and you have appropriate qualifications that your senator or representative will recognize, you may have an opportunity to have a positive influence in the process. Remember, though, that your senators and representatives are people who have fears, egos, and agendas just like everyone else. Show them that you want to work WITH them.
If you honestly cannot bring yourself to assist your senator or representative for whatever reason you have, then please at least be polite in your letters. An angry letter filled with vitriol and profanity will only alienate the recipient from your viewpoint.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Robotics is more of a problem than illegals... (Score:3, Interesting)
See for example Marshall Brain's writings:
http://marshallbrain.com/robotic-nation.htm [marshallbrain.com]
http://www.marshallbrain.com/manna1.htm [marshallbrain.com]
A list of current robotics videos I put together, with robots doing everything from milk cows, prune grape vines, throw and catch cell phones, put laundry in washing machines, invent and test new theories in yeast genetics, and do autopsies (the last one isn't a video, thankfully):
http://listcultures.org/pipermail/p2presearch_listcultures.or [listcultures.org]
Re:Wake up (Score:5, Insightful)
Just to play devil's advocate (a bit sincerely, at that), who is responsible for the growth of illegal immigration and outsourcing? The Mexicans/Central Americans, Chinese, and Indians? They just want a job that pays better than a couple of USD per day, and would be among the last people who want the US economy to collapse. Can we not level some responsibility at the US corporations who fanatically seek dirt-cheap labor costs and zero labor protections/environmental regulations? Can we not see some responsibility in American laborers who demand ever-increasing wages and benefits while turning down the plentiful manual labor that the illegal immigrants consider generous? And, if the labor is being utilized by these undocumented workers, exactly how are these taxpaying people costing America*? For that matter, where are you getting this idea that handing out more documentation will suddenly cause illegals to stop working illicitly, or that this would prevent boneheaded racist ideas from becoming policy?
Boiling the discussion down to "illegals destroy our economy" makes for a catchy talking point (which is why GOP politicians use it liberally), but it is, in the end, a Big Lie designed to foster discrimination and create a class of scapegoats. If it worked for every immigrant struggle in the history of this fine nation, why not, right?
An ID card is little more than security theater. You'll have the same things that happen today with SSNs and identity theft, where illegals buy paperwork from dishonest people to become (sarcasm quotes) "documented"-- the only difference will be the time it takes to crack whatever encryption is on the ID card (remember, a straight cipher like the one you suggest is very straightforward to crack with brute force), or, more likely, the time it takes to move the electronics to a fake ID.
Let's not require such cards for citizens and permanent resident visas; don't even encourage employers to try to "document" their citizen/green-card workers this way, as the constitutional implications of this are serious. Let's not force those who seek temporary visas to get these IDs, as if we're Narita Airport's immigration gates fingerprinting every foreigner (remembering that by and large we Americans are descendants of immigrants). But if we want to somehow try to offer a way for undocumented workers to get legit documentation that's easy for employers to verify, offer this to them. Put them on "probation", if you would, and monitor their progress towards a legit visa.
Maybe that's too progressive for some folks, so naturally Congress would probably strengthen CIS officials' power to kick undocumented workers out for any reason. There is never a straightforward answer to a problem like this, and every solution will hurt a huge number of people. Hanging onto this ID card idea as if it were a silver bullet strongly suggests that you want a quick and dirty fix without thinking about the consequences.
* Yes, yes, you want to say "they're taking jobs away from hard-working patriotic freedom-loving Americans". I've got news for you-- those jobs were either priced out of their market by the employers, or the same hard-working Americans rejected the lower wages. You cannot pin the responsibility on the illegals alone for wage depression.
Re:Wake up (Score:4, Interesting)
Not sure why you decided to bring race or color into the argument....no one said what color or race illegal immigrants were in this argument.
It's pretty simple, it's because I've worked in those fields, and I can tell you: there aren't very many white Americans who A) are willing to do so and B) are any good at it. I've seen similar problems in construction, although it is not as pronounced. It makes sense though: in America, anyone with any kind of work ethic will be able to get a college degree or learn some kind of skilled trade (plumber, ag inspector). The only ones left to work in the fields are lazy people or immigrants who don't have similar opportunities in their own countries.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
We have a second class sub-society of illegals in America who are willing to work for peanuts because they can't risk getting on the grid.
You don't seem to have talked to very many illegals. That is not why they are willing to work for peanuts. They are willing to work for peanuts because it's still a lot more than they would make in their own country. Secondly there are so many illegals with fake ID working in legitimate places as regular citizens that "not risking getting on the grid" isn't really an issue.
You are a little overly paranoid (Score:3, Insightful)
However, consider that revoking a card would be necessary but you can't necessarily revoke the information on the card, or if you do, you cause someone a great deal of grief. There are reasons why biometric data is considered to be the weakest form of strong security.
There is a great deal of potential for abuse here, just with the no-fly lists, etc, but this is worse because I can still drive my car across the country (I might not be able to if I didn't have income though). There is no life in prison for
Re:Wake up (Score:5, Insightful)
through everything you buy or do that requires ID. Air travel, train travel, and i think even bus travel now. just add a spiffy new ID scanner to the TSA agent checking your ID and viola, yet another database that knows who everyone is and where they're going. no one would evar misuse that...
notice how crimes these days aren't just one charge, they're like 8 at a minimum, and if the prosecutor thinks he can get away with it he throws terrorism on top to boost his resume? yeah. that. overly broad criminal statutes with redunculous sentences. not to mention 3 strikes laws.
you know, like how it's not socially tolerable to question any of the measures that reduce freedom "for our own good". or suggest that some aren't effective. or suggest alternatives that don't destroy freedom. or how people who do these things are branded as kooks, kinda like when Ron Paul threw the 9/11 commission findings in Giulianni's face. which was particularly funny because Giulianni was listed as an author of the report. yeah. that.
please wake the hell up and smell the fascism. it's not healthy.
Re:Welcome to Paranoiaville (Score:5, Insightful)
My wife and I jumped through all the fucking hoops proving she was who she was...we were a legit marriage...she was not a terrorist...that I could "support her" if she could not work...all that shit.
So, because you had to go through absolutely fucking ridiculous lengths to live a normal life with your wife you think everybody should have to go through the same sort of gauntlet? Its like you are a frat boy who got hazed and as result thinks that anyone else who didn't go through the torture he did is not worthy.
Personally, I don't give a shit if someone is a 'citizen' or not - as long they pay their taxes there shouldn't be any other requirements. It's bad enough that so many employers accuse you of being a drug abuser just because you want to work for them, having to please one more massive beauracracy just for the privilege of earning a living is beyond the pale.
And yes, I married a girl from another country too.
Re:Welcome to Paranoiaville (Score:4, Insightful)
Your response is one great big woooooosh!
Frat and legal residence is hardly apples/apples
Wooooosh #1: The point is not whether a frat is legal residence or not (what a totally random disassociation to pick) it is the fact that you had to suffer and now you want everyone else to suffer too - including native born citizens who have to put up with this verification system. And you seem to be the type to think that suffering is justified because "that's the law" rather than consider that the law is wrong.
I think by 'citizen' you mean 'legal resident and legally eligible for employment'
Wooooosh #2: Yeah, that's exactly what I meant, where "legal" is defined as paying their taxes, full stop. You clearly think that all the additional laws are undeserving of criticism.
If you don't like that Company XYZ requires drug screens or background checks - then take your application elsewhere.
Wooooosh #3: Again with "the rules are OK because they are the rules" and undeserving of criticism. I threw that drug-test bit out there as bait to see if you were of a fascist bent, you certainly seem to be. You might as well argue that requiring that all applicants pass an STD test. After all, its important to the safety and integrity of the workplace that no one need fear catching cooties from their fellow employees.
Here's something you will be unable to rationally justify - companies like blockbuster requires their employees pass a drug test. In what way does smoking a joint at home on the weekends risk the integrity/safety of their workplace?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I never in my life thought I would say anything like the following, but.... You are exactly the sort of immigrant who makes the case for never allowing immigrants to vote (immigrants who become citizens, and hence, eligible to vote in federal elections, not just qualifying local and state elections). People like you come here and destroy the native culture.
Personally, I favor very low barriers to immigration -- verifications that the immigrant is not a violent criminal, but beyond that... Come on in. You
Re:Papers Please! (Score:5, Insightful)
Right, and currently you need a SS card to work so your employer can pay their share of your SS. Your SS card already has your full name on it, which they can cross reference with your driver's licence and any references you list. The problem is that employers don't always do this (especially with more obvious possible immigrants, like those who don't speak english and don't have a name on their SS card that fits their ethnic background). Right now counterfeiting a SS card is pretty easy. All you're doing is raising the bar on what counterfeiters have to do to sell their ID cards.
How many construction companies are really going to scan the veins (for the card, as suggested by the article) of their spanish speaking construction workers?
Adding another ID card does nothing but add more paperwork, more complexity, and more counterfeits. It doesn't solve the root cause and at best it's a band-aid for immigration problems.
Re:Papers Please! (Score:4, Interesting)
Typical government reaction to a problem: Making life harder for those who follow the rules, and not really impacting the relatively small percentage of people that are / cause the problem. This is how government always reacts. Couple of examples:
I can't get sudafed at the store without showing ID, signing a register and waiting in line at the pharmacy. Bunch of people still making crystal-meth.
I can't legally own a hand-gun in Chicago, yet 400 people a year get murdered with one.
I, for one, advocate enforcing the laws that already exist...
Re:Papers Please! (Score:4, Insightful)
Which of course is futile, since they hire people without papers anyway. Just like in every other country where you need papers to get a job.
And they know that. So it’s not to keep off the “illegal immigrants” at all.
Re:Papers Please! (Score:4, Insightful)
The more unfortunate side effect is that the price of your garden salad will probably quadruple. All of this in the age old quest to stop more Catholics from immigrating.
Think of the fines (Score:4, Insightful)
This is what the government wants. An employer caught hiring illegals will be fined and have assets confiscated. It will be a profit center for government, prosecuting and deporting illegals is not.
Re:Papers Please! (Score:4, Insightful)
Immigration isn't difficult to control. Just go around to all the constructions sites and haul in all the workers that can't speak English. No, this isn't a troll. Those that can't speak English at all will either have some very fresh papers saying they can work here, or they will have a concerned family member monitoring them.
But even then. This is a lame excuse for a national ID card. The "illegal immigrants" are here because they can make more in a month here than they can in a year at home. Our government could stop this illegal immigration in its tracks with a little patrolling of the border. But guess what; nobody in power wants to stop the flow of CHEAP labor. If they wanted, REALLY wanted, to contol the flow, they could set up a VISA system to control the work.
An American employer would submit a request to a government agency responsible for vetting and admitting the immigrants. The same agency would have oversight of working conditions and seeing that the immigrants receive fair pay. The work gets done, everything is legal, and everyone's rights are protected.
It's a simple solution that would be much less expensive than the current law enforcement model, and much less obtrusive that the current or future scams of making every citizen carry work papers. It won't happen though. "Illegal immigration" is just a red herring to distract people into surrendering their civil rights.
Re:Papers Please! (Score:5, Insightful)
Sorry, WHAT? How is this any different from the I-9 verification forms that you're required to complete when starting a new job?
I honestly can't see how this is any worse than a Social Security card, passport, credit card, or drivers license. If you don't have one of those things, you're probably living completely off the grid anyway, and won't be affected by this at all.
I'm mindful of civil liberties, but fail to see how this would do anything to change the status quo, apart from cutting down on counterfeiting.
Re:Papers Please! (Score:4, Insightful)
Why don't we flip what you just said. "How is this any different from the I-9 verification forms that you're required to complete when starting a new job?"
Exactly. We already have verifications in place to ensure that an employer's workforce is legit. They're already being ignored by employers who want cheap labor. Why do we think a *different* verification process which still relies on the employer's honesty is going to work any better than the one we already have? It won't, because the meatpacker who's knowingly hiring illegals today is going to knowingly hire them tomorrow too.
So either the sponsors of this legislation are stupid (a possibility which I cannot at all discount) or there is an ulterior motive to this legislation (again, something I can't discount).
At best this is going to be a colossal waste of money and a bureaucratic nightmare of tangles, as the government will have to pay to distribute these cards, and will then have to spend inordinate amounts of time fixing the database errors that prevent people from getting work.
At worst this is going to be used to punish people the government is angry with. And I don't mean (necessarily) some Orwellian conspiracy where you either vocally support the government or you don't get to work anymore. I just mean "Oh. You cheated on your taxes back in 1995. Your work papers are revoked."
Whether or not you believe that the government would ever intentionally oppress its citizens, why should we allow the government to install the machinery that would facilitate it?
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
So how exactly would you deal with an illegal alien that says "I don't need a work permit, I'm a US citizen and no, you can't see my birth certificate or anything else that proves that I am." And even if the birth certificate is issued by the hospital and not the government, it's practically useless without some kind of credible identification which 99 times out of 100 means government issued. Denying you this card should be on equal level with the government denying your identity and denying your citizensh
Re:Papers Please! (Score:4, Insightful)
Then you can't work. No work, no money. No money, you become disenfranchised
No, then you just start receiving Government handouts and they know you'll vote Democrat for the rest of your life.....
And how were you planning to vote, with no ID card?
Re:Papers Please! (Score:4, Funny)
Save America!
Lynch your Congressman
How did you know?
http://www.house.gov/lynch/ [house.gov]
Re:Papers Please! (Score:4, Insightful)
Some problems with the idea of overthrowing the American government;
1) The government has more force to throw at you than any dissenting group could hope to match. The government has pretty much a monopoly of force.
2) Armed revolutions generally don't have possitive results. Name a single revolution after the French Revolution that saw generally positive results.
3) It is the low road, and pretty much says that you completely given up on the American people, or on any chance of fixing the American discourse.
4) It is the lazy way.
5) People will get hurt. Innocent people will get hurt. Your personal political ideology generally never trumps the lives of others. And if you go into it with an "us vs. them" motive, your ideology is probably flawed and tyrannical.
I personally dread the day when people take up guns against their elected government. First because the term "elected", by picking up guns your saying that you know better than the voters, which to me, is tyrannical. Its part of the stupid modern "tea party" line of bullshit, democracy is fine until people vote for people I don't like.
Second, who would get control of the new government? Liberatarians, actual socialists, the anarchists, Christian fundamentalists? All of these sections are disenfranchised feeling currently. And some small subset of each of these groups would be willing to fight, and more problematically, enforce their ideology on others. Someone is going to mention "restoring the Constitution" or some such empty phrase, which leads to the question "whose interpretation of it?". No interpretation is an objective truth, all are equal, no matter how much you disagree with them. Its like arguing whose interpretation of the Bible is right, and we all can see how those arguments turn out.
Third, who are you going to fight? If you managed to oust the president and all of congress, people will just vote them back. The Government is only a problem on the surface, but the real problem runs much deeper. The American people are the "problem", how do you fix that? I doubt an armed revolution will work.
I'm scared of your use of "faithful", when it comes to the potential killing of people, you'd better have much more than faith.
Re:Papers Please! (Score:5, Interesting)
> 1) The government has more force to throw at you than any dissenting group could hope to match. The
> government has pretty much a monopoly of force.
Currently true. Personally, I think that this is exactly the situation that the second amendment tried to avoid. Sadly narrow interpretation has hamstrung it and left us in this sad state.
Of course, I simply pointed out the second amendment as evidence that this state of affairs was not intended and that it is the right of the people to overthrow despots. I never said a revolution HAS to be violent. I would be happy to convene a new constitutional convention.... or 50 (no, I don't particularly want a strong federal union... if anything, maybe something like the EU)
> 3) It is the low road, and pretty much says that you completely given up on the American people, or on
> any chance of fixing the American discourse.
Low? Maybe. Its not so much the people as the bureaucracy that I have essentially 0 faith in. They have shown absolutely no real interest in representing what I see as liberty in any meaningful way. if anything, they approach whats left of liberty as an unfortunate hinderance to their ideas, rather than a core value.
I have 0 faith that they have any intention to do anything but maintain their dominance, and line their own coffers.
> I personally dread the day when people take up guns against their elected government. First because the
> term "elected", by picking up guns your saying that you know better than the voters, which to me, is
> tyrannical
This presumes fair elections. I submit that the system of choosing who ends up on the ballot AND the system of voting itself, constitute systematically unfair elections that highly favor the hegemony of two parties that are willing to collude to break up issues between them as a method of effectively shutting out any voices but their own.
As such, I don't, personally, recognize the legitimacy of said elections. I pay my taxes, of course, because they are the biggest gang in town and I am genuinely afraid of their thugs. That should not be construed as I actually consent to their governance or consider them "my government", any more than I would MS13 if they came into my shop and told me I had to pay for protection from their thugs too.
Personally I advocate the progressive marginalization of the government as an entity, as a new form of revolution. De-legitimization in the eyes of the masses, replacement of their functions by other entities where possible, wholesale subversion of their "laws" when applicable. Just as I would for any other armed gang of thugs.
As an anarchist (of the libertarian socialist variety), I have no desire to force my ideas on anyone but... I certainly don't advocate being a collaborator with thugs. I do however advocate self defense, and being prepared enough so that, should the day come, they need to think twice about clamping down and restricting liberty too much further.
If they simply did not attempt to use their thugs to enforce social engineering, I would happily treat them like any other legitimate organization which might need a force to defend itself but, otherwise respected others.
-Steve
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Sure, they'll start off requiring it ONLY for workers, but I'm sure they'll soon find creative ways to use it. I'm sure you can use it then to check for flight access. How about with cashing checks or even credit cards, nifty way to track purchases....maybe even stores will
Wow! (Score:2, Insightful)
flight access [...] cashing checks or even credit cards [...]to track purchases [...] replacement for courtesy cards [...] health care, I mean we can now see that you buy WAY too much alcohol and cigarettes [...]the govt types will be able to come up with new, nifty ways to use a national id
Wow - just WOW. You are aware that with the exception of "national health care", EVERYTHING you mentioned would be done by private businesses, right? And if idiots like you get their way and there is no "national health care", private insurance companies could use it the same way, right?
Don't get me wrong - such an ID is a horrible idea - but it's a horrible idea because it will be abused by corporations.
(Yes, I know - all the libertardians will now proceed to mod me down and talk about how the invisible
Re:Papers Please! (Score:5, Informative)
Sure, they'll start off requiring it ONLY for workers
That's not really an "ONLY", is it? The British government started off requiring them only for international (non-EU, IIRC) students and air-side airport workers. (The students is because there are loads of international students registered on fake courses at fake universities.)
There are some useful arguments here [liberty-hu...hts.org.uk] and here [no2id.net].
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Yeah, we need to get rid of all those people harvesting the food we eat. That will fix everything!
Re: (Score:2)
The problem with this - your card has no biometrics (pictures, fingerprints, etc) - so you can steal someones social security card and then use that to gain work...which is not what we want.
Uhmm... Using a stolen SSN to get a job... Wouldn't that mean the social security benefits aquired over the years in that job would be credited to the original owner of that number?
Re:Tracking of work? Nothing new (Score:5, Insightful)
Uhmm... Using a stolen SSN to get a job... Wouldn't that mean the social security benefits aquired over the years in that job would be credited to the original owner of that number?
And the income taxes that would be owed for said income....
This whole thing is pointless anyway. Does Congress really live in a fantasy land where illegal immigrants are hired to positions where they supply SSNs, drivers licenses, etc? In my experience the vast majority of businesses employing illegal labor do so by paying them in cash. "Come work with us for a day putting up drywall, there's a few sawbucks in it for you." No amount of biometrics will stop this.
Re:Tracking of work? Nothing new (Score:4, Informative)
Does Congress really live in a fantasy land where illegal immigrants are hired to positions where they supply SSNs, drivers licenses, etc? In my experience the vast majority of businesses employing illegal labor do so by paying them in cash. "Come work with us for a day putting up drywall, there's a few sawbucks in it for you." No amount of biometrics will stop this.
Illegal immigrants use stolen socials to get said jobs...yes it happens, and yes it is significant. Those socials are also used by criminals who are trying to avoid detection, used by people trying to steal benefits, used by people trying to get loans and defaulting on them, etc. It's a huge issue. SS theft is extremely bad - it hurts the person who had their information stolen (getting your SS changed is next to impossible). It hurts the businesses who got screwed out of loan money (which in turn raises the prices for the general public).
Another card? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Don't worry, the UK government has been pushing for this for years. Technically it already exists, and about 5 volunteers have signed up for it. On the other hand, while certain groups have IIRC already been forced to have one, other test groups have outright rejected it.
With an election coming up, I haven't seen a single reference in favour of ID cards from the Labour lot who are in power at the moment, and both the other big parties have said they will scrap the scheme. It's become a political nightmare f
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Fortunately, I somehow doubt that the rest of the world is going to start adopting universal ID because one or two governments think it's a good idea. At the risk of triggering Godwin's Law, Germany doesn't exactly have a great record in this area. And lately, the US probably has the most abusive anti-privacy/state intrusion laws in the western world, and I think many other places are getting a bit sick of the US throwing its weight around.
Meanwhile, privacy and the database state are becoming a significant
Re: (Score:2)
Perhaps because the existing cards don't cover and weren't designed for this particular application, and using the driver's licence would be stupid?
Re: (Score:2)
using the driver's licence would be stupid?
Especially for people who can't drive for whatever reason.
Comment removed (Score:5, Funny)
Papers please! (Score:4, Informative)
Seriously though...this idea would likely work just as it is being advertised, but the privacy implications of this are astounding. Then again, we only have the illusion of privacy at this point here in the US, so we may as well stop fooling ourselves....
Remember kids, privacy != freedom
Re:Papers please! (Score:4, Insightful)
Remember kids, privacy != freedom
It's been well-established that a lack of privacy discourages people from peaceful assembly and accessing other tools necessary to the success of a democracy. When we have designated protest zones in cages tipped with razor wire and a hundred cameras covering every angle, and people being profiled by the FBI and investigated as potential subversives for doing this, it becomes clear that privacy, while not being the same as freedom, is essential to it. One cannot survive without the other.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I think this highlights the difference between 'privacy' and 'anonymity.' Subtly different concepts. I think when most people scream 'privacy!' they are really advocating anonymity.
Privacy is being able to do things without others knowing about it. Anonymity is being able to do something without people knowing who you are. Notably privacy implies anonymity, but anonymity does not imply privacy. Case in point: if you are speeding in traffic, people know that there is someone speeding - it is not a private a
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I posted this yesterday in a different story, but it seems appropriate for this one as well:
http://haacked.com/images/TerroristsHateFreedom.gif [haacked.com]
national ID (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
This is a National ID card. Call it what it is and be done with it, don't try to hide it as part of an immigration bill.
Several states already have laws on their books preventing their executive branches from servicing a National ID card. A few years ago they called it "REAL ID".
e.g. New Hampshire [state.nh.us]. Folks interested in these issues ought to come out [freestateproject.org] and lend a hand.
Meh (Score:4, Insightful)
The only reason I mention that is because a social security card is also 'required' for employment, although I lost mine when I was a kid and have never shown it to any of my employers.
I tell them I forgot it and they never ask again.
Re:Meh (Score:4, Informative)
A social security card is not required. It can be used as a "List C" document for the I9 form.
http://jobsearch.about.com/cs/backgroundcheck/a/background_2.htm [about.com]
I simply use my passport since it's a "List A" document. Which begs the question ... why is it that we need something more than that? Like this new thing is going to be "unforgeable" ?
Tie this in to drivers license, and passport (Score:2)
Gov't - stop making life cumbersome. With technology we can get everything we want, on a drivers license sized ID card. It shouldn't be that hard.
Oh - and don't forget the most import
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
hey why not add thier bank account data, IRS payment status, medical history, criminal record, fbi and other three letter agency file indices... I'm sure you could think of even more things that would make your life and the governements easier. Don't worry, next week the Senate takes up the 'lets wipe everyone's ass for them' bill.
Start with lawmakers (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Start with lawmakers (Score:5, Interesting)
Federal employees are already being issued biometric ID cards.
Illegal work. (Score:2)
"A person familiar with the legislative planning said the biometric data would likely be either fingerprints or a scan of the veins in the top of the hand. It would be required of all workers, including teenagers, but would be phased in, with current workers needing to obtain the card only when they next changed jobs, the person said. The card requirement also would be phased in among employers, beginning with industries that typically rely on illegal-immigrant labor.""
What about virtual companies and telec
For those who are going to complain (Score:2)
For those of you who are going to draw analogies to Soviet Russia, etc. and complain that this somehow violates our rights and so on: just think of all the "papers" we ALREADY have to carry in this country. A lot of fuss was made in anti-Soviet propoganda about the papers the Russians had to carry around, but try leaving your house some time in the U.S. without your driver's license, car registration, proof of insurance, etc. I'm pretty sure the cops aren't going to accept "But this is a free country!" in l
Re: (Score:2)
The difference is that requiring you to have a driver's license, registration, and proof of insurance helps ME if you hit me with your car. And you're entirely free to walk around or take public transportation without any kind of identification whatsoever. That's not the case in many other countries. In the US, you are only required to have (and carry) a driver's license if you want to drive. Unless there's some law I'm unaware of that requires everyone to learn how to drive, which there isn't.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Rather open the borders (Score:4, Interesting)
and let in all the illegals than give those fucks in washington not only a national id card but one with biometric data. Worse than the Nazis and Soviets.
Guilty until proven innocent. (Score:5, Insightful)
This is something that we need to harp on everytime the subject comes up. You cannot pass laws against illegal aliens to prevent them from working or participating in social programs, because we don't know who they are. You can only pass laws against everyone requiring them to prove they are a citizen. To require us to beg government approval before we can work or attend school, and hope there isn't a clerical error, or we never lose our papers at a bad time, or that the government won't someday extend this program to a larger scope.
There are no laws against illegal aliens, there are only laws stating that we are all assumed guilty of being illegal aliens until we prove ourselves innocent.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
That's the best argument I've seen. And as I recall, there is some SCOTUS decision that basically says you aren't required to prove or even admit who you are, unless you're a principle in a crime.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
> no coincidence that the US transitioned from an open immigration society to a closed
> society in the 20s and 30s
Uh.... The Emergency Quota Act was passed in 1921. What entitlements were being doled out in 1921? Note that the act didn't place any limits on immigration from Latin America and placed the limit on Northern/Western Europe higher than actual immigration levels; it was basically targeted at limiting immigration from Eastern/Southern Europe. And that had more to do with "those people are
666 (Score:3, Funny)
Not a fix (Score:2)
The Plans... (Score:5, Insightful)
How come its OK for capital to transfer across borders but labor can't move freely? How come I have to go through more trouble to get legal working status in another country than I do to invest in a foreign stock market? Is it because the nation state is the new lord's estate and they want to keep me on the manor? And to make sure we don't get any funny ideas, the Daddy Party tries to tell us we should hate our neighbors and do anything necessary to keep them out, fomenting racism and causing all sorts of animosity on both sides of the border, and the water, making sure that we're just as unwelcome abroad as they are here... screw this shit.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Do you care if your neighbor is from your own culture and thus understands, for example, that it's not acceptable to make loud noises at night because most folks work during the day? And thus someone from a culture where partying outside well into the morning hours is going to be bothering the hell out of you?
Wait... so them teenagers are all dirty foreigners? I KNEW IT!!!
The same argument was made with the Irish, and the Italians, and what do we think now? Is there anything more American than going out to a bar on St. Patty's day and drinking yourself drunk. And more so, is there anything more American than our pizza, spaghetti, etc?
This "culture" argument is stupid, and has been blown off hojillions of times before in our culture.
Great idea! (Score:5, Insightful)
Well, this completely solves the illegal immigration problem! I mean, it's not like people will give illegal immigrants jobs if they don't have valid "job cards." After all, then they would need to pay the immigrants cash under the table or something. And, of course, these cards will be 100% forgery proof so immigrants won't be able to just get a fake ID.
Plus, there are no privacy concerns at all. I mean a card with your fingerprint and other personal information sitting right in your wallet? That's the most secure place I can think of. Nobody would ever lose their wallet or have it stolen. The card could never, ever go missing leading to identity theft. Nope. Simply impossible.
Oh and did I mention the "E-Verify" online system to check the ID card's validity. A stroke of genius! It's sure to be 100% hack-proof like all good government sites are.
Finally, there's no way this would ever be used for anything other than jobs. There will be no temptation for our completely honest politicians to extend this to travel, voting or any other use.
Now if you'll excuse me, I need to clean my glasses. I think there's a smudge on the rose-colored lens.
The powers that be... (Score:2)
... don't want a fix to the problem.
It's not good for business, and so MANY people don't want to fix the problem, it's never going to be solved in any real way.
You know the I-9 form? You know how annoying it is? You know how many people have been prosecuted for falsifying information on the form?
Two. That's it. Two cases.
Either people here in the US are really, really honest, or there's no one out there investigating theses things.
New technology won't change old behavior.
implant (Score:2, Insightful)
i knew something like this would happen when immigration moved under the auspices of the Department of Fatherland Security.
and RFID is so much nicer than barcodes or numbers just written straight on the skin...
Instead of using crap like this... (Score:2)
Instead of using crap like this to stop illegals, do this instead:
1.Do whatever is necessary to ensure legal American workers can get (and will try to get) the jobs that illegals are currently taking. Tie this work to unemployment benefits (i.e. if you are currently out of work and receiving any kind of government unemployment benefits you have to take these jobs. Possibly the government over there could do what the government here in Australia did and introduce "work for the dole" (which is where you work
Just need to have serious fines for employers (Score:5, Informative)
Today, it is cheaper to staff with undocumented workers and hope they don't get caught. If ALL employers had to verify the ID of all of their employees and contractors or face serious fines and all contractors (including household help) were required to show a verifiable ID and anyone who fails to check or falsifies faced serious penalties, this problem would be hugely reduced overnight.
The real problem is that the big businesses (agriculture, meat packing, hospitality, commercial real-estate, etc..) want the cheap labor and won't let the problem be solved.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I googled, and found the fine to be up to 10,000 and 5 years in prison for employing, knowingly, illegal workers. 5 years in prison isn't insignificant. The problem is more likely that the employer didn't know (or claim to not know), and/or the illegal employee gave him counterfeit papers.
As an employer, how can you be certain? If the person hands you a W2 from an old job, a valid looking ssn, what more should you do? And if the employer can't be certain without going to extreme lengths and background ch
It's official (Score:4, Interesting)
Federalism is officially a complete failure.
The day I am forced to get an unconstitutional "biometric ID card" in order not to have my job opportunities, directly subsidized by taxes, government-sponsored monopolies and other expropriated wealth, stolen by an illegal immigrant is the day that it's time to dissolve the federal government and revert it's duties back to states that have some semblance of fiscal responsibility and individual rights.
And I say this of course under the near-universal assumption (by now) that this, along with everything else the US government does, will do absolutely nothing to curb illegal immigration or salvage jobs or benefit Americans and instead will be used simply as another tool of inept government to punish the compliant and reward criminals and cheaters and traitor banks and businesses.
The US is no longer a functional government. It can't regulate borders. It dissolves them and signs them away in supranational treaties. It can't regulate trade or abusive businesses. It supports them and bails them out when they fail. It can't win wars. It can't even define "winning" in terms of the bullshit wars it now engages in. It can't regulate reproduction or resource consumption or immigration or anything that actually affects the long term well-being of it's citizens. All it can do at this point is make token bullshit infringements on the rights of anyone unlucky or stupid enough to get in it's way, accomplishing absolutely nothing save crippling debt increases in the process.
Permanent underclass? (Score:4, Interesting)
but would be phased in, with current workers needing to obtain the card only when they next changed jobs
Well, that's scary. You could easily form a permanent underclass of never-employable again people with that plan.
There's no point to getting a card unless its more effective than a passport or drivers license or military ID, or my freaking passport would be good enough so we wouldn't need this new thing. It took months to get my passport, including all kinds of hoops to jump thru for notarization and some special kind of birth certificate and other foolishness involving the local postmaster. I assume this new thing will be worse, otherwise we wouldn't need it. Its a safe assumption that in general, any time the govt does anything, its to make it worse for the middle class, and this specific situation seems to fit the mold.
For a upper middle class employed dude like myself, a couple months time and a couple thousand bucks is annoying but no big deal, similar to replacing a leaking roof and fixing the damage. For dirt poor, unemployed, barely HS educated, how-mucha-month, joe six pack, he's screwed. What if J6P needs to hire a lawyer to fix some paperwork, or needs to pay up front to get docs from various agencies to prove his existence?
Greasing the wheels (Score:5, Insightful)
It's funny how a lot of Americans are shouting "Dey took our jerbs!", but when you actually offer them the jobs that illegal immigrants are doing, i.e. scrubbing toilets for low wages, then suddenly they are too good for that kind of work.
Illegal immigrants do not take away high-pay jobs, and those actual high pay jobs are routinely shipped off to India and alike anyway. Those immigrants are greasing the wheels of the economy, doing jobs that nobody else wants to do.
I see it in my own country (Netherlands) where we have to ship in seasonal workers to harvest asparagus crops because they just can't get the local people to do the hard work.
It'll be interesting to see the effects of this plan.
Re:Greasing the wheels (Score:5, Insightful)
Illegal immigrants do not take away high-pay jobs, and those actual high pay jobs are routinely shipped off to India and alike anyway. Those immigrants are greasing the wheels of the economy, doing jobs that nobody else wants to do.
Right.
Because, until the massive influx of ILLEGAL immigrants in the U.S., toilets everywhere went unscrubbed, burgers went unflipped, no construction happened, lawns went unmowed, assembly-lines were silent...
Keep on keepin' on regurgitating the "They only take the jobs nobody else wants" line.
I have a good friend that is a ceramic-tile-setter. That is NOT a "Job nobody else wants." At 48 years old, his career (making about $20-30 an hour) is OVER; simply because he simply cannot support his family on the wages that an entire crew of ILLEGAL immigrants (who sleep THREE FAMILIES to a house) can be hired for.
Sorry, the onslaught of ILLEGAL immigrants (in the U.S., mostly Mexicans) has ruined the U.S. economy. You see, it's a "trickle-UP" effect.
Re:Greasing the wheels (Score:5, Insightful)
You know what? When some people find that their job doesn't pay enough for their lifestyle they look for a new, better paid job. Sometimes they go back to school to learn new skills, sometimes other people in the household start working so that they whole family isn't supported by one person (which is increasingly impossible).
Of course some people just sit back on their asses and complain that it's the mexicans' fault for taking all the work. But that doesn't make sense - why is this guy entitled to more money just because of where he was born? Why should I (as the customer wanting my bathroom tiled) pay more just because he wants me to? And why should the government penalise people willing to work for less? Do we complain when Newegg sells us memory cheaper than elsewhere?
It's really simple - if you're selling something in a market, be it a product or a service, no one owes you customers. No one owes you a business model (see copyright & RIAA, it's a popular topic around here). If you're charging too much, lower your prices. If you can't make enough profit at those prices, offer something else to distinguish yourself (maybe he does better quality work? maybe he could partner with a designer?). If that still doesn't work - figure out a different way to make money.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I don't know why you picked on this poor fellow, but he's not railing against the free market. He's railing against the unfair price pressures of competing against criminals who don't have the same obligations (tax, insurance, supporting a family in the USA with a higher cost-of-living than Mexico) that those who play by the rules do.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
"But that doesn't make sense - why is this guy entitled to more money just because of where he was born?"
Perhaps you missed the part about ILLEGAL immigrants? His job is being threatened by people breaking the law. The citizens of a country are entitled to set the laws that run a country within reason.
I'm sorry but it's not reasonable to disrupt society and good well paying stable jobs to cater to illegal immigrants and cheap consumers and employers (both of which are breaking the law by hiring illegals).
Never happen (Score:3, Insightful)
Between the libertarian right, the religious crazies who will conflate this with the "mark of the beast", and the lefties who don't trust law enforcement, this will never get through Congress. If it ever came to a vote, the uproar in the intertubes and talk radio would be deafening and the tea party loonies would all die of apoplexy.
Take it from a person who has to carry one... (Score:3, Informative)
I lived in USA for 6 years and the best thing there, in terms of citizen-government interaction, was that there was no mandatory ID cards.
Sure, an ID card is not that big of a deal at first. It's not much unlike a DL (which almost everyone carries around all the time anyway), and it's not like the police can't track you down all the time.
But this is what will happen:
Here in Serbia, quite literally, I can't even take a walk in the park anymore without a cop stopping me and asking for ID...
I can sum this up quite eloquently. (Score:3, Insightful)
FUCK THAT!
(seriously...in addition to the obvious reasons why this is such an awful idea, there is going to be a very large population of people who will see this as "the mark of the beast.")
Re:Ornlu (Score:5, Funny)
Ok, it's not like you have to work...
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Mr. Cheney, we've advised you in the past to stop trolling internet forums!
Re:Not with Obama (Score:4, Insightful)
I find this hard to believe. Obama already gets enough grief about
Obama's not in the senate. He hasn't been in the senate since he became president. This proposal is in the senate. Stop obama bashing.
Just because Schumer is meeting with Obama does not mean Obama is responsible for this idea. According ot the article, a source in the white house said they have no official stance.
Personally, this is the first time I have seen the democrats sell something properly. They are targetting this towards everyone, but their language is focusing on immigrants. Republicans are against national IDs, but they are more likely to be for it when we start throwing out the words "immigrants"
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
That's the way it goes, and part of the reason why I turned my back on what the Republican party has become.
"Government, stay outta my life! Unless it's gay marriage, prayer in schools, pot, or mexicans. Then you need to regulate the fuck out of it!"
And they wonder why people look down on them...
To be fair, the Democrats are just as bad...the difference being that Democrats like to pretend they aren't lying to you, while Republicans lie right to your face. Either way, still lying.
Re:why are people so emotional about this? (Score:4, Insightful)
A driver's license is proof you had training in operating a potentially dangerous piece of machinery around others. Which is why they have ticky boxes for things like "chauffeur" and "commercial" on it. You know, because it's about driving. I agree, it shouldn't be used for anything other than employment as a driver, traffic violations, and insurance purposes! In fact, it's a perfect example of how the "oh, this card will only be used for X" is so easily corrupted!
Want to know what hysteria is? It's the "OMG TEH MEXICANS ARE STEALIN' MAH JOB!". Nevermind that these 'patriot' xenophobes tend to be the same group that practically worship symbols like the Statue of Liberty, but don't even bother to learn the inscription she carries (I'll give you a hint: "Give me your tired, your poor...") Instead of radio-collaring everyone, why don't we concentrate on fixing the broken immigration system that keeps legal applicants in limbo for years, pushing some to come here illegally instead. Oh wait, that's going to take a lot of effort and won't appease the xenophobes, so let's just put a shiny band-aid on it to get re-elected. (And with all the immigration hysteria, the fools won't even notice that we've chipped away a little more of their freedom!)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)