By: S. Rowan Wolf, Ph.D Uncommon Thought Journal
May 13, 2005
This work is under a fair use Creative Commons License
It's all over the news and likely to become a reality - a so-called National ID. The National ID card will be the consequence of the passage of the REAL ID Act of 2005 (H.R. 418). The bill is purportedly part of anti-terrorist legislation which is reflected in the actual title (versus the short title) of the bill - "TITLE I--AMENDMENTS TO FEDERAL LAWS TO PROTECT AGAINST TERRORIST ENTRY." One might wonder how it is that a measure to stop "terrorists" from entering the country becomes a mandate for a National ID card. How does a border control issue become a massive population monitoring issue?
The Bill
The National ID card is embedded within this larger bill, which pertains to the treatment, detention and removal of removal of "aliens." This section of the bill deals with the various legislation and protections already in place for those who are applying for refugee status, asylum, and immigration. Most of these powers resided in the Attorney General. Those powers are now either shifted to, or shared with, the Secretary of Homeland Security. Determination of an "alien's" rights and disposition is ultimately not a matter of proof or fact, but totally at the "discretion" of whoever is deciding an individual's status (See Section 101 of the bill)
The REAL ID portion starts with Section 201. It applies to both Driver's Licenses and Identification Cards. Both of the documents have been issued by the states - each determining their own qualifications, style and form. Under this act, the requirements for the cards are set by Homeland Security. The basic requirements as laid out in the bill are:
(1) The person's full legal name.(2) The person's date of birth.
(3) The person's gender.
(4) The person's driver's license or identification card number.
(5) A digital photograph of the person.
(6) The person's address of principle residence.
(7) The person's signature.
(8) Physical security features designed to prevent tampering, counterfeiting, or duplication of the document for fraudulent purposes.
(9) A common machine-readable technology, with defined minimum data elements.
The states are required to verify all documentation to the specification of the Department of Homeland Security, maintain the records, etc. All of this will be incredibly expensive and borne by the states, but there are issues in the above that should raise eyebrows. First is that the "digital photo" is for face recognition purposes. In other words, capable of being run against the facial recognition database. Second, is the identification on the card must be formatted to a common reader (whoever gets that contract will be very rich). The facial recognition aspect is part of "other requirements" of the states" (3) Subject each person applying for a driver's license or identification card to mandatory facial image capture. Further, the states are required to maintain databases of all of the information required (including the facial recognition and other biometric data - such as retinal scan), and "Motor vehicle drivers' histories, including motor vehicle violations, suspensions, and points on licenses."
Privacy or Security
Since REAL ID is embedded in a security bill embedded within the Iraq War appropriations bill, one might assume that it is a security measure. One might assume that a National ID will protect us - somehow. If we know everything about everyone, then we will surely know who the "bad guys" are. Given the "electronic" aspects specified, it is clear that one of those databases will be the facial recognition database. The data that will be accessible through a National ID is massive. Already, we have databases linking all types of private commercial data, criminal data, and employment data. It is highly likely that there will be pressures to place RFID chips into the IDs. In fact, California is already looking at legislation to ban placing RFID in IDs. What a marriage that would make. The possibilities are almost endless. They range from being able to locate and track someone (GPS) to keying the code to homes, locks, cars, to automatic verification of commercial transactions. Imagine how efficient and portable it would be to have one little card that could do everything.
There are those who think that there is a need for one identification for everyone. One that is virtually - though never intended to be - is the Social Security Number. This is now used for all sorts of tracking and identification. [You might be interested in looking at the GAO report on the commercial use of Social Security Numbers.] We have all been warned repeatedly how we should protect our SSN, because if the wrong person has it, they have key pieces of our identity. As is noted at Your Social Security Number:
One of the most common forms of identity theft is when someone discovers your SSN and uses it to access personal information. For example, someone with your name and SSN could walk into your bank pretending to be you, claim that they forgot their (your) account number, and instead provide your SSN. They might make changes to your account by making withdrawals or transferring funds. They could open checking accounts, apply for credit cards and loans in your name, and more. A hacker can use your SSN to view personal information that you have placed online. Many people do not discover that they have become a victim of identity theft until they try to make a big purchase such as a car or house.
One little number for everything. One little ID for everything. Let's look at an example that most of you can probably relate to. We all have accounts, cards, voice mail, access to password protected programs and sites in our lives. We are told to come up with unique passwords and change them frequently so that someone doesn't steal them or crack them. But that is so cumbersome. Why not just pick one and use it for everything? Think about all of your PINs, codes and passwords. What would be at risk if you had one number for all of those? Magnify that by a thousand, and you have what information about you would be at risk with the proposed National ID card. Feeling more secure?
The Bigger Picture
The National ID is really part of an ongoing push for the creation of massive databases to "mine" for a variety of purposes. You may remember back in 2002 that a DARPA program called Total Information Awareness (TIA) made the news. This was a plan to create a massive database of everything (including security camera footage, phone calls, and internet/email communication) and put it in one place where it could be mined. The appropriations for funding the program did not pass because of privacy concerns (see Moving the Bar.) While TIA went down to defeat, it did not die. Everyone and their cousin has gotten in on the big data collection scheme. Agencies from HUD's Homeless Management Information System to Homeland Security's plan for mining commercial databases. They are particularly interested CAPPS which is passenger data from the airlines. Of course we also have the MATRIX system which is a criminal database. It is difficult to grasp just how much data we are talking about. According to the GAO, there are 199 datamining efforts going on within the federal government as of 2004. That is why the government is building a huge underground facility capable of holding 10 terrabytes of data a day (Generating "data" and a Hole to Put It In).
Why the push for all this data collection? Why the incremental creep of the invasion of our lives. They very concept of TIA raised enough hackles to get the funding withdrawn for the project, but it has become a hydra. The newest and most public version of that is the National ID. I think that most people would feel uncomfortable at the scope of the data collection that is already being done. There is fear mongering, but there is also real experience that folks can draw on. While many agencies and corporations would have access to the data on us, we would not. Anyone who has tried to straighten out a billing error, or even an address change problem, knows that it is virtually impossible to get the same information the company (or government) has on you. If you were suspected of engaging in "suspicious" activity (and the definition of that gets broader and broader), how would you ever get that straightened out?
More data does not mean more information and therefore better decision making or security. It means chaos and random interpretation at the discretion of a person or a program. With millions of pieces of information on a person how do you determine what is important? How many ways can you put that data together?
We are living in a period where (in the U.S. at least) you are guilty until you prove yourself innocent. If you are suspected of "terrorist" leanings, you have to prove you are not. If you are suspected of "crime," you have to prove you are not a criminal. Disputes with most business transactions leaves you to prove the business is in error. Proving "innocence" is a very difficult thing which is why the courts are supposed to operate under the premise of innocent until proven guilty. However, as the "terrorist" cases have gone, the government controls what information you can present, and who they will let testify.
Instituting a National ID card only accelerates and already crumbling privacy protection. I fear that we move very close to a state of virtually unlimited power in the hands of the state, and no protection from the abuses of that state. That is not a condition that has space for either freedom or democracy.
Addendendum Laws that are modified by the "REAL ID Act of 2005":
Conditions for Granting Asylum- Section 208(b)(1) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1158(b)(1))
Section 102(c) of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (8 U.S.C. 1103
Section 212(a)(3)(B)(I) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(3)(B)(I)
Engage in Terrorist Activity Defined- Section 212(a)(3)(B)(iv) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(3)(B)(iv)) is amended to read as follows:
Section 237(a)(4)(B) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1227(a)(4)(B))