Super National ID Card Passes House

http://www.infowars.com/articles/ps/nat_id_super_card_passes_house.htm

On the heels of passing the National ID card in December, the House has passed legislation radically expanding the scope of the Orwellian ID law. From Panamerican standardization to DNA databases to targeting gun owners, it is a nightmare and does nothing about illegal immigration.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2005-02-10-house-licenses_x.htm

Posted 2/10/2005 3:02 PM Updated 2/11/2005 2:13 AM

House passes bill that would tighten driver's license rules

By Kathy Kiely, USA TODAY

WASHINGTON — Legislation meant to make it harder for terrorists to operate in the USA won approval in the House of Representatives on Thursday.

Proponents said it would improve border security. Critics said it was biased against immigrants and would saddle states with millions of dollars in bills that they can't afford to pay.

The bill now goes to the Senate.

The measure, sponsored by Judiciary Chairman James Sensenbrenner of Wisconsin, passed on a 261-161 vote. It would:

• Create secure driver's licenses and bar people who are not in the country legally from obtaining them.

• Make it easier for judges to deny requests for asylum and deport non-citizens.

• Permit the secretary of Homeland Security to overrule state and local regulations to speed completion of border barriers, such as the 14-mile fence between California and Mexico that's being held up by an environmental dispute.

Last year, controversy over those proposals nearly sank an intelligence bill that implemented recommendations of the 9/11 Commission. Sensenbrenner dropped his opposition only after he was promised speedy passage this year of his measure.

He described the package as a national security measure designed to prevent a terrorist from using the asylum system to prolong a stay in this country or to obtain a driver's license that enables someone to get on a plane or transfer money.

Opponents said laws already exist to foil terrorists. Democratic Rep. James McGovern of Massachusetts accused backers of the bill of pandering to "political pressures from immigrant haters."

Democrats and Republicans said the strong House vote in favor of the bill is a sign of trouble for President Bush's plan for a "guest worker" program that would allow non-citizens who are living and working here unlawfully to earn legal status.

"It's telling him that the tide has shifted. Open borders are no longer the clarion call up here," said Rep. Tom Tancredo, a Colorado Republican who has been a leading proponent of stricter immigration policies. "My side of the debate is on the offensive for the first time in years."

Rep. Barney Frank, a Massachusetts Democrat who opposed the Sensenbrenner bill as too tough on asylum seekers, agreed with Tancredo's assessment. The president "cannot deliver his party on anything that can be seen as pro-immigrant," Frank said.

Republican House leaders plan to send Sensenbrenner's bill to the Senate attached to a funding bill for Iraq to enhance its chance of enactment. But Jim Manley, a spokesman for Senate Democrats, said that would trigger "a huge debate on the Senate floor."

That prospect might not please Senate Republican leaders. John Cornyn, a Texas Republican who heads the Senate's immigration subcommittee, said he'd rather wait on the Sensenbrenner bill until a full immigration debate later when considering Bush's proposal.

But Republican conservatives in the House say they won't consider the president's guest-worker program unless Sensenbrenner's bill becomes law. "My feeling is you have to protect the border ,,, before you go to immigration reform," House Majority Leader Tom DeLay of Texas said last week.

Opponents of the Sensenbrenner measure include a range of religious organizations. Groups such as the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops contend the asylum provision, which permits judges to reject applicants who seem to lack credibility, could keep out frightened torture victims who may become confused when telling their stories to immigration officials. Among the critics is Rep. Chris Smith, a conservative Republican from New Jersey. "This is an ugly provision," he said. "I guarantee you, real asylum seekers will be denied."

The National Conference of State Legislatures and the National Governors Association say they oppose the Sensenbrenner measure because developing new driver's licenses will impose huge costs on states.

Last year, the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office estimated that the Sensenbrenner measure could cost states $460 million over the next five years.

The White House issued a statement this week endorsing the Sensenbrenner package but calling for changes in the driver's license and asylum provisions. That has raised suspicions among conservative Republicans. "I believe the president is trying to equivocate," Tancredo said.

 

For the people who will inevitably try to dismiss Pressed_Rat's post as "internet conspiracy theory," I have included below the speech that Rep. Ron Paul (TX) gave before the House.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mr. Speaker:

I rise in strong opposition to HR 418, the REAL ID Act. This bill purports to make us safer from terrorists who may sneak into the United States, and from other illegal immigrants. While I agree that these issues are of vital importance, this bill will do very little to make us more secure. It will not address our real vulnerabilities. It will, however, make us much less free. In reality, this bill is a Trojan horse. It pretends to offer desperately needed border control in order to stampede Americans into sacrificing what is uniquely American: our constitutionally protected liberty.

What is wrong with this bill?

The REAL ID Act establishes a national ID card by mandating that states include certain minimum identification standards on driver’s licenses. It contains no limits on the government’s power to impose additional standards. Indeed, it gives authority to the Secretary of Homeland Security to unilaterally add requirements as he sees fit.

Supporters claim it is not a national ID because it is voluntary. However, any state that opts out will automatically make non-persons out of its citizens. The citizens of that state will be unable to have any dealings with the federal government because their ID will not be accepted. They will not be able to fly or to take a train. In essence, in the eyes of the federal government they will cease to exist. It is absurd to call this voluntary.

Republican Party talking points on this bill, which claim that this is not a national ID card, nevertheless endorse the idea that “the federal government should set standards for the issuance of birth certificates and sources of identification such as driver’s licenses.” So they admit that they want a national ID but at the same time pretend that this is not a national ID.

This bill establishes a massive, centrally-coordinated database of highly personal information about American citizens: at a minimum their name, date of birth, place of residence, Social Security number, and physical and possibly other characteristics. What is even more disturbing is that, by mandating that states participate in the “Drivers License Agreement,” this bill creates a massive database of sensitive information on American citizens that will be shared with Canada and Mexico!

This bill could have a chilling effect on the exercise of our constitutionally guaranteed rights. It re-defines "terrorism" in broad new terms that could well include members of firearms rights and anti-abortion groups, or other such groups as determined by whoever is in power at the time. There are no prohibitions against including such information in the database as information about a person’s exercise of First Amendment rights or about a person’s appearance on a registry of firearms owners.

This legislation gives authority to the Secretary of Homeland Security to expand required information on driver’s licenses, potentially including such biometric information as retina scans, finger prints, DNA information, and even Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) radio tracking technology. Including such technology as RFID would mean that the federal government, as well as the governments of Canada and Mexico, would know where Americans are at all time of the day and night.

There are no limits on what happens to the database of sensitive information on Americans once it leaves the United States for Canada and Mexico - or perhaps other countries. Who is to stop a corrupt foreign government official from selling or giving this information to human traffickers or even terrorists? Will this uncertainty make us feel safer?

What will all of this mean for us? When this new program is implemented, every time we are required to show our driver’s license we will, in fact, be showing a national identification card. We will be handing over a card that includes our personal and likely biometric information, information which is connected to a national and international database.

H.R. 418 does nothing to solve the growing threat to national security posed by people who are already in the U.S. illegally. Instead, H.R. 418 states what we already know: that certain people here illegally are "deportable." But it does nothing to mandate deportation.

Although Congress funded an additional 2,000 border guards last year, the administration has announced that it will only ask for an additional 210 guards. Why are we not pursuing these avenues as a way of safeguarding our country? Why are we punishing Americans by taking away their freedoms instead of making life more difficult for those who would enter our country illegally?

H.R. 418 does what legislation restricting firearm ownership does. It punishes law-abiding citizens. Criminals will ignore it. H.R. 418 offers us a false sense of greater security at the cost of taking a gigantic step toward making America a police state.

I urge my colleagues to vote “NO” on the REAL ID Act of 2005.

 

Thanks for posting that, LS. Mr. Paul's words could not ring more true.

And might I add kudos to Ron Paul for being one of the few congressmen truly standing up for the rights of Americans.

 

Yes, I was impressed with his speech, and I honor his courage in speaking out. If only more Congressmen were acting the same way . . .

 

Well, it seems everything is going as planned....
Stuff like this is just plain scary. I too admire Paul's courage in delivering the plain truth, let's hope people are listening.

 

Ok...the House aside, what are the chances of this actually getting through the Senate and into law?

 

Email and or call your Senators and demand that they vote against this measure. Also write letters to local and national newspapers exposing this bill for what it truly is. Lets raise hell and put a great big spotlight on this thing and expose it to the entire country. If your Senator is a Republican play up states rights and separation of powers issues.


What was that sound? It was our Founding Fathers turning over in their graves.

 

Well, the bill is supposedly going to meet greater opposition in the Senate, but we'll just have to wait and see what happens. Like AT98BooBoo said, though, it would be a good idea to write your Senators . . .

 

I heard about this on the news, but the impression I got is that it was just going to be tighter restrictions on the documents needed to get a state drivers license or ID. I didn't hear any mention of all states going to a national ID.

Gotta love the media spin!

 

I have yet to find even one news source (not to say that I looked REALLY hard) that has reported on what Rep. Ron Paul said. Funny how they avoid that topic . . .

 

Is it now a national thing or a state thing that when you go to get your drivers license renewed that you get a retna scan, and a temporary piece of paper to use in lieu of your license as they send your info off to be checked against who knows what. You then get your license about three weeks later. They are currently doing this in my state. I don't know when it started but the last time I got my license renewed was in 2001 and it was a seven year license, due to be renewed in 2007. Who knows what type of crap will be in place by then. Everyone here is complaining about it as there was no notification to anyone of this new process.

Seems to me the retna scan is useless if they don't have a previous scan to compare it to. I suppose this is what they are hoping to establish down the road for future renewals...Is this taking place in any other states??

 

Welcome to the club. Gun owners started this particular club. It's the club of those whose cause is ignored by the mainstream media.

Remember when that failing law school student from Zimbabwe or somewhere went nuts in some southeastern U.S. law school (I forgot which state)...

He shot and killed some people, and was still armed and threatening more. The media reported that "some students confronted and overpowered him."

Well, that was about 1/8 of the story. What really happened was that a guy who had a gun in his car went to get it (there might have been more than one, I forgot), and came back with it. Came BACK to where there was a psycho murderer shooting people. And he pointed it at the psycho and ordered him to drop his weapon, which the guy did. THAT'S when all these brave students tackled the killer.

I saw articles about the way this story was reported. They said that out of something like 200+ news agencies that reported this story, only FOUR reported that anyone even used a gun to stop this guy.

How's that for media spin? I even read an interview with the guy who went and retrieved his gun -- he's incensed at the way the media ignored what he did and HOW he did it. They adamantly refuse to run stories that point out the utility of good people having guns to stop crime and murder.

-Jeffrey