Would E-Verify result in a national ID database?

posted at 9:31 am on June 16, 2013 by Jazz Shaw

Yet another glitch seems to be popping up in the immigration reform debate, and I’ll confess that I really didn’t see this one coming. One portion of the proposal regards expanding – and making mandatory in a variety of cases – the use of the E-Verify system. This would ensure that employers were making use of the system to screen out illegal immigrants when hiring. But if it applies to immigrants, in the opinion of some observers, it winds up applying to everyone. And that could lead to the equivalent of a national ID database.

“Over time, this could become a single, national, searchable database of vital biographic information and photgraphs of nearly every American,” said Senator Chris Coons, Democrat of Delaware. “I want to make sure we embed privacy protections in the system, both in how it is built and administered so that data cannot easily be stolen, and also that the information is only used for legitimate purposes.”

Homeland Security Department officials consider such fears unwarranted because E-Verify simply reaches out to other existing government computer systems, like Social Security records or passport records, to confirm a person’s identity and work eligibility. ..

Just as Social Security numbers became adopted for identification uses never intended, E-Verify, they say, would draw many unexpected uses.

“We are wary of giving the federal government this kind of centralized power over our daily lives,” Senator Rand Paul, Republican of Kentucky, wrote in an opinion article in The Washington Times, opposing the plan for expanding the E-Verify system.

And here I’d been foolishly thinking that E-Verify was a good idea, and one that most of us were on board with. For starters, the ACLU absolutely hates it, so that was one mark in its favor right up front. But some of the civil libertarians out there – who I generally sympathize with – have issues with it.

I can completely understand the inherent distrust we have in the federal government having massive “lists” of any kind when it comes to citizens. Those of us who follow the Second Amendment wars are already far too familiar the idea of a national gun registry and why that’s a bad idea. In fact, the entire concept of Washington keeping lists of every American having or doing something should rightly be suspect. But a list of names and addresses? Don’t we already sort of have that with the census? (Yes, yes… I know. Census data is supposed to be locked off from any other use than establishing representation, but if you believe that I’ve got a bridge to sell you.)

Personally, I never had a problem with the idea of a national ID card being available, provided it wasn’t mandatory. If it gets you through the TSA line faster or helps establish your qualifications at the voting booth, it actually seems like a useful tool for those interested in having one. Of course, demanding that you have one just to get a job may wind up crossing some sort of line from there. I’m honestly not sure how this would play out yet. Your thoughts?


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Senator Chris Coons, Democrat of Delaware. “I want to make sure we embed privacy protections in the system, both in how it is built and administered so that data cannot easily be stolen, and also that the information is only used for legitimate purposes.”

Hey moron, if you don’t want the data stolen then don’t collect it. You have never stopped a single crime with this illegal snooping and you should be hanged for treason.

Flange on June 16, 2013 at 9:38 AM

Just start the damn E-Verify program already.

Let’s please not give the conspiracy theory nutballs any more material to run with. We need to take care of this illegal immigrant problem.

bluegill on June 16, 2013 at 9:39 AM

Would E-Verify result in a national ID database?

Yes. Much like the Social Security system effectively has.

I can completely understand the inherent distrust we have in the federal government having massive “lists” of any kind when it comes to citizens.

Indeed. Who hasn’t trembled in terror as Federal workers from the U.S. Postal Service have looked up where they live to deliver their mail, matching names to addresses? /s

Yes, yes… I know. Census data is supposed to be locked off from any other use than establishing representation, but if you believe that I’ve got a bridge to sell you.

Oh, that’s not a matter of just you being sarcastic. It’s explicitly not used for just that purpose. How do you think they generate unemployment statistics? They have the U.S. Census Bureau conduct the Current Population Survey, which while it provides economic data, clearly isn’t being used to determine the number of representatives each state gets.

Stoic Patriot on June 16, 2013 at 9:43 AM

One thing is certain: If a national ID card is mandatory, one use liberals will never allow is that it be required to vote. That would be ‘racist’.

Liam on June 16, 2013 at 9:45 AM

Honestly, I’m ok with this. Yes, it does allow the government to do things that you would think are private. But the government already knows much of this already. Just in different places.

If you would like to see an example of this just log into your social security account and check out your benefits.

http://www.socialsecurity.gov/myaccount/

Yep, that’s right. They know where you work. How much you make. where you lived…. ect.

Not much private there.

Many employers, creditors and rental agencies require a credit report… hmm… not much private there and very little control of your information.

Yes, people should be worried. But not about government intrusion but of identity theft. It doesn’t take much to assume someones identity enough to really screw someone up.

I would be really happy to have a national ID. Use it for everything. Voting, driving, social services, ect.

Then you could get away with denying someone a service because they do not have a valid id. It would help combat identity theft. It would do much to help those who have problems with illegal immigration stomach what the Democrats want to do.

Dannic on June 16, 2013 at 9:49 AM

We already have a national ID database. It’s called the Social Security number. You can’t get a job without one. You can’t even get much of any credited service, without providing it.

E-verify just allows the government to know where you are located most of the time.

Dusty on June 16, 2013 at 9:51 AM

Yeah, the last thing we want to do is infringe upon the rights of those visiting the U.S. /

Those who wish to come here from a foreign nation seeking work should go into a federal database until they become a citizen.

After that, they can be recorded, spied upon, phone tapped, questioned by the IRS, visited by OSHA, investigated by ATF and denied legally requested tax status, etc… just like the rest of us.

ROCnPhilly on June 16, 2013 at 9:51 AM

Tie E-Verify to voter registration and the Democrats will kill it in a heartbeat.

jon1979 on June 16, 2013 at 9:51 AM

“I want to make sure we embed privacy protections in the system, both in how it is built and administered so that data cannot easily be stolen, and also that the information is only used for legitimate purposes.”

“Hey, all we have to do is call the NSA for this privacy stuff anyway”

dirtseller on June 16, 2013 at 9:52 AM

seeing as how you can’t run everify until a business owner has gone through the time and cost of full interview process and is ready to actually offer the job to someone how is it going to help?
people keep touting everify w/o realizing you cannot use it until you actually want to hire the person.

dmacleo on June 16, 2013 at 9:52 AM

That must be Allahpundit’s card in the screencap…

Personally, I never had a problem with the idea of a national ID card being available, provided it wasn’t mandatory.

Good point, but I don’t know if that makes the whole point of these cards moot. It’s mandatory for US citizens to be issued social security numbers and cards. A couple months ago I was certainly in favor of E-Verify. But now, I’m just not sure. As it is, I can lock my doors and windows, and the govt can break in. But with a national ID card, it’s like leaving those doors and windows wide open.

JetBoy on June 16, 2013 at 9:53 AM

When do I get my “666″ stamped on my forehead as a Federal Government requirement?

Rovin on June 16, 2013 at 9:55 AM

Hmm…. worried about protecting your personal data? Just ask the Veteran’s Administration how well that works. They’ve compromised the personal ID and other medical data of millions of veterans through loss of laptops by contractors, and outright theft through hacking and other means.

This is one of those systems that we’ll end up saying “well, it seemed like a good idea at the time.”

Just say no. The easiest way to deal with illegals is to round them up, deport them, and then seal the border with all our returning troops.

TKindred on June 16, 2013 at 9:59 AM

If you asked my a few months ago, I would have seen no problem with a National ID. While I have always held our Government in contempt, I at least trusted it with simple information.

Not so anymore.

Sinner on June 16, 2013 at 10:01 AM

Under current law, employers are prohibited from hiring “undocumented” aliens, but the only thing they have to go on is the ID that applicants supply. eVerify would provide a way to verify that the documentation is authentic and identify those here illegally. As others have pointed out, the SSA already has a “national ID database” for U.S. citizens and authorized “documented” aliens.

Syzygy on June 16, 2013 at 10:02 AM

Oh My…these schemes start to fit a fascist pattern don’t they…

workingclass artist on June 16, 2013 at 10:03 AM

eVerify would provide a way to verify that the documentation is authentic and identify those here illegally.

Syzygy on June 16, 2013 at 10:02 AM

Anything can be counterfeited. Besides, if amnesty goes through, will anyone be here illegally?

Liam on June 16, 2013 at 10:05 AM

And of course, any gummint usage of any information in any way is considered the very model of “legitimate purposes,” ain’t it? This is proof that our gummint servants consider themselves to be patting us all on the head…

DublOh7 on June 16, 2013 at 10:06 AM

Just start the damn E-Verify program already.

Let’s please not give the conspiracy theory nutballs any more material to run with. We need to take care of this illegal immigrant problem.

bluegill on June 16, 2013 at 9:39 AM

E-Verify won’t change anything. Illegals aren’t working for big corporations that would ask for e-verify, they work for other illegals who run sub contracting businesses (painting, sanding floors, etc) that are cash businesses that don’t exist on paper.

Or a contractor will hire some day laborers under the table. Trust me, no one is looking at SS cards when they pay some guy they met at home depot $100 a day to dig footings.

The government does not and will not enforce existing immigration laws. If they were serious about deporting people, they could come to my neighborhood and just pull over ever car with expired / fake license plates. They’d deport 100s a day. But they don’t.

E-Verify is just another database for the government to collect info on US since they have shown time and time again they do not care about collecting info on and deporting illegals.

Timin203 on June 16, 2013 at 10:06 AM

We already have a national ID database. It’s called the Social Security number. You can’t get a job without one. You can’t even get much of any credited service, without providing it.

E-verify just allows the government to know where you are located most of the time.

Dusty on June 16, 2013 at 9:51 AM

Back when I was still working as a bartender/sometimes manager at a couple restaurants, one of my duties included submitting timesheets information to the payroll company. As with so many restaurants, we had Latino kitchen and bus help. Every so often I’d be given a SS number that payroll said didn’t exist…so whomever gave me a “wrong” SS came back with one a few days later that did work. I have no idea where or how this happened, but it did happen.

JetBoy on June 16, 2013 at 10:07 AM

[I]f amnesty goes through, will anyone be here illegally?

Liam on June 16, 2013 at 10:05 AM

Good point. If everyone’s given amnesty, there will be no need for eVerify.

Syzygy on June 16, 2013 at 10:13 AM

AT&T has installed a nifty Obama alert on their I-Phones. It can’t be switched off.

workingclass artist on June 16, 2013 at 10:13 AM

When do I get my “666″ stamped on my forehead as a Federal Government requirement?

Rovin on June 16, 2013 at 9:55 AM

F*ck Em’

I’ll go off grid and live in a van down by the river first.

workingclass artist on June 16, 2013 at 10:16 AM

AT&T has installed a nifty Obama alert on their I-Phones. It can’t be switched off.

workingclass artist on June 16, 2013 at 10:13 AM

Do you mean you get news about The One whether you want it or not, and can’t block it?

I often delete cookies, especially when I have to pay a bill over the Net. I never go to Google, yet I keep getting cookies from them.

Liam on June 16, 2013 at 10:18 AM

I want to make sure we embed privacy protections in the system…

LOL!

PattyJ on June 16, 2013 at 10:21 AM

I want to make sure we embed privacy protections in the system…

LOL!

PattyJ on June 16, 2013 at 10:21 AM

Yup. You just want to say, dude. Think about what you just said.

Fallon on June 16, 2013 at 10:30 AM

Data is only secure as the people who are supposed
to protect it. Edward Snowden anyone? The State
Dept. had former criminals on the payroll.
Anything can be stolen and forged.

redguy on June 16, 2013 at 10:36 AM

I want to make sure we embed privacy protections in the system…

LOL!

PattyJ on June 16, 2013 at 10:21 AM

It is comical, isn’t it?

Even if the laws are the up-and-up, the size and scope of data collection by private entities is huge. Google has its fingers into everything, for example. Its corporate heads are known Obama supporters, so they can always volunteer lists if they want. Or, they can sell lists ostensibly for advertising while someone else along the line can make sure data gets into the hands of government.

We have a secret court system, where certain people can get approval for obtaining lists if they want. All it takes is one unscrupulous person to undermine any laws.

Given the scope of what is out there, effective oversight is impossible.

Liam on June 16, 2013 at 10:36 AM

AT&T has installed a nifty Obama alert on their I-Phones. It can’t be switched off.

workingclass artist on June 16, 2013 at 10:13 AM

I wonder what other apps are secretly running in the background?

ROCnPhilly on June 16, 2013 at 10:37 AM

Conservatives have been demanding this for years…libertarians have not, but then a lot of libertarians are open border people anyway.

I mean really…we have the census, we have social security cards already. I guess we could all get in our way back machines and go the year 1899 when all this stuff was not happening.

Terrye on June 16, 2013 at 10:37 AM

Wasn’t it Ron Paul who said the fence would be used to keep us in? Same thought process.

Terrye on June 16, 2013 at 10:39 AM

E-Verify uses information that an employer is already required to collect from potential employees All it does is verify it is accurate. Expansion of E-Verify is one of the few GOOD things about this bill, but there are SO MONY other disastrous parts, it needs to die.

michaelo on June 16, 2013 at 10:41 AM

So, EVerify is supposed to prevent illegals from being hired?

Tell me, how does that get past anti-discrimination statutes? (That “open-borders” types and various progressive groups with other axes to grind routinely uses as clubs.)

It theoretically could be used to prevent people with criminal records from being hired in “sensitive” positions. Except that, oops, there are those anti-discrimination statutes again. Plus the Fifth Amendment (the only Amendment progressives love- mainly because they use it only slightly less often than the average Mafioso).

These are just two examples of how the ostensible purpose of EVerify can, and will, be defeated by statutes which will most assuredly be used by those advocating it to protect their own favored “constituencies”. Leaving it to be used for the one purpose that they approve of. Namely, gathering all possible data on those they regard as their political enemies.

Now, how exactly is EVerify going to solve the “illegal immigration” problem, again?

Once more we see that the body of law, and the “social contract”, only work so long as those empowered to administer the former agree to abide by the latter. In case no one has noticed, those in power today, both in the elected branch and the bureaucracy, do not.

clear ether

eon

eon on June 16, 2013 at 10:47 AM

Citizens of other countries who are in the U.S. illegally are NOT “illegal immigrants”.

They are illegal aliens.

listens2glenn on June 16, 2013 at 10:50 AM

eon on June 16, 2013 at 10:47 AM

That’s the scam.

Pass a law that nobody will enforce.

workingclass artist on June 16, 2013 at 10:51 AM

It theoretically could be used to prevent people with criminal records from being hired in “sensitive” positions. Except that, oops, there are those anti-discrimination statutes again.

eon on June 16, 2013 at 10:47 AM

I think a judge recently ruled that a company can’t use criminal background checks to determine hiring a new employee. The reason? Because blacks have a higher criminal rate than whites, the practice is ‘discriminatory’ and ‘racist’.

Liam on June 16, 2013 at 10:52 AM

Can someone tell me why this has been popping up in my ad feeds on HA over the past few days?

ℼ潤瑣灹⁥瑨汭㰾瑨汭㰾敨摡㰾瑳汹㹥筡潣潬㩲〣〰昰給潢祤琬扡敬搬癩甬ⱬ楬浻牡楧㩮㬰慰摤湩㩧細潢祤扻捡杫潲湵ⵤ潣潬㩲牴湡灳牡湥㭴潦瑮昭浡汩㩹敶摲湡ⱡ牡慩ⱬ慳獮猭牥晩紻⼼瑳汹㹥猼牣灩㹴昨湵瑣潩⡮笩慶⁲㵤絻眻湩潤⹷獳昽湵瑣潩⡮⥡登楯⁤ℰ㴽孤嵡搿慛⭝㨫孤嵡ㄽ瘻牡攠搽捯浵湥⹴敧䕴敬敭瑮祂摉愨Ⱙ㵢孤嵡椻⡦楷摮睯挮獳挩獳愨∬浮ⰢⱢ潶摩〠瘬楯⁤⤰攻獬⁥晩攨笩㵡⹥牨晥瘻牡挠愽椮摮硥晏∨渦㵭⤢椻⡦㸰⥣㵢⭡☢浮∽戫攻獬⁥慶⁲㵣⭣ⰴ㵦⹡湩敤佸

Is anyone else getting this?

Fallon on June 16, 2013 at 10:55 AM

Put the information in the Social Security lock box.

trs on June 16, 2013 at 10:58 AM

***

Every so often I’d be given a SS number that payroll said didn’t exist…so whomever gave me a “wrong” SS came back with one a few days later that did work. I have no idea where or how this happened, but it did happen.

JetBoy on June 16, 2013 at 10:07 AM

ID theft.

Within Rubio’s bill, welcoming identity thefts is A-OK. In these cases, even if otherwise “law abiding,” Rubio wants to legalize people who broke the law in invading our country and then compounding that by stealing an American’s ID in order to remain here.

Just saw a dishonest SEIUCOPE ad for Rubio’s amnesty. Barf.

BuckeyeSam on June 16, 2013 at 10:58 AM

Is anyone else getting this?

Fallon on June 16, 2013 at 10:55 AM

Not if you have AdBlockerPlus installed.

Solaratov on June 16, 2013 at 10:59 AM

Put the information in the Social Security lock box.

trs on June 16, 2013 at 10:58 AM

Good idea!

There’s plenty of room…since there’s no money in there.

;-)

Solaratov on June 16, 2013 at 11:00 AM

They already have a list for every “legal” American, your Social Security Number. Everyone gets one at birth now, so a defacto list of sorts already exists with the SSA. It may not have your current address, but pretty much everything else is in it.

Johnnyreb on June 16, 2013 at 11:02 AM

EVERYONE IS ALREADY ON SOME “LIST” SOMEWHERE.

GarandFan on June 16, 2013 at 11:03 AM

Personally, I never had a problem with the idea of a national ID card being available, provided it wasn’t mandatory.

Wouldn’t that be a Passport?

Gatsu on June 16, 2013 at 11:03 AM

I think a judge recently ruled that a company can’t use criminal background checks to determine hiring a new employee. The reason? Because blacks have a higher criminal rate than whites, the practice is ‘discriminatory’ and ‘racist’.

Liam on June 16, 2013 at 10:52 AM

It’s not quite that bad. The EEOC’s position (which courts generally give deference to) is that a blanket policy against hiring anyone with a criminal record has a disparate impact on minorities, so an employer has to consider each applicant’s arrest record in light of the job he’s being hired to perform. For example, an employer can refuse to hire someone with a criminal record if the job would require him to go into customers’ homes.

Syzygy on June 16, 2013 at 11:03 AM

This issue is going to divide conservatives, unfortunately.

But I come down firmly against E-Verify.

Today, you can hire people without asking the permission of the Federal Government. And that is a good thing. As an employer, if you do something wrong, you are going to be fined.

As an employee, it will inhibit legal employment. Adding checks means mistakes and times when you can’t get a job as a citizen. I find that unacceptable.

Even if it works as promised, and they largely flush out illegals working UNDER PAYROLL arrangements, which I think it will, it will drive more of the illegals towards cash arrangements, where many work already.

And E-Verify won’t stop there. No program ever does. It will add layers of burden over time between employer and employee, limiting your ability to contract freely. It will allow more monitoring of the details of the job market in ways that are not positive.

The data will be analyzed, believe me!, for other “problems” with employers. ‘Social justice’ causes will find natural ways to extend.

Its not a conspiracy, its just the natural tendency of programs to grow. And I think it is a horrible idea to have to ask permission of Federal Government to hire someone or be employed by someone. It will materially curb employment in the long run. It will drive hiring overseas for stuff that can be outsourced.

I do not see how it is in conservatives best interests to have the government start watching and tracking even more of what we do, and have even more powers over our lives.

The day will come when someone’s eligibility is ‘accidentally’ switched to off, and a Kafkaesque nightmare of months of work and effort to get it switched back will ensure. And then it will get worse.

PrincetonAl on June 16, 2013 at 11:04 AM

One thing is certain: If a national ID card is mandatory, one use liberals will never allow is that it be required to vote. That would be ‘racist’.

Liam on June 16, 2013 at 9:45 AM

Yep. Democratics can’t win elections without the dead voters, illegal alien voters, multiple voting, cross-state voting, etc. They will fight voter ID tooth-and-nail.

slickwillie2001 on June 16, 2013 at 11:06 AM

I would agree with implementing it ONLY if it is also used as a Voting ID.

If they will not couple it to that then what good is it exactly doing?

Old Dog on June 16, 2013 at 11:15 AM

If you asked my a few months ago, I would have seen no problem with a National ID. While I have always held our Government in contempt, I at least trusted it with simple information.
Not so anymore.
Sinner on June 16, 2013 at 10:01 AM

Nah, you were just good with the idea of subjecting OTHER people too it. The only thing that’s changed your mind is the realization that your subjected to it as well.

You guys were all for these things to be applied to “others”. Calling anyone and everyone names who said, maybe it’s not the best idea.

You tunes change pretty quick once you felt like part of it, instead of just the special class good guys decided who ELSE should be subjected to it.

Genuine on June 16, 2013 at 11:17 AM

I am with those that don’t see this as anything more than a social-security number issue.

boone on June 16, 2013 at 11:22 AM

“Over time, this could become a single, national, searchable database of vital biographic information and photgraphs of nearly every American,” said Senator Chris Coons, Democrat of Delaware.

Um, you don’t think that already exists?

rbj on June 16, 2013 at 11:23 AM

Pretty sure Obamacare accomplishes this already. And since the Supremes just legalized DNA collection of people arrested, how long before DNA is collected from newborns?

BKeyser on June 16, 2013 at 11:27 AM

The only way a national ID registry will be useful is if it is biometric — just like those already used for visa applicants in many countries, and already deployed in India (which already has 100s of millions of people enrolled in its scheme).

The technology all exists. The “ID card” is superfluous.

Once registration is compulsory, more or less everybody will sooner or later be enrolled, once more or less everybody is enrolled it will soon be found convenient and cost effective to use the database for access control — to buildings, roads, vehicles, Internet and money.

Once biometric access control is implemented (and the technology is already being used in localised situations), your life will operate according to the whims of bureaucrats, political activists and Jobsworths.

None of this is a problem if you trust the people who control the database to always act in accordance with your own principles, ethics, standards and goals.

However, a system such as this allows power to be centralised and detached from oversight like nothing else in the history of humanity.

YiZhangZhe on June 16, 2013 at 11:43 AM

“Over time, this could become a single, national, searchable database of vital biographic information and photgraphs of nearly every American,” said Senator Chris Coons, Democrat of Delaware

…not if I wear a burqa!

KOOLAID2 on June 16, 2013 at 11:45 AM

A few thoughts on this

E-verify is already a mandate for Federally contracts over ~200,000
Contractors must also flow the requirement down to subcontractors etc.

I cant decide if the database will be used to keep illegals from manufacturing (union) jobs but not cash basis jobs, or if it will be a back door to a guest worker program by eventually issuing federal IDs to those who don’t have them.

I have seen where a valid SS Number is “Sold” by an individual to more than one illegal who then kick back a percentage of their wages to the valid ID holder. presumably this database would stop an individual from selling a valid ID to several people at once

notalemon on June 16, 2013 at 11:48 AM

“Over time, this could become a single, national, searchable database of vital biographic information and photgraphs of nearly every American,” said Senator Chris Coons, Democrat of Delaware.

Um, you don’t think that already exists?

rbj on June 16, 2013 at 11:23 AM

The IRS is getting into the act as well: IRS Tracks Your Digital Footprints

slickwillie2001 on June 16, 2013 at 11:48 AM

There are plenty of reasons not to have a National ID but it end forever the argument over Voter ID

J_Crater on June 16, 2013 at 11:58 AM

Think that databases aren’t talking to each other already? I signed up with the Social Security website to get my annual statement and part of the verification was to identify the license plate number on my vehicle. So the SSA has access to my states DMV records.

What is to stop a national ID from being linked and used to sign into computers, attached to bank accounts, etc?

Russ86 on June 16, 2013 at 12:01 PM

I’m libertarian leaning, but I have absolutely no problem with a national ID. Especially if it supplants current voter registration methods and returns us to the the quaint concept of one person, one vote.

ElectricPhase on June 16, 2013 at 12:33 PM

A National ID would make the card itself valid not the facts behind it. If a terrorist, bomber etc. got a card they would be able to get on a plane just because they had a “national ID card.” Find out who issues the card hold his family hostage to make him issue card then eliminate him [and family]. Then on with the plan or whatever.

Those things might be able to happen now with the types of ID we have, but with a card that will enable us to travel, vote, etc. just because we have the card could be dangerous.

jevica on June 16, 2013 at 1:11 PM

A National ID would make the card itself valid not the facts behind it. If a terrorist, bomber etc. got a card they would be able to get on a plane just because they had a “national ID card.” Find out who issues the card hold his family hostage to make him issue card then eliminate him [and family]. Then on with the plan or whatever.

Those things might be able to happen now with the types of ID we have, but with a card that will enable us to travel, vote, etc. just because we have the card could be dangerous.

jevica on June 16, 2013 at 1:11 PM

Even simpler, just have some shaven-headed, multiply-pierced twentysomething in an Internet cafe’ in Belgrade hack the system and create a phony file. Or a dozen. Or as many as your group of Islamist Holy Warriors of the New Caliphate need.

Then just walk in, hand over the ID, and do as you please.

I would point out (from my professional POV) that if a terrorist or criminal has multiple IDs under different names under EVerify, there would be little trouble in, say, using one to enter the country, a second for acquisition of material, a third for entering the intended AO (Area of Operations) to execute an attack, ad a fourth for egressing the country in the Escape & Evasion phase.

How? By simply having the system programmed to progressively delete each ID as it is “used up”. The result is that ID #1 gets them in-country, ID #2 isn’t twigged to as they prepare, ID #3 isn’t connected to the first two while they’re doing the immediate action, and by the time the authorities are looking for #3, they’re merrily skipping through Customs on their way out with ID #4.

Planting “Easter Eggs” in the system to do that wouldn’t be much more of a challenge for a serious hacker than penetrating the system to create the phony biometric IDs to begin with.

The Tsarnaev brothers did a nearly perfect op, except they didn’t quite have their E&E down. EVerify would solve a lot of problems like that for future “freedom fighters”.

The whole argument for this is that the system is inviolable. Unfortunately, as long as it’s connected to the Net in any way, that just isn’t possible. And since it has to be connected to work at all, wellll….

clear ether

eon

eon on June 16, 2013 at 2:12 PM

Fallon on June 16, 2013 at 10:55 AM

Google translation:

π Run Suo Yu ⁥ jin jin Rui Rui 㰾 㰾 Tou WHATSOEVER 㰾 luster of gems tumultuous 㹥 Tu Min Tan 㩲 SANCHUAN 〰 Huang Yu Wan cuttings is to move Leper King Mu Yong ⱬ peg Jiong Yang Wei Cheng 㩮 㬰 Breast – feeding 㩧 fine picking Xi Huang Yu beaten up pigwash You ⵤ Mintan 㩲 contravene Yuhuimutu 㭴 flooded Lizhaobogu 㩹 Zhen mow Yu Mu Lian ⱬ ⱡ Save Xianchuanfangwan Yang Bo fill up observing the luster of gems tumultuous 㹥 Yan 㹴 Zuoyousuoyi ⡮ Bo Qing ⁲ 㵤 Mianyang Breast – feeding Run ⹷ Rulongyousuo Yi ⡮ ⥡ Gordon Dun ⁤ ℰ 㴽 Guwenggecui ⭝ 㨫 solitary Weng ㄽ fistula male Michadaotong Tu ⹴ Ji 䕴 Right-Wing Lin Jing Rong Harcourt Ⱙ 㵢 His lone Wengyan ⡦ Kaiaohunti Rushuinouque ∬ floating Ⱒ Ɫ Hei Tama 〠 Zhang Dun ⁤ ⤰ attack hai ⁥ Dinner Wafa 㵡 ⹥ Ganghan Loumunaobo Shenqiaomangyan ∨ vortex 㵭 ⤢ Yan ⡦ 㸰 ⥣ 㵢 ⭡ ☢ floating ∽ Yu attack Xie ⁥ celebration ⁲ 㵣 ⭣ ⰴ 㵦 ⹡ Breast – feeding Kehuo

workingclass artist on June 16, 2013 at 2:23 PM

Think that databases aren’t talking to each other already? I signed up with the Social Security website to get my annual statement and part of the verification was to identify the license plate number on my vehicle. So the SSA has access to my states DMV records.

What is to stop a national ID from being linked and used to sign into computers, attached to bank accounts, etc?

Russ86 on June 16, 2013 at 12:01 PM

To apply for foodstamps applicants have to supply auto registration & vin#

All applications/queries are routed through a central DC office/phone bank first and then if approved referred to a local office.

workingclass artist on June 16, 2013 at 2:26 PM

Think that databases aren’t talking to each other already? I signed up with the Social Security website to get my annual statement and part of the verification was to identify the license plate number on my vehicle. So the SSA has access to my states DMV records.

What is to stop a national ID from being linked and used to sign into computers, attached to bank accounts, etc?

Russ86 on June 16, 2013 at 12:01 PM

To apply for foodstamps applicants have to supply auto registration & vin#

All applications/queries are routed through a central DC office/phone bank first and then if approved referred to a local office.

workingclass artist on June 16, 2013 at 2:26 PM

That’s why they register the Escalades in someone else’s name.

slickwillie2001 on June 16, 2013 at 3:00 PM

Of course, demanding that you have one just to get a job may wind up crossing some sort of line from there.

What line? The moment you make citizenship mandatory for jobholding is the moment that you mandate that every potential jobholder have proof of citizenship. And in this electronic age, verification of citizenship must happen within seconds to be considered non-onerous, and hence a database of citizens is absolutely mandatory.

As part of e-verify, my employer recently required everyone to update their citizenship records — passports, birth and baptismal certificates, etc. I have no doubt that copies of these documents went into a database somewhere.

Now, add to jobholding proof of citizenship needed for obtaining drivers licenses, disability, social security, welfare, medical care, filing income taxes, going to college…

Get used to it. If the anti-immigration people have their way, an internal passport is coming.

unclesmrgol on June 16, 2013 at 3:08 PM

workingclass artist on June 16, 2013 at 2:23 PM

Thank you (and bluefox), I’ll be running my anti-virus scan pronto.

Fallon on June 16, 2013 at 3:41 PM

Get used to it. If the anti-immigration people have their way, an internal passport is coming.

unclesmrgol on June 16, 2013 at 3:08 PM

Sounds like projection to me. The people most enamored of the idea of an “internal passport” are the progressives on the left, who still love them some USSR even after twenty-plus years without its “shining symbol of a radiant future” to point to with pride.

I rather suspect that most people on the anti-illegal immigration side are opposed to EVerify precisely because it could become just such an “internal passport”.

Your papers, please.

clear ether

eon

eon on June 16, 2013 at 3:52 PM

If the anti-immigration people have their way, an internal passport is coming.

unclesmrgol on June 16, 2013 at 3:08 PM

Immigration is merely today’s issue to justify the database. If there were no immigrants at all another issue would be used: uninsured drivers, unregistered firearms, people who might have an infectious disease.

The only way to avoid a system that will involve you identifying yourself several times per day so that you can be tracked and approved is to ensure the biometric database isn’t constructed. That is going to be hard, given that it is already well under way.

However, if it makes you feel better, there is unlikely to be an internal passport because a biometric database obviates the need for all such documents.

YiZhangZhe on June 16, 2013 at 4:55 PM

Not sure why anyone is concerned. E-verify will be put in place right after the border is secured, aka never.

xblade on June 16, 2013 at 5:22 PM

Today, you can hire people without asking the permission of the Federal Government. And that is a good thing. As an employer, if you do something wrong, you are going to be fined.

This, a thousand times this! Until everify, you have to show some documents to your employer to prove your identiy and you were good. WIth everify, the employer has to get permission from the federal government to hire you. What will you do if you are denied? By mistake, or for nefarious reasons? Given all that has been revealed recently about abuse of power, how can anyone think this is a good idea?

The Buzz on June 16, 2013 at 5:52 PM

Hey, that’s the same “E-Verify” that produced a “failed,” when Obama’s name and Social Security number were input into it! It said that name and that number “do not match the records of the Social Security Administration.”

By the way, that case is going back to federal court (as decided in late May or 2013). Judge Royce C. Lamberth of the District Court in D.C. threw it out over a year ago, but because of “new evidence” he is allowing it to be re-filed for “Reconsideration.” This time the SSA must give the “original application” of one “Harrison J. Bounel” to the lawyer, because supposedly this individual is 120 years old—and according to SSA Law, applications that old CAN be given to anyone, without any kind of death certificate, or any other documentation! The lawyer was “denied” a certified copy of this original application a year ago.

Mr. Bounel was born in 1890, and supposedly had the SAME Social Security number as the Social Ssecurity number that Pres. Obama is using, and lived at the SAME address as Obama, in Chicago.

This should be interesting!

DixT on June 16, 2013 at 7:18 PM

We should reverse the system. Secure the borders, stop the jobs and welfare magnets and get everyone who shouldn’t be here to self deport. Then, anyone who comes into the country as a visitor, student, or whatever has to give ID to the govt. If you match that database then you are ineligible to work here.

hopeful on June 16, 2013 at 7:52 PM

The E-Verify system or a mandate to use it is no more intrusive or an employer burden than the online credit checks, public record checks, Google searches,Facebook searches, etc. employers routinely do on their own initiative. Plus, it’s free.

It’s no more inaccurate than those services, either. Furthermore, if it does wrongly characterize you at least there’s a federal office to go to complain in person. Plus,just as you can check your credit before going house- or car-shopping you can E-Verify yourself. I have.

Oh, it would also help employers catch citizen applicants playing games with their identity.

kd6rxl on June 16, 2013 at 8:15 PM

The Buzz: “What will you do if you are denied? By mistake, or for nefarious reasons? Given all that has been revealed recently about abuse of power, how can anyone think this is a good idea?”

Just as you can check your credit report before house hunting or car shopping, or applying for a job (employers routinely check credit reports) you can E-Verify yourself.

The (hideous) E-Verify self-check URL is:
here.

kd6rxl on June 16, 2013 at 8:24 PM

The solution is in the words of Milton Friedman:

You can have open borders, or a Welfare State;
You can’t have both.

We have to decide which type of state we will be:
A Welfare State where everyone, in one form or another, is a Ward of the State;
Or, a bastion of Freedom & Liberty, with a government limited to its enumerated powers.

The choice is ours.

Another Drew on June 16, 2013 at 8:33 PM

Just say no. Everify is a squirrel. If the feds locked down the border, the few that get by aren’t worth the hassle of verifying. State issued id and san and you’re good to go. There is no perfect failsafe solution and everify is a bridge too far in terms of sacrificed privacy for the veneer of legitimacy.

AH_C on June 16, 2013 at 10:05 PM

Mr. Bounel was born in 1890, and supposedly had the SAME Social Security number as the Social Ssecurity number that Pres. Obama is using, and lived at the SAME address as Obama, in Chicago.This should be interesting!DixT on June 16, 2013 at 7:18 PM

Interesting because at his age Oboobi wasn’t required to have a ssn until he got a job. It was only in the mid 80s that they started ratcheting requirements to have ssn a an early age, ie by 5 years of age then now within 6mos of birth. People forget to use the prevailing laws in effect at the time, not the current laws. Being the US hater Stanley was, she likely left the US for Indonesia, never to return. Barry had no need for a ssn, just a pssport-if Indonesia required one of its naturalized citizen to be. The only way Oboobi could return to the US in his teens was via passport, but if US,I believe it was in 77 that a ssn was required for any child over 14. I had a ssn but my younger siblings didn’t in that time frame. It was only in the late 90s that dependents even started being linked to by ssn, in part to reduce fraud of overcoming dependents.

So the simple question was why didn’t he get a ssn typically assigned to Americans while overseas? Because Stanley didn’t want to apply openly? This would explain ‘stealing’ a ssn because when crunch time hit, he was already in country under foreign passport and no legal way to reclaim his citizenship post-18th birthday

AH_C on June 16, 2013 at 10:29 PM

Personally, I never had a problem with the idea of a national ID card being available, provided it wasn’t mandatory.

In theory, the Social Security Number was and is not mandatory. However, it basically has been mandatory for decades. This is the problem with allowing such things a foothold in our lives; they eventually take over completely.

Theophile on June 16, 2013 at 11:30 PM

More excuses to convince the American people that we shouldn’t track or enforce illegal immigrants. There’s already a database for legitimate immigrants; it’s called a visa or green card. Why shouldn’t there be one for illegitimate ones?

Levinite on June 17, 2013 at 8:42 AM