Senate immigration group mulling “biometric” ID cards for all U.S. workers
Key senators are exploring an immigration bill that would force every U.S. worker—citizen or not—to carry a high-tech identity card that could use fingerprints or other personal markers to prove a person’s legal eligibility to work.
The idea, signaled only in vaguely worded language from senators crafting a bipartisan immigration bill, has privacy advocates and others concerned that the law would create a national identity card that, in time, could track Americans at airports, hospitals and through other facets of their lives.
The lawmakers haven’t committed to the “biometric” ID card, and are wary of any element that might split the fragile coalition of Democrats, Republicans and outside organizations working toward agreement on a broad overhaul of immigration laws.
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
They can take that biometric card and shove it up their fundament.
DannoJyd on February 21, 2013 at 8:52 AM
Feds are already doing this by other means so what’s the big deal with a national ID card?
HondaV65 on February 21, 2013 at 8:52 AM
A fertile new field for hacking and identity theft. Great idea.
platypus on February 21, 2013 at 8:57 AM
OH HELL NO
gophergirl on February 21, 2013 at 9:02 AM
To be followed eventually by a chip implanted in you neck.
How about this, every politician will need to have their face tattooed with a Mike Tyson-type tribal ink to prove their eligibility for office.
Bishop on February 21, 2013 at 9:03 AM
Why are they trying to disenfranchise minorities and the elderly. As we have been told time and again isn’t requiring and ID just a form of racism and intimidation? I hope the same faces that bark every time voter ID requirements are brought up will also say this will keep certain segments of society from the chance at employment. (Like that really matters these days though)
Mouse1 on February 21, 2013 at 9:03 AM
How about a tattoo instead?
forest on February 21, 2013 at 9:03 AM
nobar on February 21, 2013 at 9:07 AM
There will, of course, be authority for the head of DHS to waive this requirement for illegal immigrants.
BuckeyeSam on February 21, 2013 at 9:11 AM
They’ve just got to establish a national registry for something, don’t they? Once they get that they can add their hidden box for firearms, and not call it a registry for firearms because it’s a registry for employment.
Dusty on February 21, 2013 at 9:11 AM
This idea won’t go anywhere until obama’s top amnesty/immigration operative, Marco Rubio, starts pushing it.
Pork-Chop on February 21, 2013 at 9:16 AM
Oh ridiculous.
You’ll use your credit or debit card everyday, you bank account number, checks, and on and on.
You think your life, habits, patterns, and activities CAN’T be tracked?
Stupid.
Genuine on February 21, 2013 at 9:19 AM
End times
cmsinaz on February 21, 2013 at 9:21 AM
All of which are voluntary to one degree or another.
But you’re right, since we’re being “tracked” all the time anyway what’s the problem with having a bar code etched into our necks, right?
You first, comrade, step on up.
Bishop on February 21, 2013 at 9:23 AM
But you still can’t force people to show these cards in order to vote. That would be racist.
Doughboy on February 21, 2013 at 9:23 AM
While your at it, why dont you get rid of chain migration?
ChunkyLover on February 21, 2013 at 9:23 AM
Welcome to Obama’s Bizarro World – it’s coming – all of it.
jake-the-goose on February 21, 2013 at 9:23 AM
Yep
gophergirl on February 21, 2013 at 9:26 AM
Right on. We can count on the State to use these tracking devices in ways they shouldn’t and then not use them in ways they should – like IDing voters.
forest on February 21, 2013 at 9:31 AM
If interested please visit my new website ……..
getafakebiometricidcardfor100pesos.org
fogw on February 21, 2013 at 9:32 AM
53% of Americans believe that most illegal aliens should be deported. Get that McCain? MOST does not mean amnesty for 11 million you moron. Also, I can guarantee you the people that believe a few should be granted legal status would say no to anyone that has an arrest record, criminal record or is collecting welfare.
POLL
Wigglesworth on February 21, 2013 at 9:32 AM
When I got my driver’s license renewed a couple months ago they asked if I wanted a national license. When I declined, they said “That’s OK, in 2017 it’ll be mandatory”. I asked what benefit it had and they said it would allow me to enter federal buildings easier.
Apparently that’s going to be important in the near future.
Xavier on February 21, 2013 at 9:32 AM
It could be covered by hair and thus the automatic scanners in every building and on every street could have trouble reading it. A far better method would be implanted RFD or bar codes on our cheeks. Of course I would prefer it on a cheek other than my face. That way at least I get to moon anyone asking for ID.
Of course many groups would be exempt for this mandatory ID and eventually only white male, christian, conservative, gun owners would have to have it. It’s only fair we target the problem group and leave the peaceful groups alone.
Dr. Frank Enstine on February 21, 2013 at 9:38 AM
Sir, you’re hyperbole is unnattractive and you didn’t even bother to attempt to veil the strawman in your argument. It’s intellectually lazy.
Comparing an ID card with a barcode in your neck sounds like a teenager in a class room who just read 1984 for the first time.
But I’ll not insult your intelligence by pretending you actually believe what you just said. Your wobble on, but but but those are “voluntary”(even hedging further with “to some degree or another”)starts your whole premise from a weak point.
It’s just a card, it wouldn’t be the end of the world, and WOULD provide of more uniform system to national identification, immigration employment status, and health records. Which you know, cuts down on costs…
Personally, I don’t care if they do it or not. I’m not advocating for it of against it. But Jesus, you guys do realize that virtually every problem that conservatives raise you also call almost every solution, good or bad, to be the devils making, the end of the world, we’re all gonna diiiiiiiiiieeeeeeeee!!!!, sky is falling and it’s the apocalypse in the making!
That’s not attractive and doesn’t gain votes from regular, normal Americans. It turns people off after a while and it’s been constant since 2008. Why not make a reason based argument against it instead if you dislike the idea and an alternate solution?
Genuine on February 21, 2013 at 9:59 AM
As an addendum, and hearing already, “But 2010!!”.
You’ll notice I did say it turns people off “after a while”. It also works at first too. You can scare people. But after a while when the sky doesn’t fall? You start to looking like a publicity priest continually predicting the end of the world that keeps not coming when you say. People stop listening.
And Barack Obama stayed in office, the democrats gained seats in both houses, and the states passed numerous measures themselves that were entirely antithetical to your desires because of it.
Think on it. I’m not totally wrong.
Genuine on February 21, 2013 at 10:12 AM
It wouldn’t even take that. They are working on hand held devices that can brush your skin and “sniff” your DNA from dead skin cells. It then links wirelessly to a central DNA database which contains all known information about you.
tommyboy on February 21, 2013 at 10:35 AM
And yet contradicted by the actions of the campaign you referenced, lol.
Now let me see your papers, b*tch.
xblade on February 21, 2013 at 10:36 AM
It’s called protecting our borders, sir.
The Zoo Keeper on February 21, 2013 at 10:36 AM
Well, this dovetails nicely with that article about drones and coded DNA attacks.
Yes, they can already track us to an extent, but at least they have to get a subpoena to get credit card info and such. Not that I think the average judge is a stalwart defense of our privacy; unless of course you want to kill a baby.
TexasDan on February 21, 2013 at 10:36 AM
More identification wouldn’t be necessary or helpful if current laws were enforced. When laws are selectively enforced, as they are now, any potential intrusion into privacy becomes suspect, and rightfully so.
The article we’re discussing has a significant lack of technical detail so it may be premature to condemn it. However, given the lessons of history (as Bishop was pointing out) and the lessons of this administration, can we be sure this new law won’t be abused as egregiously as are any number of others?
Xavier on February 21, 2013 at 10:50 AM
Great!! Great start, protecting our borders. Now, how? How many check points? How many guards? What’s the budget? What’s the cost for finishing the fence in a manner that it actually WORKS as stopper rather than merely as an obstacle? How big should the “fence” be and what should it entail? Just a big piece of sheet metal sticking 15 foot in the air? Concrete walls like in Israel? The Great wall in China? Or how about the Berlin Wall? It would seem to be the most effective design, two layers with a no man’s land in between full of all manner of deferent objects.
Is it possible? You good with the cost and the continuous indefinite spending required to maintain it?
And I suppose mass deportations must be in order as well for those already here? But how do you ensure businesses can’t hire those who manage to elude us? What’s your idea?
I assure you it’s more complex than simply saying, “Protect our borders”, sir.
Genuine on February 21, 2013 at 10:52 AM
I already carry valid ID. Cram it, Washington.
CurtZHP on February 21, 2013 at 11:00 AM
Is this going to be like the TWIC Card that costs $129.75 to get and is valid for 5 years and no one is required to buy a card reader to actually make use of the card? See the quote below.
meci on February 21, 2013 at 11:01 AM
Do you really think most regular, normal Americans are cool with a biometric federal ID? You really think if this proposal goes nowhere it will only be because of resistance from crazy nuts ranting about the mark of the beast?
Heck, my state has started implementing the federal guidelines for drivers licenses and even regular, normal I know hate it and complain about it. And it’s not even a federal ID and it contains no biometrics.
Fezzik on February 21, 2013 at 11:05 AM
exactly what i’m thinking..all of this is leading up to the mark of the beast…it may not actually be 666 but will no doubt be a mark…i’ll never ever agree to this..i’ll stay permanently unemployed if i’m forced to have this to be a worker
sadsushi on February 21, 2013 at 1:36 PM
Actually, I rather think they probably won’t be gung ho and pushing FOR it. But, like I said, I’m not advocating for or against it. What I DO think is that even though it might not be the most popular idea that regular normal Americans will be able to find more sense in the rational explanations of why it could be of use than they will with, “Oh my god! It’s basically the mark of the beast! We’re all gonna diiiiiiiiieeeeee!!!!”.
Which was the point. If you’d rather see something else, I’d come up with better responses.
Genuine on February 21, 2013 at 4:22 PM
Wouldn’t e-verify serve the same purpose without the national ID card?
hopeful on February 21, 2013 at 5:51 PM