National ID cards for Americans
“I want to see two things in Los Angeles. Voter ID, so that the people have a chance to vote, and I want to see the water be released and come down into Los Angeles and throughout the state.”
Donald Trump to reporters in North Carolina
Statewide ID cards? How about national ID cards?
In the 20th century, the people most actively opposed to national identification cards were people with a libertarian bent. They worried that a national ID card would mark Americans as slaves in an oppressive tyranny. A national ID card is associated with a tattoos on the arm given to prisoners at Auschwitz.
Now it is Democrats who oppose identification documents, mostly focusing on voting and legal presence in the country. That opposition to photo identification feeds the MAGA assertion that Democrats intentionally allow non-citizens to vote and that Democrats tacitly support and enable illegal immigration.
I put up an "extra" post yesterday, showing farmworkers. It reflects my respect for them and their work. They are probably -- who knows? -- here without documentation of legal status. Their current "underground" status is demeaning to them and a source of political opposition and discord. I am pro-immigration. I would prefer they be brought out of the shadows. Give them legal status of some kind and give them proof of that status.
College classmate Erich Almasy wonders what is so objectionable about a national ID card. He is an expat, living in Mexico, and has written guest posts about retirement in San Miguel de Allende.
Guest Post by Erich Almasy
Donald Trump says California must establish statewide ID cards if it wants disaster relief funds. Nearly all 192 countries have national ID cards; only about eleven, including the United States, do not. The cards are usually mandatory, and non-conforming people are fined. Increasingly, these cards are fully digital, allowing immediate database searches for identity.
In México, each citizen is registered with a digital ID card when they turn eighteen. The card entitles the holder to vote in elections and registers them for health care and social security. The registration includes retinal scans, fingerprints, and voice prints. There are penalties for not having and carrying one. While I am not a citizen, and my municipality/state issues my Mexican driver’s license, it is a national document that requires the same input. As you can see, you aren’t supposed to smile.
If DJT is serious about ID cards, he should propose a nationwide digital ID card with multiple forms of identification -- including DNA. After all, even President Clinton had to provide his DNA. (In contrast, Trump refused to provide his DNA in his E. Jean Carroll trial.) The problem for Trump is that his base of MAGA supporters would altogether reject any capability of the federal government to track them. Visions of confiscation of guns or the rounding up of right-wing activists would make such a program dead on arrival.
Is a digital national ID card the ultimate manifestation of Big Brother as envisioned by George Orwell? Should Americans reject them as an infringement on their freedom despite the benefits of accurate censuses, verified elections, and enhanced criminal prosecution? I would favor their use, if only to end the ridiculous claims of conservative pundits about widespread fraud.
The Real ID program is already in place as a required national program. How much invasive tracking of citizens is acceptable? There’s something creepy about all this. The Census has worked quite well over many years. I don’t trust DJT wouldn’t use more tracking to harm those he hates.