| |
|
SPEECHES
Public Comments on the National ID Card
July 5, 1998
Docket Management
Room PL-401
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
Nassif Building
400 Seventh Street, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20590
Re: Docket No. NHTSA-98-3945
No. of Notice: 23 CFR Part 1331
To Whom It May Concern:
In response to NHTSA's request for public comment, Citizens
for Choice in Health Care is submitting the following comments on
the proposed rule for the State-Issued Driver's Licenses and
Comparable Identification Documents.
Citizens for Choice in Health Care (CCHC) is a non-profit
organization which was founded in 1995 to support individual
choice and privacy in health care decisions for all citizens.
Supported by members and contributors across the nation, CCHC
seeks to protect patient and medical record confidentiality, to
safeguard the critical patient-doctor relationship, and to support
individual freedom and responsibility in all health care
decisions.
Public Comments by
CCHC
General Comments
The creation of a federal identification system through
mandated federal requirements for state-issued driver's licenses
will lead to the creation of a federal or national identification
card for all citizens which will likely become required for access
to all health care services allowing government tracking of
medical information, and linking of medical information with other
personal data.
The creation of what can be considered a federal
identification system for all citizens is not only an overreaching
intrusive mechanism on law abiding citizens. It is also
unconstitutional as relates to the limited powers of federal
government written in the Tenth Amendment: "The powers not
delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited
by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or
to the people." What has been under the purview of states is now,
according to P.L.104-208, to be placed under federal jurisdiction
and mandate&emdash;without a change in the Constitution to
authorize it.
Worthy Quote
"The American political system was set up to be inefficient,
to divide power," Sobel said. "What ID numbers do is centralize
power, and in a time when knowledge is power, then centralized
information is centralized power. I think people have a gut sense
that this is not a good idea." (Dr. Richard Sobel, a research
fellow at Harvard Law School to Sherly Gay Stolberg for the New
York Times, July 20, 1998)
American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators
It is notable that the AAMVA is a membership organization
representing State and provincial officials. Such officials are
not representatives of the people of each state, and have not been
elected by the people. They have no obligation, and are under no
oath, to consider the welfare of the individuals in their
respective states or to uphold the Constitution of the United
States. They have also apparently paid a fee to participate which
necessarily means that they hold a bias in the creation of
regulatory policies. In addition, they put forth the finances and
energy to create a working group and a Uniform Identification
Practices Model Program to present to the NHTSA. This influence
gives their opinions an upper edge in the discussion, and furthers
the commitment of members to have their proposals adopted into
regulations.
Evidence of Identity
P.L. 104-208 merely states that the "application process for
the license or document shall include the presentation of such
evidence of identity as is required by regulations promulgated by
the Secretary of Transportation after consultation with the AAMVA.
The Secretary in the proposed rules would require citizens to
produce multiple documents in order to prove without a doubt that
they are who they say they are: a primary document to establish
identity and a secondary document to confirm identity. In terms of
semantics, according to the American Heritage Dictionary,
"establish" is defined as "To make firm or secure," "To settle
securely in a position or condition," "To cause to be recognized
and accepted without question" and "To prove the validity or truth
of." Since that is the case, no secondary documents for
confirmation of identity are necessary. According to the
dictionary, "confirm" is defined as "establish." The Secretary, in
requiring such prolific documentation, is validating the fact that
identity cannot be proven without a doubt through identification
papers. In essence, this procedure will treat law-abiding citizens
as guilty until proven innocence.
Substantiating Documents and Loopholes
The fact that the Secretary would require U.S. citizens to
produce "sufficient substantiating information" to verify their
identity is ironic against the proposed requirement that non
immigrant aliens who do not have social security numbers are
permitted to produce "proof of lawful presence" documents that are
to be verified merely through a determination that the document
"reasonably appears on its face to be genuine as it relates to the
applicant." This certainly is a loophole for imposters, especially
those of a foreign look or tongue.
Of the documents listed as Primary Documents and Secondary
Documents, not all contain photographs. Who can be sure the person
is the person they claim to be without an up-to-date photograph?
And even then it's only a reasonable guess. Teeth, eye color, hair
color and style, and facial features can be changed. In addition,
those who wish to obtain a federal ID card for an illegal alien
child will be able to certify a child's identity by a notarized
affidavit. This is a loophole for those the statute wishes to
deter. Interestingly, parents who have SSNs and birth certificates
on children in their households occasionally find it difficult to
prove to the IRS that a given child is truly either in existence.
Given the exceptions of "fire or natural disaster" there
appears to be a necessity for citizens to produce verifiable
certificates or damaged property as evidence that they have
experienced a fire or natural disaster. Would these documents need
state or federal approval and who would issue them? Would disaster
victims need a photograph on the document? Would they be sent to
an authorized official to receive the verifiable document, or be
required to pay a fee to receive the document verifying that they
lost their home or car, or identification papers in a fire or
natural disaster? Would there be state natural disaster
verification officials? Would every member of the family be
required to produce such disaster documents to state
identification officials?
The proposed rule says applicants who claim not to have a
social security number must sign certifying statements to that
effect. What will certify that a person does not have a SSN? This
appears to be another loophole for the very people the statute
seeks to deter.
It is assumed that whatever information is presented as a
Secondary document will be copied and kept. One of the documents
listed is medical records. This would produce a direct link to
medical record information.
Form and Security Features
The proposed rules allow the issuing agency to determine
whether the person's mailing or residential address will be placed
on the new federal license. There should be no requirement that
the residential address be on any license. This is a safety
feature against burglary, stalking, malicious intent, or rape by
those who view, or steal, the card.
According to the proposed rule, the agency is urging states to
adopt as many security features as possible. What passes as a
security feature for the state and federal governments can become
a deterrent in daily transactions for individuals if there are
errors in the card's features. These features and the consequent
hassles can produce additional costs for taxpayers in time and
money.
Security features are only necessary if access to the card is
useful for fraudulent purposes. If the card were to remain purely
a driver's license, to be produced by drivers for driving
requirements alone, the card would not be considered very
valuable. This proposed rule seeks to create a federal
identification card through the driver's license which will make
the ID card exceedingly valuable to imposters. The probable
inclusion of bar codes, magnetic strips, computer chips, and other
machine readable technologies along with the social security
number will allow card use to expand into monetary transactions,
workplace and public building access, accumulation of personal
purchase and point-by-point location information on citizens, and
government access to personal, private and confidential
information on individuals, including medical records. Marketers
and criminals will find this information worth millions of dollars
- well worth the low risk of eventual government fines or prison
in case of discovery or capture.
It is well worth it to note that the increased passage of laws
has never deterred crime. Indeed, enacted legislation only
increases the actions which are subject to prosecution, and the
people who are called criminals.
For those who believe that security features can be made
tamper proof, James Gleick, who spoke with Visa and Citicorp for
an article in the New York Times on Cyber-Dollars (June 16, 1996)
wrote, "For every new idea in tamper resistance, there is a new
idea in tampering."
Social Security Number
The social security number was originally enacted with the
requirement that it would not be an identification number. In
fact, until about 10 years ago, the social security card held the
words, "FOR SOCIAL SECURITY AND TAX PURPOSES&emdash;NOT FOR
IDENTIFICATION."
The statute and the proposed rule violate the longstanding
promise that the social security number would not be used to
create a national ID card.
Since the social security number is not to be an identifier,
and the proposed rule allows non-immigrant aliens to use
alternative numeric identifiers on their ID cards, citizens will
have less freedom against linkage of all data on themselves than
non-immigrant aliens if the social security number is placed on,
or linked to, the card.
Disruption, Tyranny, Invasive Identification, & Health
Care Access
Given the fact that it has been estimated that there are over
500,000 erroneous or duplicate SSN's, and the fact that the
statute says that no other identification will be accepted by the
federal government as proof of identification, the magnitude for
error and disrupted lives is enormous. As the federal ID/license
card gradually becomes required for all transactions, the ability
to move or transact freely in society will be limited by
validation of identity.
In addition, all SSN's must be verified as belonging to the
person presenting them according to the Social Security
Administration. What will it take to verify that the person
standing before the state official is the person attached to the
SSN? What person given an SSN at birth is photographed with the
SSN card? What person can be clearly identified beyond a doubt
even if photographed at birth when the SSN is obtained. What will
it take to assure absolute identification of individuals? Perhaps
a tattoo at birth or an implanted biochip? A biometric identifier?
DNA linked to the SSN? All of these do not speak of a free
society. They speak of tyranny and invasive use of the body parts
of citizens.
President Clinton recently put the Medical ID card (Unique
Patient Identifier) on hold due to public outcry. The fact that
the proposed rules require electronic verification means that a
central system will be computerized. It is likely that all
businesses, airlines, schools, hospitals, health plans, and others
with whom citizens transact will move to require use of the
federal ID card and electronic verification of identity through
the Social Security Administration before allowing the transaction
to proceed. This would create a version of the medical ID card
that the public clearly opposes. In essence, no person would be
allowed to receive care until they, or their bank account or
insurance policy, are verified and validated.
Costs
It is presumed that more federal funding may be available to
states that choose to implement more security features. However,
after the initial funding to set up the electronic verification
system and the various security features has been depleted, state
taxpayers will continue to pay the additional costs of the
systems, plus the high costs of verifications, errors, litigation,
and eventual enforcement. Although federal statute claims that
anything under $100 million annually is not a federal mandate, the
fact remains that multiple laws under the $100 million line create
a growing unfunded mandate on states and taxpayers. In addition,
costs are rarely as low as projected.
Enforcement
It is interesting that no enforcement procedures or penalties
are part of the statute or the rules. This creates even less
deterrence for criminals to use the proposed system fraudulently.
The statute has no legal teeth to deter fraudulent behavior, but
plenty of incentive and opportunity to pursue unwarranted tracking
of, and access to, personal information on citizens.
Conclusion
The identity of an individual can rarely be proven beyond a
shadow of a doubt. No identification system will assure absolute
accuracy. Forced electronic tracking and monitoring of law-abiding
citizens is unconstitutional. Federal imposition of a federal
identification system on states is unconstitutional. Law-abiding
citizens, who make up the majority of the nation, will be caught
in the information gaps, identification inaccuracies, and
electronic errors. Disruption to the lives of law-abiding citizens
will never be compensated. Imposters and fraudulent behavior will
continue undeterred at a new level. Linkage of data systems will
include access to medical records making the federal ID card the
medical ID card currently being opposed by the American people.
Potential required use of the federal ID card for access to health
care will remove the availability of anonymity for those patients
who require anonymity for professional or personal reasons.
This system has long been opposed by the American people and
should not now be allowed to move forward to the detriment of the
freedom cherished by all citizens of the United States.
Sincerely,
Twila Brase, R.N.
Public Health Nurse
President
Citizens for Choice in Health Care
|
 |
Citizens' Council on Health Care
1954 University Avenue West, Suite 8, St. Paul, MN 55104
Phone: 651.646.8935 / Fax: 651.646.0100, e-mail
|
| |
