(US House of Representatives - February 10, 2005) Congressman Ron Paul opposes a National ID. Starting on May 11, 2008, Americans will need ...
(US House of Representatives - February 10, 2005) Congressman Ron Paul opposes a National ID. Starting on May 11, 2008, Americans will need a federally approved, "machine readable" ID card. n------------------------------------------------------------nn(Transcript)nn...With the utmost sincerity and a deep conviction, I am quite confident that this bill, if you vote for it, you will be voting for a national ID card. I know some will argue against that and they say this is voluntary, but it really cannot be voluntary. If a State opts out, nobody is going to accept their driver's license. So this is not voluntary. nnAs a matter of fact, even the House Republican Conference, which sent a statement around with some points about this bill, said "the Federal Government should set standards for the issuance of birth certificates and sources of identification such as driver's licenses." nnThis is nationalization of all identification. It will be the confirmation of the notion that we will be carrying our papers. nnAs a matter of fact, I think it might be worse than just carrying our papers and showing our papers, because in this bill there are no limitations as to the information that may be placed on this identification card. There are minimum standards, but no maximum limitations. nnThe Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security can add anything it wants. So if they would like to put on our driver's license that you belong to a pro-gun group, it may well become mandatory, because there may be an administration some day that might like to have that information. nnBut there is no limitation as far as biometrics and there is no limitation as far as radio frequency identification. That technology is already available and being used on our passports. This means that you do not have to show your papers. All you have to do is walk by somebody that has a radio frequency ability to read your passport or read your driver's license. There is no limitation as to what they can put on these documents. nnThis bill also allows the definition of "terrorism" to be re-defined. There are no limitations. nnIn many ways I understand how well intentioned this is, but to me it is sort of like the gun issue. Conservatives always know that you do not register guns, that is just terrible, because the criminals will not register their guns. But what are we doing with this bill? We are registering all the American people, and your goal is to register the criminals and the thugs and the terrorists. nnWell, why does a terrorist need a driver's license? They can just steal a car or steal an airplane or steal a bus or whatever they want to do. So you are registering all the American people because you are looking for a terrorist, and all the terrorist is going to do is avoid the law. But we all, the American people, will have to obey the law. If we do not, we go to prison.nn------------------------------------------------------------nnThe day before (February 9, 2005), Ron Paul spoke against HR 418, the REAL ID Act, before the US House of Representatives.nn"HR 418- A National ID Bill Masquerading as Immigration Reform"nn(Transcript) nnMr. 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. nnWhat is wrong with this bill? nnThe 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. nnSupporters 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. n...n[ http://www.gunowners.org/op0506.htm ] Less
