Science and Society

I'm not sure what to make of the furor over the national driver's license. We've had a national ID card for several years - it's called the Social Security card. Used to be you didn't need one until you took a job. Now, as I understand it, you need one issued by the age of 6 months (!).
Given the problems with illegal immigration, a national driver's license isn't such a bad idea. The Feds have ignored the problem for so long, that it's become almost unmanageable. I would opine that we've asked for it.

I work for a large government agency where the collection and use of personal data is essential for the agency's employees to do their jobs. I agree with you, Ned, in that the collection of data by itself is not intrinsically good or bad--it's what is done with the data that is good or bad. My employer has very strict guidelines about retention and disclosure of personal information to individuals and to other agencies, and woe betide the employee who flouts such guidelines!

To continue with your theme, I'd also assert that we're being watched from a very early age when infants receive their Social Security number to a very advanced age when various governmental bodies and insurance agencies know what medical care you receive and which medicines you take. I find the disagreement which the States have with the Federal government about ID's to be too little, too late, since we already have a national ID known as the Social Security card, even though it was never intended as such.

I think the Naional Drivers Lisense is a bad idea. It would cost millions to impliment with the burden falling to States. What do you do if someone applies with your information? What recourse do you have to get your life back? They are now you. I see this increasing identiity theft. The BMV in my town was found to be corrupt a few years back. They were charging taxes to Air Force Base residents and pocketing the money and selling fake IDs. It happens.The people they have there now are often clueless about State regulations, who's going to oversee the new ID system when the workers have to be knowledgable in immigration law as well as driving law, etc. A bad idea that will cost a fortune to start and keep running.

IT seems that the government in its slow paced way has started to learn that the previously ubiquitous social security card was a bad idea when used as a national ID. There was no such thing as ID theft before we were identified in such a way.

The conveniences that we receive through ahving such an id are just that conveniences. Universal credit ratings are chief among those conveniences. They are not however centrally necessary to our country. They as he said, just are.

We should not take these things that 'just are' and allow them to shackle our freedoms until they dissappear. One of the problems with the 'right to privacy' is that most people dont know what it means, even the legal system only has the slightest clue on this one. This is something that we need to define as well as we have defined the freedom of press, and free speech.

We can manage without centralizing these things, but we choose not to. Interstate travel, medical care, even credit all predated (if only slightly) these nationally viewable identity schemes. With a little thought we can have both privacy and convenience. Without it we will have no privacy, and eventually the government will use the information against us all.