National ID Cards

[Guest DrTom]

Giuliani sees merits in national ID cards

 

By Margaret Kane

Special to ZDNet News

June 26, 2002, 9:00 AM PT

URL: http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1105-939507.html

 

WASHINGTON--U.S. citizens may need to carry national identification cards someday, but that doesn't need to translate into a loss of fundamental freedoms in the name of safety, former New York Mayor Rudolph Giuliani said Wednesday.

 

"We need a better way to properly ID people that's more effective (than current means). There's a trade-off we have to make between privacy and the protection of everybody...in society," said Giuliani, following a keynote speech at the E-Gov 2002 conference here. More than 10,000 people are attending the four-day conference, which concludes Thursday.

 

A national ID system has become a hot-button issue within the tech industry and nationally. Technology experts and privacy advocates have been debating the merits of national ID cards and other identification systems and trying to figure out how to make sure they wouldn't be abused.

 

Giuliani said ID cards do not necessarily equal a loss of freedom, adding that other democratic countries require citizens to carry ID cards.

 

"We have to separate fundamental freedoms...from those things that we had the luxury to do in the past," he said.

 

Giuliani's speech was met with standing ovations and flag waving from the crowd at the show, which included employees of federal, state and local governments. The conference here is being run jointly with one on "homeland security," reflecting a new focus from the technology world and the government of using IT for defense.

 

Giuliani discussed ways that technology aided him as mayor, including helping him handle the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11.

 

Before those attacks, Giuliani's best-known achievement had been lowering the city's crime rate, a feat he said was greatly helped by the use of technology to conduct daily monitoring of crime.

 

The city had previously analyzed crime statistics on a yearly basis, but he initiated a program that helped track crime at the precinct level on a daily basis and plotted that data on geographic and time bases to more efficiently deploy police officers.

 

Similar programs were used in the city's correctional facilities to help reduce violence at Riker's Island by 80 percent, he said.

 

Technology also helped open up the city to citizens, he said, making their lives easier. For instance, New York has put in place ways for citizens to use the Internet to pay parking tickets and apply for permits for everything from opening a restaurant to tackling new construction.

 

"One of the great complaints about government, certainly in New York City, was that it was unusable...and unmanageable," he said. "E-government is a way to change that."

 

Giuliani's Emergency Management System, created in 1996, used technological simulations to train for emergencies including terrorist attacks, fires and other crises, Giuliani said.

 

"I can't emphasize more how important that it is to prepare for the worst thing you can imagine," he said. "Using technology to try and play games for what might happen, even if they're not exactly right when the emergencies occur," is an important way to prepare.

 

Giuliani cautioned attendees to prepare for the unexpected but to remember that "life goes on."

 

"At home, we have to do everything we can to be better prepared," he said. "At the same time, we have to get people to relax and go about their daily lives."

 

Giuliani disagreed with the notion that the world is now a more dangerous place.

 

"It was as if a curtain was in front of us; we saw the world the way we wanted to see it. Now the curtain has been lifted, and we can see the world the way it really is," he said. "Having said that, and recognized that, even before doing anything about it we're safer."

 

Asked if he would be interested in becoming secretary of the proposed Department of Homeland Security, Giuliani said that he hadn't decided on his future but that the job that he really wanted was to become "general manager of the (New York) Yankees."

 

 

Based on this -- which I think is a VERY bad idea -- I now withdraw my support for Giuliani to replace John Ashcroft as Attorney General. Maybe he should stick to making speeches and pursue that job in baseball he seems to want so much. There are enough people in Washington who are foolishly willing to trade freedoms for the perception of security without Rudy getting into the mix.

[Guest Anubis Puppet]

What other democratic nations require their citizens carry national IDs?

 

I would really like to know.

[Guest dreamer420]

it reminds me of the seinfeld where lloyd braun suggested new york city start wearing name tags and it costs the mayor the election to, you guessed it, Rudy Guiliani

[Guest BookerTman]

Aw, ya beat me to it, dreamer.

[Guest dreamer420]

lol. that's funny that you had the same idea too.

[Guest Invader3k]

What would be wrong with National IDs? I guess I really don't see the problem. I mean, how would this differ from a driver's license, other than the fact that everyone would have one?

[Guest J*ingus]

The very first thing that all police states did was to require all their citizens to carry identification papers. THAT'S why this is a very bad idea.

[Guest Invader3k]

"The very first thing that all police states did was to require all their citizens to carry identification papers. THAT'S why this is a very bad idea. "

 

Sorry, that answer just isn't good enough. Just because the system has been abused in the past, doesn't mean that it is necessarily a bad idea.

[Guest Some Guy]

It's just the first step to further removal of our freedoms. If you give them an inch they'll take a mile.

[Guest Hogan Made Wrestling]

Here's a good rule of thumb to follow: Any idea advocated by Sun CEO Scott McNealy is almost certainly a horrible idea. Of course, McNealy might only be supporting this so that he can convince his pals in the government to use his products as the base for them.

[Guest KoR Fungus]

<<<What would be wrong with National IDs? I guess I really don't see the problem. I mean, how would this differ from a driver's license, other than the fact that everyone would have one?>>>

 

Well, given that there aren't national ID cards now, and it would take money and effort to implement them, I think the more relevant question is why *should* we implement them.

 

So, how would a national ID card add to our security without taking away any of our freedom? Because if we have to sacrifice *any* freedom, it's not worth it. Giuliani even says stuff like "we have to separate fundamental freedoms...from those things that we had the luxury to do in the past", which means he's calling for a sacrifice of freedom. Nope, sorry, I will always be against sacrificing freedom for security.

[Guest DrTom]

"Nope, sorry, I will always be against sacrificing freedom for security."

 

Count me in, too. I've been saying that the whole time. National ID cards are a terrible idea because of the potential to abuse them. How tough would it be for the government to put a smart chip in the cards? Then how tough would it be for them to track you with this chip, if not directly, then by where you use your required card? Before you think they wouldn't put chips in cards, the DOD has required all personnel working on Army installations to get a new "Smart card" with, you guessed it, a smart chip in it.

 

Besides, what would it really accomplish. Wow, one more form of ID that can be defrauded and counterfeited. What a good idea. The government doesn't need to keep track of people all the time, and I think the potential for abuse is just too strong.

 

I liked Giuliani until he got behind this idea.

[Guest red_file]

What other democratic nations require their citizens carry national IDs?

 

I would really like to know.

With a loosely defined definition of democratic[1], some democratic nations that require their citizens to carry a national I.D. include:

 

1) Israel - no stated purpose for it that I could find beyond security issues

 

2) Spain - any citizen over 14 is required to get a national I.D. to participate in government programs

 

3) Argentinia - citizens must get an I.D. when they turn 8 and then re-register when they turn 17

 

4) Germany - all citizens over 16 must carry a card that's similar to a passport

 

5) Belgium - all citizens over 15 must carry a national I.D. that is used for identification to the police, proof of age in business transactions, and doubles as the Blegium equivalent of a passport.

 

6) Finland - they have a voluntary I.D. which contains computer chips which allow the bearer to "sign" electronic documents and serves as a passport.

 

[1] I'm not sure how strictly one wants to define a democratic nation as Spain has a monarchy and a government that acts in a generally democratic way, but might not be considered a democracy in the traditional sense. At any rate, I believe that, culture aside, their government could be considered close enough to our government for the purpose of the example.

 

Supposedly there are over a hundred countries in the world which require their citizens to carry some form of national i.d. when they venture outside of their homes.

 

Though I don't support national i.d.'s, I think that they rank pretty far down on the list in the fight against our government's "invasion of our privacy."

[Guest J*ingus]

Hey, it's a person who uses actual facts to back up their arguments. What the hell are you doing in a forum like this?

 

But still, "over a hundred countries" means that countries with even the loosest kind of "democratic" government make up less than 5% of the countries that require their citizens to carry IDs. And frankly, I just don't see the point. The terrorists all had driver's licenses, after all. How would another form of ID stop future attacks?

 

But, if they're going to pass this stupid law, here's a possible compromise: everybody has a social security card with their number on it, right? Why not just make those into the ID cards? You could add pictures of the person if you wanted, but NO computer chips or anything of that variety.

[Guest red_file]

Hey, it's a person who uses actual facts to back up their arguments. What the hell are you doing in a forum like this?

There was a truth telling contest two forums over and this looked like a nice place for a good discussion.

 

But still, "over a hundred countries" means that countries with even the loosest kind of "democratic" government make up less than 5% of the countries that require their citizens to carry IDs.

 

I believe I may have been unclear on this point. The six countries I mentioned were not the only democratic countries that required their citizens to carry national identification, only that those six were ones that I could verify were rules under a loose definition of democracy. For example, Kenya requires its citizens to carry national i.d., but I have no idea what their government is like. I'm sure there are others more knowledgable in world governments than myself that could probably help us out with this.

 

A piece of information that may or may not have relavence to this argument is that a majority of the countries in the world require their citizens to carry some form of national i.d. There are between 189 and 191 countries in the world (depending on whether you consider Vatican City and Montenegro countries or merely independent states) and over a hundred of those require national i.d. Now, this doesn't really mean anything as if a stupid thing is stupid whether it is done by an individual or a nation. Just thought I'd add it to stir the pot, so to speak.

 

And frankly, I just don't see the point. The terrorists all had driver's licenses, after all. How would another form of ID stop future attacks?

 

Even more disturbing is that most (or was it all?) of the terrorists were in the country legally; they'd obtained visas. So, they were required to be able to produce the documentation that they were not citizens (were any of them citizens ?; I must confess that I'm having trouble remembering some of the facts). A national i.d. would not have helped in this case as they were already identified as not being citizens, which is really all the i.d. is good for.

 

But, if they're going to pass this stupid law, here's a possible compromise: everybody has a social security card with their number on it, right? Why not just make those into the ID cards?

 

Would you believe that social security numbers are still optional? Most people's parents get them SS numbers when they're children, but you're not required to get them. Sure, it makes paying taxes a little difficult and there's that whole bit about the government not really being able to track some of your records without one, but the government as never stepped in and said that a citizen must obtain one. Many small groups in rural areas don't register for social security numbers; typically these are the same groups who eventually have shoot-outs with the government. Unless the government changes their policy on social security numbers, they wouldn't reach the entire population.

 

One thing that I always wonder about is those people that don't have a driver's liscense and don't work for a company that issues a picture i.d. to get through security, how do they prove themselves to be twenty-one when they get carded?

 

Doesn't New York City have some type of i.d. card for residents of the city? I remember hearing something about there being some hullabaloo about cheerleaders having to flash their residents i.d. to police because of the terrorist attacks. Perhaps that's why the former Mayor is keen on the idea of national i.d. cards.

[Guest Some Guy]

If Keyna's government is anything like Egypt or Nigeria I want no part of anything they do. The 2 countries i mentioned are a totally corrupt mess with massive poverty and internal strife.

 

I can understand Israel having an ID because of all the terrorism, although it doesn't seem to have helped.

 

Argentinia is a mess.

 

Germany, Finland, and Belguim might as well change their flag to all red with a golden sickle and hammer.

 

I don't know much about Spain's Gov't buy it's probably not much different from the aforementioned European countries.

[Guest hardyz1]

One thing that I always wonder about is those people that don't have a driver's liscense and don't work for a company that issues a picture i.d. to get through security, how do they prove themselves to be twenty-one when they get carded?

 

I don't know about other states, but here in PA you can just get a state ID card.

[Guest Some Guy]

In Ma you get a state ID that's good for buying beer, but some bars and clubs won't take it.

[Guest dreamer420]

this makes me glad I live in canada. he you get a birth certificate, a drivers licence, and that's it.

[Guest RetroRob215]

I agree with what Tom said in his second post. The ID cards may not seem like a big deal now, but they could lead to more changes. Driver's licenses should be a good enough form of ID. Even if you don't drive, you can apply for a non-driving ID.

[Guest red_file]

Germany, Finland, and Belguim might as well change their flag to all red with a golden sickle and hammer.

Okay, those three countries have socialistic elements in their economies. The point of which is?

 

I don't know much about Spain's Gov't buy it's probably not much different from the aforementioned European countries.

 

From what I understand, their government acts in a way similar to that of Belgium. They have a figurehead king, currently King Juan Carlos, an elected president, two appointed vice presidents, and a bicameral senate. I'm guessing that qualifies as democratic. Economically, they're moving away from "state run" and towards privatization in an effort to lessen unemployment and make the nation more competitive in the European market.