@ossobuco,
ossobuco wrote:I'm not sure what I think about it, still mulling. But, my immediate reaction is a kind of totalitarian (word instead of nazi or socialist(!) super watch.
Like in the UK? Or just about anywhere else? Seriously, Americans are weird about this. You already have to carry ID to function in America, and what difference does it make if it's a national one or a state one? Some people argue against a national "database" of citizens but we already have a national identity through social security numbers and it's not like it enables anything that can't already be done to you.
Quote:On the other hand, is it like my passport?
In most countries, it's just exactly like like the status quo, except that it is not different from state to state. That is all.
Of course, in some countries it also involves fingerprinting and other real differences in privacy but just consolidating identity nationally is not fundamentally different in any way other than the consolidation.
Quote:I'm listening while wary.
Why wary? Most Americans seem to be wary of it, but I've met very few who even know why they are wary of it.
Quote:Tell me what good it would do.
Most people I know have had to apply for new IDs and drivers licenses when they move within America. That is just wasteful bureaucracy, imagine how many hours are lost every year just to get your new ID with a different state name and flag on it. And imagine how much overhead maintaining 50 different systems is instead of one. There's economy of scale for just one.
You know, this would be a lot easier if someone would point out a single reason why it's NOT a good idea. What benefit do you see in each state issuing separate ID cards and drivers licenses? Why should your identity stop at the state border?
