ESHB 2730: The Bill written with 'Duck Tape'

No, that is not a misspelling. I meant "Duck" tape.
Last year, we were able to thwart the efforts to require our fingerprints on our driver's licenses. This year, a new number was assigned to basically the same bill without the fingerprint requirement. This version has been attacked for its many problems but it keeps on moving or should I say - Ducking - the real issue.

In spite of submitting volumes of documented evidence in opposition to this type of legislation, the Legislature seems intent upon passing it. To date, it has had at least nine amendments. (If the original bill was so wonderful, why is it now being held together with DUCK tape? Is it because the original bill was so flawed and using DUCK tape is the only way the proponents can hope to waddle it thru the process?)

I understand the Transportation Committee removed the references to PL 104-208 but they didn't remove the requirements. Rep. Eric Robertson keeps saying the SSN [social security numbers] will not be "on" the driver's license. He refuses - or DUCKS - to answer if they will require an applicant to provide proof of having a SSN to be placed in their database. (Even newby computer users know anything put into a computer can be retrieved later even if you 'think' you have deleted that information. It stays on the hard drive forever. So, don't be fooled by the comment it will not be kept in file or it won't be "on" the license.)

It is not the business of the State to provide any kind of identification for private or corporate business, so the claims of preventing fraud are of themselves a fraud. Just because so many use a driver's license as identification does not make it identification. It is only a driver's license - nothing more.

The Digest for this bill reads as follows:
{+ (AS OF HOUSE 2ND READING 2/11/98) +}
Declares that the purpose of this act is to require effective means of rendering drivers' licenses and identicards as immune as possible from alteration and counterfeiting in order to promote the public health and safety of the people of this state. Declares that, beginning October 1, 2000, the federal Illegal Immigration Control Act, P.L. 104-208, requires states to either place drivers' social security numbers on the face of their licenses, or to complete a social security verification process.

Provides that, in order to prevent fraud and curtail invasions of privacy, the governor, through the department of licensing, shall seek a waiver to the federal mandate. If a waiver is not granted, the department shall rely only upon the verification process prescribed in the federal law. In no event may the social security number be placed on the driver's license or identicard.

If the REAL intent of this bill is simply to "require effective means of rendering drivers' licenses and identicards as immune as possible from alteration and counterfeiting in order to promote the public health and safety of the people of this state", then why is there any reference to the PL 104-208?
Several issues arise here. The first is that Congress has no authority to require the State of Washington to enforce a federal law. Printz v. United State, 1997. Even IF Congress had enacted a law requiring Washington State to modify its driver's license, it would have no authority in law.

The second is that there is no law requiring American citizens to apply for or to obtain a SSN. I contend all laws featuring this requirement should be repealed as having no basis in law.

The third point, since there is no federal law mandating the States must obtain social security numbers (or verification thereof), there is no federal agency charged with enforcement within the States. Therefore, Who is Gov. Locke going to request this "Waiver" from?

To make a "tamper proof - secure" driver's license requires only using plastic laminating equipment, which will cause immediate damage to the card if tampered with. No need here for requiring anyone to submit a SSN, iris scans, digital photos, or any other biometric identification. I understand this idea was not even considered by the proponents.

The state of Tennessee had these same types of requirements; after heavy protests and court battles it was reversed in 1990. Their present license is a hologram type; if one tries to alter it, the state seal will disappear. If it is tilted one way or another the state seal will appear over the picture. This makes sense and would not be objected to by most people. It is the requirement that personal information be stored in a central database, connected to one's SSN which causes most objections.

I provided the Transportation Committee with 25 pages of documentation, including many cases of DMV employees charged and convicted in California, New York, and North Carolina for selling these "tamper-proof secure" driver's licenses. I also provided documentation of litigation involving the requirement of SSN's in Alabama and California.

As I am writing this, I have yet to see the bill as amended by the Senate Transportation Committee. It did pass out with a unanimous vote and agreement that all members would work hard to ensure its passage on the Senate Floor. If it passes the Senate, it will return to the House for vote to concur with the amendments by the Senate.

Members who votes against the bill in the House were: Representatives Benson, Boldt, Buck, Carrell, Crouse, DeBolt, Doumit, Dunn, Eickmeyer, Gombosky, Grant, Kessler, Koster, Lambert, McMorris, Mielke, Morris, Pennington, Quall, Schoesler, Sherstad, Smith, Sommers, H., Sterk, Sump, Thomas, L., Van Luven Excused: Representatives Cooke, Mulliken

All others voted FOR and need to be educated as to the error of this bill.
(Jackie Juntti has been involved with action against the implementation of national identification in Washington. Her email address is: Jackie Juntti idzrus@earthlink.net

Web sites fighting the National ID include:

(WA) http://home.earthlink.net/~idzrus/index.html (AL)http://www.networkusa.org/fingerprint.shtml
(GA) http://www.atlantainfoguide.com/repeal/
Donnie Guthrie Home page http://www.scott.net/~dg1/1.htm ( Donnie is the young man arrested for NOT showing his SSN to the police.)