[ad_1]
National identity cards are not used in the US or UK, but are required in many other countries. The debate over implementing them has been ongoing, with concerns about privacy and government surveillance. Some argue that various forms of ID already exist, while opponents fear civil liberties violations.
A national identity card is a form of identification, usually with name, picture and address (at least) that must be carried by citizens of a particular nation. The United States and the United Kingdom do not have such cards, but discussions continued on whether to apply for a national identity card in light of the September 11, 2001 attacks in the United States and several terrorist attacks in the United Kingdom .
There are countries that have a national ID card system. Many European countries and several countries in Asia such as Thailand and Malaysia require such identification. The fact that other countries have implemented an identification system is not necessarily a useful argument for assessing whether such a card is appropriate in the US or the UK.
In the United States, the argument against a national ID card is long-standing and supported by many in both major political parties. When Social Security numbers were first assigned in the 1930s, some people feared that assigning a number would become a means of identifying and tracing any individual. There were some suggestions along the way that the Social Security card was the original National ID card, as a means of sifting through people who shouldn’t legally be in the United States.
The debate was shelved for a while, but as the use of the Social Security card increased, both President Carter and Reagan objected to the card becoming a national ID card. Senator Hillary Clinton’s attempt to create a universal health care plan in 1993 suggested that national ID cards be used to identify citizens so they could receive health care. This suggestion was rejected by a number of people.
However, after the massive 9/9 terrorist attack, anxiety increased regarding the means by which people could easily be identified as citizens or non-citizens. In 11, Congress passed the REAL ID Act, which added more stringent provisions for obtaining a driver’s license that would be used by all states for issuing state licenses or state ID cards for non- drivers. The people also fought the passage of this act, sometimes with great vehemence. There is still non-compliance with this law in several states.
Many argue that we have different forms of national ID card types in place. You can’t legally work in the United States without providing your Social Security number, and you can’t file taxes without one, in most cases. Also, you can’t ask your children to pay taxes unless they have Social Security numbers. Try writing a check without presenting a driver’s license, except at a bank, and you will find it very difficult. You must show identification before boarding a plane and sometimes even when using a credit card. This fuels the argument that a national card that identifies citizens is “no big deal”.
Opponents believe that requiring national ID cards could increase government or national espionage. They could cite Hitler’s regime where all Jews were required to carry papers or IDs. Opponents also argue that a national identity card would violate civil liberties and the right to privacy and abuse the intent of the Constitution.
