American Policy Center » 2008 » July
- For Freedom – E- Verify System Must Be Stopped
- will not safeguard the United States from terrorists;
- will not preserve what’s left of our Rule of Law; and
- will further decimate our liberty.
- Stand your ground; oppose re-authorization of E-Verify!
- Oppose any electronic employment verification program for American citizens.
- We Are Beginning to Move the Rock of Freedom Uphill
- REAL ID: Connecting the dots to an International ID
- Barack Obama and the UN’s Drive for Global Governance
- Principle One called for the consolidation of all international agencies under the direct authority of the UN.
- Principle Two called for UN regulation of all transnational corporations and financial institutions, requiring an “international code of conduct” concerning the environment and labor standards.
- Principle Three explored various schemes to create independent revenue sources for the UN – meaning UN taxes including fees on all international monetary transactions, taxes on aircraft flights in the skies, and on shipping fuels, and licensing of what the UN called the “global commons,” meaning use of air, water and natural resources. The Law of the Sea Treaty fits this category.
- Principle Four would restructure the UN by eliminating the veto power and permanent member status on the Security Council. Such a move would almost completely eliminate U.S. influence and power in the world body. In turn Principle Four called for the creation of an “Assembly of the People” which would be populated by hand-picked non-governmental organizations (NGOs) which are nothing more than political groups with their own agendas (the UN calls NGOs “civil society”). Now, the UN says these NGO’s will be the representatives of the “people” and the Assembly of the People will become the new power of the UN.
- Principle Five would authorize a standing UN army.
- Principle six would require UN registration of all arms and the reduction of all national armies “as part of a multinational global security system” under the authority of the UN.
- Principle Seven would require individual and national compliance with all UN “Human rights” treaties and declarations.
- Principle Eight would activate the UN Criminal Court and make it compulsory for all nations — now achieved.
- Principle Nine called for a new institution to establish economic and environmental security by ensuring “Sustainable Development.”
- Principle Ten would establish an International Environmental Cort
- Principle Eleven demanded an international declaration stating that climate change is an essential global security interest that requires the creation of a “high level action team” to allocate carbon emissions based on equal per-capita rights – The Kyoto Global Warming Treaty in action.
- Principle Twelve demanded the cancellation of all debt owed by the poorest nations, global poverty reductions and for the “equitable sharing” of global resources, as allocated by the UN – here is where Obama’s Global Poverty Act comes in.
Urgent Effort Needed NOW
July 30, 2008
Action Alert! Action Alert!
| APC is now offering you a quick and easy way to multiply your efforts and help win more battles! Simply click http://www.referralblast.com/rblast.asp?sid=7137 to send this APC Action Alert to up to TEN of your friends! It’s fast, it’s easy, and most of all, it’s extremely effective in KILLING LEFTIST POLICIES! |
Big Brother’s forces of tyranny are making a major push in Congress right now to re-authorize E-Verify.
This massive data bank essentially will dictate who can be hired in this country. It is the brainchild of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and is an electronic employment verification (EEV) program.
The plan is to make E-Verify mandatory for all American workers. E-Verify is hugely flawed, and will have devastating effects on both naturalized U.S. citizens, as well as those who were native-born, if it is not stopped. We stand in a narrow window of opportunity – if E-Verify is not re-authorized in both houses before the September adjournment, the program will expire in November.
One man, Senator Robert Menendez (D-NJ) has taken a stand to stop E-Verify. He has put a Senate hold on the reauthorization legislation — and he needs our immediate, vocal, and continuous support to stand up to massive forces who are lying to you about this dangerous program.
You and the American Policy Center have had a tremendous impact on the illegal alien debate. Your efforts have placed substantive roadblocks not only in the paths of those seeking amnesty for criminal invaders, but also those seeking to register every working American.
Yet there are now multiple bills, in both the House and Senate, aimed at re-authorizing the flawed E-Verify program. If successful, any one of these bills will shackle U.S. citizens to a hugely-flawed national database that:
APC stands opposed to Big Brother’s surveillance over our lives – no matter the reason. As Benjamin Franklin so sagely opined, “They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security.” The United States already has laws on the books to prevent the lawbreaking and abuse directed at our nation and her citizens; they need only be enforced. Americans must not be herded into DHS’ surveillance system because of these lawbreakers, or for any other excuse.
The E-Verify program currently mandates that all federal agencies and all federal sub-contractors must use the E-Verify System in order to hire new employees. One major problem with E-Verify is that DHS first checks a worker’s eligibility through the Social Security Administration’s (SSA) Numident database.
The fact is, SSA never purges a Social Security number once it is assigned. The Numident database currently contains 435 million records; more than 100 million more than the nation’s total population, legal or otherwise. In December 2006, the SSA Inspector General reported approximately 18 million of these records are not accurate. Yet DHS wants E-Verify re-authorized, and made mandatory for the entire American workforce. Just imagine the disruption already suffered by millions of American citizens as they try to work and support their families. That hardship will only grow much worse if E-Verify is re-authorized and made mandatory for every working American citizen.
It is outrageous to propose that the very foundation of our great nation – the hard working, legal Americans, must now submit to having their personal information placed in a massive DHS database, and be registered in a DHS worker registry, before being authorized to work in our own country. This is an outrage! And the presumption that DHS can better find millions of illegal, undocumented workers by first herding them together with a hundred+ million legitimate workers is absurd.
A study by the Cato Institute found the E-Verify program to be ineffective, intrusive, and expensive. “A full-fledged Electronic Employment Verification (EEV) system has many practical and technical problems – to say nothing of the question of whether it is appropriate for a free country – and would still fail to prevent illegal immigration” says Jim Harper, Cato’s director of Information Policy Studies. Mr. Harper further stated, “The things necessary to make a system like this really impervious to forgery and fraud would convert it from an identity system into a cradle-to-grave biometric tracking system.”
E-Verify sets the stage for a national workforce management system, designed ultimately to subject all of us to an intrusive global surveillance system.
E-Verify will not prevent illegals from working in the United States, but rather help identify illegals the government wants converted to “authorized aliens.”
Such a national human resource management system is highly desired by big business, and has been under implementation since the 1990s. Federal executive involvement is nothing less than fascism.
It is an unjustified and unwarranted intrusion into our privacy, and a very real threat to our security and liberty!
Please be warned: There are forces now pushing for your support of the E-Verify system, telling you that it is necessary for tough enforcement to protect us from illegal immigration and terrorism. They are lying! If you support freedom over fascism then you must help stop the E-Verify System
ACTION TO TAKE
1. It is imperative you immediately contact Senator Robert Menendez. Tell him:
And please thank Senator Menendez for taking the heat he is on this vital issue!
2. Call your state’s two U.S. Senators and tell them you OPPOSE re-authorization of the E-Verify System.
United States Capitol switchboard: (202) 224-3121. A switchboard operator will connect you directly with the Senate office you request.
Hurry. There is no time to lose.
With Congress’ August recess looming, letters sent via the US mail may not arrive in a timely fashion. We recommend you call, email and fax Senator Menendez. His contact information is listed below:
317 Senate Hart Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20510
202.224.4744
202.228.2197 fax
Email: http://menendez.senate.gov/contact/contact.cfm
SEND THIS MESSAGE TO AT LEAST TEN MORE PEOPLE! APC is now offering you a quick and easy way to multiply your efforts and help win more battles! Simply click http://www.referralblast.com/rblast.asp?sid=5906 to send this APC Action Alert to up to TEN of your friends! It’s fast, it’s easy and most of all, it’s extremely effective in KILLING OPPRESSIVE POLICIES!
Address to the 9th Annual Freedom 21 National Conference
Dallas, Texas
July 26, 2008
PART 2
By Tom DeWeese
President, American Policy Center
THE SUPREME COURT
Gun Control
And there’s more good news. June was a very good month for us.
The Supreme Court ruled that individual Americans have a right to own guns. They struck down the age-old DC gun ban. We won the most important Second Amendment Constitutional case in American history.
And the other side is beside themselves. The Washington, DC news media reported the Courts ruling like a disaster was about to come down on the poor folks of DC.
Every single local news broadcast in DC that night actually combined the report of the Court’s ruling with a memorial service that was being held for a young kid who had been gunned down in the streets – a common occurrence in DC. The obvious message was that DC residents could now expect more of these killings now that guns were legal!
No wonder they were so distraught. They need gun bans in order to impose global governance. But we won!
And that’s not all the good news on the Supreme Court front.
UN Criminal Court
You may remember that in 2005 the UN Criminal Court ruled that the state of Texas must reopen the case of a Mexican death-row inmate. The reason was that the death penalty awarded in the case violated the 1963 Vienna Convention which said he should have had council from his home country. Never mind that he confessed to the crime.
Incredibly, the Bush Administration stepped in, basically acting as an agent for the UN Court. President Bush actually issued a memorandum to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales ordering the Texas court to reopen the case.
But in a 6-3 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court said President Bush lacked the legal authority to tell the Texas Court how to act.
However, that ruling has much more impact than just this case. It limits presidential power and the reach of international treaties, saying neither President Bush nor the World Court has the authority to order a Texas court to reopen a case. It says the UN World Court does not govern over U.S. Courts. States’ rights, said the court, are preeminent.
The doom and gloom crowd have written volumes about how the Court has abandoned the Constitution in favor of international agreements and foreign laws. And that has certainly happened.
The Globalists need the Supreme Court to be a lackey to their agenda in order to impose global governance. But here are two cases where the Constitution was upheld. Those are victories for our side.
Upholding the 10th Amendment
In that same spirit, in June 2008, the legislature of Oklahoma passed a joint resolution claiming its state sovereignty under the 10th Amendment to the Constitution, outlining its powers and serving notice to the federal government to back off from overreaching its Constitutionally delegated powers.
In Oklahoma, the revolutionary slogan of ‘Don’t tread on me’ is alive and well.
This is great news. It is a huge start for a nationwide trend. It paves the way for us to pressure other states to follow. It is the worst news for the global governance crowd – a huge step backwards.
But the message that was attached to the e-mail I received with this news said, ‘yeah, this will last until the feds start taking away their highway funds.’ How do people live in such a black hole? Nothing is good enough for them. We are all doomed. Well, I think some people fail to understand how hot the fire of freedom burns in Oklahoma.
And still more good news in the courts.
Upholding the 5th Amendment
Again in June, after 17 years of war in the courts, the Wayne Hage 5th amendment property rights takings case was finally won. This is a major, precedent-setting case that recognizes rancher’s grazing and water rights as equal to property rights.
The case validates the 5th Amendment takings clause that just compensation must be made in any takings and that private property is fundamental to the existence of our nation. The case can now be used to help save thousands of ranches across the west.
Stopping Martial Law
Here’s another victory you may not have heard about. For years the Internet has been full of fear mongering about how Martial Law will be declared for some unstated reason; and that we freedom fighters will be transported by train to concentration camps and elections will be suspended.
There have been claims that George Bush is planning to do all of this as well as abolish this year’s election so he can stay in office as a dictator.
You know, I watched a recent interview with President Bush and got the distinct feeling that no one is looking forward to the election and his last day in office more than George W. Bush.
But there was much ado about a revision Congress made in 2006 to the Posse Comitatus Act and the Insurrection Act to make it easier for the president to declare Martial Law. Yep, that did happen. And hence the fear.
But what you may not have heard was that the Congress repealed those changes at the end of January 2008 as part of Public Law 110-181 (HR4986). It was done very quietly and was hardly reported in the media.
And while we rightly attack the media for not telling both sides of the story, those who daily feed the Internet jungle drums with doom and gloom, didn’t bother to report that one – perhaps because it didn’t supply the accepted premise that nothing good is happening.
Enforcing English First
Here’s a small, but important victory concerning protecting English as our national language. In March of this year the Senate voted 54-44 to pass the Alexander Amendment.
That Amendment recommends removing $670,000 from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission budget – money the agency planned to spend filing law suits against employers that have English-only rules for all employees. Instead the Senate recommended that the money be used to teach English. As I said, it’s a small item, but significant.
In another development on the English First front, Lou Dobbs just conducted a poll in which 94% of responders said they favored English as America’s language.
Stopping the SAVE Act
And here’s more important progress in the fight to stop Big Brother.
We are still holding off passage of The Secure America through Verification and Enforcement Act (the SAVE Act). This bill is being sold to our people as a ‘get tough’ policy on illegal immigration.
Now, many of you may actually be helping Numbers USA push this dangerous legislation by making phone calls to your congressmen urging them to support the SAVE Act. Please learn more about this bad bill. You are being misled and used by some bad people to help take away your freedoms.
In truth, the SAVE Act would give the federal government powerful control over private business it shouldn’t have, and would establish more massive data banks for Big Brother.
The SAVE Act would create databases on birth certificates and death certificates. Both of these government databases are necessary for compliance to REAL ID.
The SAVE Act would force private businesses to run all applications for employment through a federal data bank – one that is not equipped to handle the massive traffic of every business in the nation accessing it 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. So when a name is tossed out as illegal, no matter the reason, a private, law abiding citizen then has to take personal time to go the government agency and try to prove who they are – meanwhile losing the job. Yet, it would catch very few illegals in its net.
This is not how the United States of America is supposed to operate. Americans aren’t to be treated guilty until proven innocent.
The SAVE Act is really just a companion bill to the REAL ID, again under the guise of ‘getting tough in enforcing laws’ against illegal aliens and terrorists. Instead it puts all Americans in a straight jacket, using the politics of fear.
It was put on a fast track in both the House and the Senate, quickly gathering hoards of co-sponsors from both Republicans and Democrats who hoped to use it to make their constituents think they are tough on illegal immigration – that is until they learned the truth about the bill. That’s when the fast track stopped.
I’m proud to say that the American Policy Center has been the main opposition and we were able to recruit others to our side to bottle it up – where it is today. Fascism is fascism no matter what you call it or how pleasant you try to make it smell. This bill too must end up on the trash heap. And that will be a victory.
European Union
Some say it’s over in Europe as the European Union solidifies its stranglehold on the Continent. Really? Someone better tell that to the Irish.
Ireland just rejected the European Union’s attempt to establish a new EU Constitution by voting against the Treaty. This is the third time there has been a public vote on acceptance of the EU and the third time it has been soundly defeated. First by France. Then by the Netherlands. Now by the Irish.
The EU can’t continue to ignore this opposition without facing a revolution. The Irish vote may be the first crack in the coming destruction of the European Union.
North American Union, TTC and Mexican Trucks
And here at home, on our own front in fighting the North American Union…
You’ve just heard an incredible presentation by Dan Byfield on the amazing progress they and local leaders are having in stopping the Trans Texas Corridor through the use of local commissions which force the state government to deal with them. So far they have organized nine of these commissions along the TTC route and all have said they will not let the corridor pass through their counties. The Texas Department of Texas is getting desperate – there is no way around these commissions. The people are again in charge of their own property and policy.
We’ve also heard from Oklahoma State Senator Randy Brogdon and his effective fight to stop the TTC from crossing Oklahoma’s border.
And there’s more.
In September of 2007, The Bush Administration began a major project needed to implement the NAU and the TTC. The project was a test to allow Mexican trucks to cross our borders and transport goods throughout the nation.
Immediately, both houses of Congress passed legislation to block the project and remove any funding for it. Senator Byron Dorgan, a Democrat from North Dakota got an amendment passed 74-24 to the Transportation Departments appropriations bill to de-fund the project. It passed and was signed into law by President Bush last December.
Yet, Transportation Secretary Mary Peters just decided to ignore the law and do it anyway. She just recently endured a hearing by a hopping mad Senator Dorgan.
Now there are calls by many, including the Teamsters Union, that Mary Peters be fired. What a message that firing would send to the SPP perpetrators. It’s something we should all help bring about.
Fire Mary Peters and stop the Mexican truck invasion – and thereby put a major pothole in the center of the Trans Texas Corridor.
These efforts and those by thousands around the nation are getting the message out about the North American Union. The perpetrators of this treason did not want the general public to know of their plans. They wanted to operate in secret.
But we have blown the whistle on them. We have alerted Americans. And we are throwing a massive monkey wrench into their well-laid plans. And it is having an effect.
They started with denials and escalated to calling us names – lunatic fringe; liars; scaremongers. They refuse to debate the issue. They hide behind a curtain of secrecy. But it’s not working.
And that fact is having an effect on their plans. There is a feeling of despair growing in the ranks of the SPP.
Back in January, Jerome Corsi reported on an article written by a reporter for the Canadian newspaper, The Globe and Mail. The reporter, John Ibbitson was actually participating in an SPP meeting, presenting a paper. So he was on the inside.
He was basically shocked by the attitudes of the participants. Here are the people who seem to have everything under control. The people you and I fear the most. Yet, he found them exhibiting an overwhelming feeling of despair that their well-laid plans for a North American Union were in trouble.
Said Ibbitson, ‘public exposure has stalled SPP efforts.’ He concluded that the Security and Prosperity Partnership is ‘DEAD.’ Other SPP leaders, while disagreeing with Ibbitson about that, admit that the ‘public awareness’ of the SPP and some of its features will trigger changes.
Stuart Trew, a researcher and writer for the Council of Canadians wrote, ‘The opposition in all three countries has exposed the SPP North American Integration agenda.’ Several other attendees to an SPP meeting in Mexico confirmed that public exposure has been a hindrance to the progress of the SPP program.
Ibbitson hinted that Bush and Canadian Prime Minster Harper were reluctant to spend any more political capital in the SPP effort. And that was one reason why the SPP meeting in New Orleans in April was more about public relations than substance. They are trying to regain ground that they’ve lost to us.
Now, I don’t believe for a second that this fight is anywhere near over. But, I tell you this because I want you to understand that your fight is having an effect. Notice how many times they used the word ‘exposure.’
The fact is this. We do not live in a vacuum. Things don’t just happen. Actions have consequences. Our actions have an effect.
For you to believe that all is doomed means that nothing we do counts. None of our articles, none of our speeches, none of our rallies or protests or even this conference mean a thing. We are helpless.
To believe that all is doomed is to say our ideas – the ideas of Jefferson, Washington, Franklin and Madison – aren’t strong enough to stand up against the delusional ravings of Marx, Lenin, Hitler and Maurice Strong.
If that is true, then we may as well go home. All really is lost. But that is just not true. Our actions do count – in a big way. All of these things I mentioned indicate a trend that people are beginning to listen to our arguments and may well begin to accept our ideas. That is progress – and it can lead to victory.
There is no need to get apocalyptic just because the general public hasn’t accepted all of our ideas at once. We didn’t get into this mess in a day, and we won’t get out in a day. Rather than facing our doom, I believe we are facing magnificent opportunity. Even in defeat there is opportunity.
Opportunity for Victory
You know, during this election, both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama attacked NAFTA. Does it matter why? Does it matter whether or not it was a sincere attack? Does it matter if it was attacked for the wrong reasons? It gives us an opportunity to jump on and carry the attack for the right reasons and that is exactly what we should do.
As Winston Churchill put it in 1941, during the darkest hours for the British in World War II, ‘Do not speak of darker days; let us speak of sterner days. These are not dark days; these are great days – the greatest days our country has ever lived; and we must all thank God that we have been allowed, each of us according to our station, to play a part in making these days memorable in the history of our race.’
There is opportunity for us now as never before. The economy is falling because of globalist polices.
People are seeing their life savings endangered as the dollar continues to fall and they will demand that something be done. We have the answer.
They are already suffering at the gas pump, and drilling American oil – taboo just a year ago – is becoming a demand. We have the answer.
We have never had a better opportunity to take steps to get rid of the Federal Reserve and restore our money to the gold standard.
In fact, my friend Ed Vieira, a monetary expert of the first order, offers a very simple plan to do that – and it won’t take a major upheaval to accomplish it.
Simply put, he suggests that we start using the gold and silver coins legally being minted by the government and begin to spend them. Stores already offer the option to use Federal Reserve notes, or credit or debit cards. He suggests that using the gold and silver coins as a fourth option would see a quick demise of the Federal Reserve notes, painlessly and in a free market.
Of course, I’ve stated that very simply, without a lot of detail, but you get the point. We can make things happen, we are not helpless. And getting us back to a standard of monetary worth will take care of the soaring gas prices. We have the answer.
Second, we need a plan to get the feds out of the public schools. This is where most of our future problems are breeding right now. Desperate parents are ready to listen – they just don’t know what to do – we have the answer.
Third, we must break the hold that the radical environmentalists have over all of our lives. Let those green Nazis freeze in the dark in their caves. The fact is, as I’ve pointed out, it’s already happening. A movement cannot live on lies forever.
And fourth, get the United States out of the United Nations. It is the greatest source of evil in the world. It is the breeding ground for every policy we fight. Accomplish that and every other issue we spend our lives fighting will melt away – the Republic restored.
Relieve yourself of the despair. Our fight isn’t over. It’s just begun. It is a time of great upheaval. And that makes it a time of great opportunity.
Ron Paul understood that his presidential campaign had little chance of sending him to the White House in 2008. His real goal was to start a revolution to get us there at another time. The incredible news is that his plan has worked beyond anything he could imagine. The revolution is truly under way.
Don’t despair over the economy. The truth is, the economy isn’t a captive of George Bush or Congress or some dark hand. The economy is in the hands of millions of hard working individuals.
As you drive home after this conference, look at all of the office buildings, the stores, the factories. Inside every single one of those buildings are people who depend on that business to earn their living. In every one of them, someone is taking steps to keep that business alive, no matter how dark the times.
I first made that observation during the uncertain times leading up to Y2K in 2000. As the doomsayers even had the exact date and time of economic Armageddon, they got it wrong because they misjudged the determination and independence of American ingenuity. Again, that is what will pull us all through this time.
There is no question that times are bad. No question that things will get worse before they get better. No question that we must be vigilant and we must fight with all we have. But, we are beginning to move the rock of freedom uphill. We are on the threshold of great change – our change – because we are right and we have the answers to the mess they have made. And people are beginning to see it.
Now is not the time to quit. Now is not the time to sit in despair. Rise up. Engage the fight. Every victory – large of small – has meaning – and consequences.
Winston Churchill said on that seemingly hopeless day in 1941 that those were not dark days – but the greatest days – because the forces of freedom understood the enemy and were fighting back. That gave hope.
But he also warned: ‘Never give in. Never give in. Never. Never. Never.’ It’s time for us to live by those words again to take America back.
Address by Representative Sam E. Rohrer
Freedom 21 National Conference – Dallas, Texas
July 25, 2008
History offers many examples of societies which have sought to increase security by sacrificing freedom. America itself provides many pertinent instances. However, our founding fathers have not left us without wisdom on this issue. Ben Franklin has famously stated, ‘People willing to trade freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both.’ REAL ID undoubtedly exemplifies a scenario in which a difficult tension exists between freedom and security. By commandeering every state’s driver’s license issuing process, REAL ID threatens the results warned by Franklin – loss of both freedom and security. It has become the biometric enrollment phase of a plan to implement a terribly invasive tracking system, largely without public knowledge or approval. REAL ID is merely the current face of a far larger, international government and private economic effort to collect, store, and distribute the sensitive biometric data of citizens to use for the twin purposes of government tracking and economic control. At issue are much more than standardized or non-duplicative driver’s licenses. This effort extends worldwide, threatening every person alive today. Although very legitimate security concerns exist in this age of terrorism, this Act extends far beyond terrorism prevention or protection of the innocent. Keeping that broad picture in mind, let us move to some background behind the face of REAL ID implementation in America.
The REAL ID Act passed Congress in 2005 buried in a ‘must-pass’ war funding and tsunami relief bill. The little debate in the House and total absence of debate in the Senate ensured that many Congressmen did not realize the full implications of REAL ID. Importantly, the desire by government and economic interests to implement a national tracking and ID system did not start with the REAL ID Act in 2005. Under the guise of security, it has been attempted numerous times in the past, even during Ronald Reagan’s administration. When former Attorney General William French Smith proposed to implement what he called a ‘perfectly harmless’ national ID system as well as when a second cabinet member proposed to ‘tattoo a number on each American’s forearm,’ Ronald Reagan responded, ‘My God, that’s the mark of the beast,’ signaling an abrupt end to the national ID debate during the Reagan years.
The significant opposition to a national ID system in the past extends to the REAL ID issue today. This conviction has united both Democrats and Republicans as well as such normally opposed groups as the ACLU and the ACLJ. Whether the concern is privacy, religious rights, states’ rights, or cost of implementation, REAL ID has galvanized broad and deep resistance, currently including an estimated six hundred groups. Today, over twenty legislatures have passed resolutions or legislation variously opposing implementation of the REAL ID Act. Eleven of those legislatures have gone further by passing laws specifically prohibiting compliance with REAL ID.
What does REAL ID do? REAL ID attempts to mandate a standardized process and format for all state drivers’ licenses to achieve increased security. Most importantly in this standardized process, REAL ID mandates a certain picture quality. A footnote issued by the Department of Homeland Security establishes this quality as compliant with the ICAO Document 9303 biometric format. The global body setting this format, the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), is a specialized agency created under the United Nations. Biometric data can be produced from a simple digital photograph of this quality by running the picture of a person’s face through a software program which measures and analyzes the unique, personally identifiable characteristics of that face. The process results in a unique numeric code which identifies a person according to facial measurements. You read that correctly. A unique number or ‘code’ is developed from an algorithmic formula which converts a digital biometric sample to biometric ‘face print’ data. Under REAL ID biometric facial recognition technology, you become a number literally worn on your face – a number which is read by computer, tracked by surveillance camera, and distributed worldwide. Clearly, this international standard provides global compatibility of American citizens’ biometric data collected through REAL ID.
Having this background, we should observe that many Americans still do not know why the provisions of the REAL ID Act must be rejected and aggressively opposed because they do not understand the full implications of REAL ID. Many wrongly assume that the legitimate need for security trumps all other considerations. However, REAL ID is not primarily about a secure driver’s license or terrorism prevention. The full and dangerous implications of REAL ID may be fleshed out through a discussion of why each American must vigorously oppose this Act’s most basic tenets. It poses dangers in the following three areas:
1.) REAL ID violates Constitutional rights.
2.) REAL ID compromises national and state sovereignty.
3.) REAL ID threatens the safety of all Americans.
I. First, let us note that compliance with REAL ID would violate our constitutionally protected freedoms.
Amendment I – Freedom of Religion
REAL ID violates freedom of religion for some citizens by forcing inclusion into a system which requires a picture – and more – just to access public services. The Amish and some Mennonites provide examples of religious groups who view the mere taking of photographs as idolatry. REAL ID conditions their freedoms, such as entering a federal building, upon a provision which violates their religious beliefs. Because this ‘government’ identification system limits travel and access to certain public places, and could even become a debit card, other more mainline religious groups view REAL ID as the advent of the ‘mark of the beast.’
Particularly because this technology assigns a unique number to represent each person’s biometric face print, these concerns are hardly unfounded.
A Powerpoint presentation from L-1 Identity Solutions, the major biometrics company in the U.S. today, bolsters this claim. A slide in that presentation includes a graph which charts future likely applications for biometrics. Phase 1 of this ‘blueprint’ for biometric implementation utilizes the authority of Federal agencies to impose such requirements as REAL ID. Phase 2 utilizes bureaucratic leveraging on regulated industries to implement biometrics. Phase 3 anticipates mass implementation on the citizens at large for such everyday activities as buying and selling. As an example, under Phase 2 DHS is attempting to force airlines to pick up the costs of collecting biometrics from foreigners at airports. In Texas under Phase 3, a company is experimenting with using the driver’s license as a debit card. Whether one is personally alarmed at some or all of these concerns, REAL ID would prohibit the free exercise of religion for many people.
Amendment IV – Freedom of Privacy
REAL ID also violates the Fourth Amendment’s guarantee of freedom of privacy. First, by mandating the collection, storage, and dissemination of personally identifiable data without any informed consent, REAL ID tramples on this right. In reality, this practice constitutes government-sanctioned identity theft and seriously breaches the ‘security of person’ guaranteed to every U.S. citizen. No sufficiently compelling need exists to warrant government mass collection and storage of such sensitive information about its citizens. Concern heightens even further when private corporations control the databases being set up to house this information. As an example, L-1 Identity Solutions houses a database of U.S. driver’s license information. This company, which has consolidated a virtual monopoly on the driver’s license issuing market in the U.S., will handle all private information collected during the license issuing process.
Secondly, REAL ID threatens freedom of privacy because this warehoused data cannot be confidently secured. Even the Department of Homeland Security’s own Privacy Impact Assessment fails to guarantee that the database linking and networking that will result from REAL ID will be secure. Many privacy experts agree that REAL ID will actually increase identity theft! In reality, the database and access to it will create an electronic superhighway for potential mass identity theft.
Thirdly, REAL ID violates the Fourth Amendment in that the process of collecting personal biometric data without consent violates the very laws that exist to protect against such measures. This is probably one of the most significant Constitutional issues. Current US law allows the collection of biometric information only in the case of criminal activity. However, REAL ID institutionalizes the capture of facial recognition biometrics for every driver, regardless of criminality.
Fourthly, REAL ID ripens the climate for aggressive efforts to control the masses via information and leading-edge technology, regardless of crucial privacy considerations. Data collection and surveillance is simultaneously occurring across several diverse fronts, each one a potential privacy danger painting the broader picture of where REAL ID will take us as a country. For instance:
1. In Rhode Island, a school district is allowing a company to place radio frequency tracking (RFID) chips in students’ book bags.
2. Nationwide, Great Britain has installed an estimated 4.2 million surveillance cameras utilizing facial recognition technology to keep tabs on all citizens. These cameras, of which there is 1 for every 14 citizens, can observe a person up to 300 times in a normal day in the city of London.
3. China is aggressively pursuing country-wide surveillance of its citizens using facial recognition technology purchased from a contractor supplied by the previously mentioned L-1 Identity Solutions.
4. According to a June 28, 2008 New York Times article, US and European officials are nearly agreed upon a ‘binding international agreement’ which would allow ‘European governments and companies to transfer personal information to the United States, and vice versa.’ Under the cloak of terrorism prevention, European governments could request ‘private information – like credit card transactions, travel histories, and Internet browsing habits’ about American citizens.
5. Homeland Security Presidential Directive 24 issued by the President on June 5, 2008, ‘establishes a framework to ensure that Federal executive departments and agencies use mutually compatible methods and procedures in the collection, storage, use, analysis, and sharing of biometric and associated biographic and contextual information of individuals.’ This step shows the President’s extensive authority and disregard for privacy in streamlining the biometric sharing process.
6. The FBI is currently building a billion-dollar database to house an enormous amount of biometric data. While officially aimed at housing criminal and terrorist data, this database already retains finger prints, iris scans and other individual biometrics that the government collects on ordinary citizens. Who knows the extent of the private information that will be stored in this massive database? REAL ID-collected ‘face prints’ are just one more piece of the data collection and tracking system.
These examples only serve to underscore the aggressive global government efforts to track and control citizens. In every case, REAL ID violates the freedoms guaranteed by the Fourth Amendment.
Amendment X – States’ Rights
REAL ID violates the Tenth Amendment in that the federal government is attempting to force the states to collect private data on their citizens, only to allow that data to be shipped out-of-state and shared worldwide. This action forces the states to work against the very interests of the citizens they are to protect. When states accede to this pressure under REAL ID, they allow the transfer of state authority to the federal government. The separation of powers built into our Constitution then crumbles as the federal government makes the rules, interprets the rules, and enforces the rules regarding all state drivers’ licenses.
II. In addition to the three ways REAL ID would violate the Constitution, compliance with the REAL ID Act would undermine our national and state sovereignty. While REAL ID reads like a manual for a national ID card, the Department of Homeland Security’s own rules for REAL ID reveal that it implements an international ID system based on biometric identification. Complying with the requirements under REAL ID would violate U.S. national and state sovereignty by forcing states to adopt international biometric facial image standards and to document standards set by international organizations.
As mentioned previously, the ICAO, affiliated with the UN, sets the standards for facial image captures (photos). Besides tracking the movements of international travelers, the ICAO also has assumed the responsibility of creating a common international passport system that stores individual personal and biometric information on a RFID chip built into the passport. The American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators (AAMVA), which recognizes ICAO standards, ‘enables’ this scheme. This international body and private organization sets nearly all the standards for REAL ID document scanning, storage, data encryption, barcode and layout design to comply with their 2005 international driver’s license system. Under REAL ID, AAMVA is the hub and backbone of the database system being set up to share information between states. From a broad perspective, the system created by REAL ID destroys national sovereignty and constitutional authority by removing control of government from the people and establishing government control over the people.
Furthering AAMVA’s control strategy here in North America, implementation of REAL ID is ‘de facto’ enrollment of each state into AAMVA’s Driver’s License Agreement (DLA). AAMVA has pushed the DLA, which meets REAL ID specifications, for nearly ten years. The implementation of this DLA is crucially important to the global effort because it mandates the sharing of all U.S. drivers’ license information with Mexico and Canada. This egregious step places U.S. citizen’s data at the mercy of Canadian and Mexican privacy controls, further exacerbating the identity theft problem, and violating Constitutional law and national sovereignty by essentially having states form a treaty with a foreign nation.
REAL ID also violates national sovereignty because any international system includes and requires agreements and obligations that would weaken any sovereign standing. In fact, a Government Computer News report notes the following from Robert Mocny, acting program manager for the U.S. Visitor and Immigrant Status Indicator Technology program. His quote comes from comments about a federal plan to extend biometric data sharing to Asian and European governments and corporations, so as to create a Global Security Envelope of identity management. ‘My question is, how is it ethical not to share?’ Mocny asked. ‘It makes no sense for us to develop separate systems . . . information sharing is appropriate around the world.’ Government Computer News further notes that he is sketching a plan for sharing biometric data that would permanently link an individual with data that governments and corporations hold. Since both governments and corporations have been infiltrated by extremists and terrorists and since certain governments of today may be our enemies tomorrow, I hardly think that worldwide sharing of our citizen’s data is a good idea!
Enhanced Driver’s Licenses (or EDL’s) provide a further example of the undermining of national and state sovereignty. Citizens that purchase these nearly REAL ID-compliant licenses, which contain biographic and biometric information on an RFID chip, can use them as a passport to enter either Mexico or Canada. This advancement establishes the international ID designation of REAL ID. The Canadian province British Columbia has also issued a new EDL which, according to their website is also, ‘an acceptable document for entry from Canada into the United States by land and water.’
REAL ID violates state sovereignty because the issue in contention is ‘national identity management’, with the federal government manipulating the tool of state driver’s licenses. Consider the following statements about REAL ID from Electronic Data Systems, the very company likely to maintain AAMVA’s driver’s license database: ‘The Real ID Act, then, is about more than a driver’s license. It puts in place a set of standards for Identity Management (IdM) that can be leveraged across an entire government organization to create an integrated citizen identity security program.’ The international biometric standards mandated in DHS’s final rules, paint the broader picture of an international ID card for government surveillance and tracking.
III. REAL ID would endanger Constitutional rights and both national and state sovereignty. Finally, let us consider that compliance with the REAL ID Act would compromise the safety of our people. Unlike what some government officials might say, 9/11 and the prevention of terrorism are not the real reasons for REAL ID. In fact, this technology was being pushed well before 9/11. Although REAL ID and biometrics are promoted as the ‘cure-all’ to terrorism and identity theft problems, many highly dispute this claim. In response to the post-9/11 claims of biometrics companies that their technology could have prevented 9/11, Jim Wayman, the former head of the US Biometrics Center countered, ‘No, the government didn’t have this stuff in place, precisely because it had been working on it and knew its limitations and didn’t find any value for the costs involved.’ He further noted, ‘It’s going to be hard to know how these technologies can be applied to increase national security. We’re not just going to turn these machines on and start catching terrorists.’ REAL ID will not assure greater safety since terrorists will either avoid or duplicate a REAL ID compliant drivers’ license, although a correctly operating biometric system would certainly increase the difficulty of faking or forging a license.
Despite the government’s assurances about the ‘certain’ safety benefits of REAL ID, no government or company can create a foolproof, perfectly secure system. A person who breaks the law or who desires to wreak havoc on American soil will find a loophole with which to avoid the requirements of REAL ID. One needs only consider that driver’s licenses on the black market will continue to be readily available.
Further, the safety of law abiding citizens will be compromised as their identities are stolen, stored and made accessible to thieves around the globe. Some people reject this idea because they hope that the government will be able to protect their identity once it has all of a person’s information. The simple faith implicit in this idea is widely misplaced, however. As proof, consider that in 2007, a Globe and Mail report noted, ‘A security flaw in Passport Canada’s website has allowed easy access to the personal information – including social insurance numbers, dates of birth and driver’s licence numbers – of people applying for new passports.’ A breach of security in Great Britain last December resulted in the loss of approximately 25 million individual records. In my state of Pennsylvania, a security breach which occurred two years ago at a Driver’s License Center resulted in over 11,000 records being compromised. Such security breaches highlight significant personal dangers to law abiding citizens and prove that the only secure data is uncollected data.
Finally, REAL ID does not assure safety because biometric technology itself does not work predictably. At this point in time, the technology we are discussing does not work well; hence REAL ID and facial recognition biometrics can not ensure safety. As a result, no one has yet been successfully prosecuted via facial biometrics. The opportunity for false identification and therefore being, ‘guilty before proven innocent’ is great. For example, the Tampa, Florida police force scrapped a facial recognition system in 2003 because, according to a spokesman, ‘We never identified, were alerted to, or caught any criminal. It didn’t work.’ While on its face, the concept of REAL ID seems like it would increase security, it does not. A Privacy International Study conducted in 2004 found ‘Of the 25 countries that have been most adversely affected by terrorism since 1986, eighty percent have national identity cards, one third of which incorporate biometrics. This research was unable to uncover any instance where the presence of an identity card system in those countries was seen as a significant deterrent to terrorist activity.’ The simple truth is that REAL ID cannot stop crime.
In summary, we have seen that REAL ID threatens Constitutional rights, national and state sovereignty, and the safety of our people. The enrollment of American citizens into an international biometric system of identification and tracking constitutes the heart of the REAL ID issue. A secure driver’s license is not the ultimate goal or certainly the ultimate result of the REAL ID Act. And it is unfortunately clear that the ultimate purpose is government tracking and economic control through enhanced knowledge and surveillance through biometric identification and tracking.
This being established, it is clear that this aggressive effort of the federal government, working hand-in-hand with private commercial interests, must be opposed on every level. While Congress must move to quickly repeal the passage of the REAL ID Act, the states provide an ideal position from which to fight this encroachment by the federal government. The responsibility for the security and privacy of our own generation and the generations to come, however, rests upon our shoulders.
The next action to be taken involves the following three steps.
First, Congress must immediately repeal the REAL ID Act and resist any effort to pass anything remotely similar. Secondly, individual states which have not passed legislation preventing implementation of any provision of REAL ID, particularly the biometric portion, must do so without delay. As has been stressed throughout this article, biometrics is the core provision of REAL ID; consequently, the states must move to protect their citizens’ biometric data immediately. This step is critical because the vast majority of statutory law did not envision the breadth of individually identifiable data that could be gleaned by rapidly advancing technology. Further, because L-1 Identity Solutions holds a virtual monopoly as contractor for state DMVs, they could use their position to coerce the states into implementing all of DHS’s wishes. This scenario further endangers state’s rights. Therefore, it is not enough for states to simply stop collecting biometric data. They must purge and ‘dumb-down’ databases to preclude any government knowledge or use of private citizen’s biometrics. Additionally, private third-party inspections should be ordered to ensure that all measures have been fully implemented. Fundamentally, the states must demand control – they must inform the contractor what to do, not vice versa. Thirdly, citizens must play a role in resisting illegitimate actions of the federal government. They must be encouraged in their capacity as law-abiding citizens to whom Constitutional guarantees were acknowledged, to resist implementation of any effort that would compromise their individual, God-given rights.
The American people remain the strongest defenders of freedom in the world. Many in our past have died for the liberties we enjoy today. Most of us are still willing to fight and die today for our freedom and the freedom of our children tomorrow. May we each do our part to ensure the greatest nation on earth remains ‘the land of the free and the home of the brave!’
‘Liberty has never come from the government; it has always come from the subjects of it. The history of liberty is a history of limitation of governmental power, not the increase of it.’ -Woodrow Wilson
———————————————————–
Sam Rohrer is a Representative for the state of Pennsylvania and a member of the American Policy Center Advisory Board.
For more information on the dangers of the Real ID Act, contact:
Mark Lerner
Co-Founder – Stop Real ID Coalition
Phone: (816) 401-7615
Email: stoprealid@aol.com
July 15, 2008
By Tom DeWeese
Senator Barack Obama has introduced a dangerous bill and it’s on the fast track to Senate passage, probably because of his high profile position as the expected Democrat presidential nominee. Obama hasn’t done much legislatively in his freshman Senate term, but this one is very telling about what we can expect from a President Obama.
The bill is the “Global Poverty Act” (S.2433) and is not just a compassionate bit of fluff that Obama dreamed up to help the poor of the world. This bill is directly tied to the United Nations and serves as little more than a shakedown of American taxpayers in a massive wealth redistribution scheme. In fact, if passed, The Global Poverty Act will provide the United Nations with 0.7% of the United States gross national product. Estimates are that it will add up to at least $845 billion of taxpayer money for welfare to third world countries, in addition to the $300 billion Americans spent for the same thing in 2006.
The situation is urgent because the Global Poverty Act has already passed the House of Representatives by a unanimous voice vote on September 25, 2007. The senate version has been passed out of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee by unanimous consent and ready for a full Senate vote.
Of course the United States has had an ongoing program of supplying foreign aid and assistance to the poor for decades. And the U.S. pays most of the bills at the UN for its herd of programs. So what’s new about Obama’s bill, and why is it dangerous?
Some history that led up to the Global Poverty Act. In 1999 and 2000 non-governmental organizations, NGOs held numerous meetings around the world to write what became known as the Charter for Global Democracy. The document was prepared to be a blueprint for achieving global governance. In reality it was a charter for the abolition of individual freedom, national sovereignty and limited government.
The Charter for Global Democracy outlined its goals in 12 detailed “principles:”
Specifically, the Charter for Global Democracy was intended to give the UN domain over all of the earth’s land, air and seas. In addition it would give the UN the power to control all natural resources, wild life, and energy sources, even radio waves. Such control would allow the UN to place taxes on everything from development; to fishing; to air travel; to shipping. Anything that could be defined as using the earth’s resources would be subject to UN use-taxes. Coincidentally, all twelve principles came directly from the UN’s Commission on Global Governance.
There was one major problem with the Charter for Global Democracy, at least as far as the UN was concerned. It was too honest and straightforward. Overt action displeases the high-order thinking skills of UN diplomats. The UN likes to keep things fuzzy and gray so as not to scare off the natives. That way there is less chance of screaming headlines of a pending takeover by the UN. So, by the time the UN’s Millennium Summit rolled around in September 2000, things weren’t quite so clear.
At the Summit, attended by literally every head of state and world leader, including then-president Bill Clinton, the name of the Charter had been changed to the Millennium Declaration and the language had been toned down to sound more like suggestions and ideas. Then those “suggestions” were put together in the “Millennium Declaration” in the name of all of the heads of state. No vote or debate was allowed — just acclamation by world leaders who basically said nothing. And the deed was done. The UN had its marching orders for the new Millennium.
Now the principles were called “Millennium Goals,” and there were eight instead of twelve. Goal 1: Eradicate Extreme Hunger and Poverty; Goal 2: Achieve Universal Primary Education; Goal 3: Promote Gender Equality and Empowerment of Women; Goal 4: Reduce Child Mortality; Goal 5: Improve Maternal Health; Goal 6: Combat HIV/AIDS, Malaria and other diseases; Goal 7: Ensure Environmental Sustainability; Goal 8: Develop a Global Partnership for Development.
Yes, these are sneaky guys, well trained in the art of saying nothing. Who could opposes such noble goals? The Millennium Project, which was set up to achieve the “goals” says on its website that it intends to “end poverty by 2015.” A noble goal, indeed. So what happened to the 12 Charter principles? Take a hard look – they are all still there.
Principles One, Two, and Twelve are right there in Goal 8 – to develop a global partnership for development. Now almost every world organization such as the World Bank carries a section on their web sites calling for “Millennium Development Goals” which control international banking and loan policy. They set policy goals for each country and sometimes communities to measure if nations are keeping their promise to implement the Millennium goals.
Principle Seven is clearly Goal 3, the only way to assure Gender Equality is to enforce compliance with UN Human Rights treaties. Principle Eight has already been achieved. Principle Nine is Goal 7. Al Gore is doing his best to enforce Principle Eleven. Global Warming, no matter how well the theory is debunked, just won’t go away because it is one of the Millennium Goals.
And then there is Barack Obama’s Global Poverty Act. Can you see which Principle that is? Of course, Principle 12 and Goal 1. Obama’s bill specifically mentions the Millennium Goals as its guide and the 0.7% of GNP is right out of UN documents. In order to eradicate poverty by 2015, they say, every industrial nation must pony up 0.7% of their GNP to the UN for use in eradicating poverty.
The UN is now becoming an international collection agency, pressing to collect the promises the world leaders made at the Millennium Summit. The UN wants the cash. In 2005 former UN Secretary General Kofi Annan said, “Developed countries that have not already done so should establish timetables to achieve the 0.7% target of gross national income for official development assistance by no later than 2015…”
At the Summit in 2000, the UN set clear goals to establish its power over sovereign nations and to enforce the greatest redistribution of wealth scheme ever perpetrated on the world. Now it has the Criminal Court; Sustainable Development is fast becoming official policy in every corner of the nation—only today we call it “going green;” and there is a full court press on to enforce Global Warming policy, in spite of the fact that there is now much evidence surfacing to debunk the theory.
Clearly, Obama’s bill has been introduced to assure the United States falls in line with the Millennium Declaration and all that it stands for. After all, the UN needs the money to pay for its new found power. Truth, science and American taxpayer interests be hanged. Barack Obama wants to be a “world” leader.
