UNFORTUNATELY,
ARIZONA DOES NOT HAVE IT RIGHT
PART 1 of 2
by
Tom DeWeese and Mark Lerner
August 18, 2010
NewsWithViews.com
There is no question that the citizens of Arizona, like the citizens of all of the southern border states, face grave and outrageous dangers from the invasion of illegals rushing across the borders. Private property is being destroyed; crime is skyrocketing; costs for schools and hospitals is forcing bankruptcy on local communities; and violence is becoming a way of life. No American, living in a nation where rights are supposed to be protected and guaranteed, should be forced to live under such conditions.
The problem, of course, is that the federal government refuses to take the actions necessary to stop illegal immigration. It refuses to secure the border either by placing more border patrol agents in place or allowing local police forces to take action when they have a known illegal in their custody. In addition, the federal government refuses to allow local and state agencies to withdraw taxpayer services like schools, healthcare and welfare to illegals.
As a result, the lure of easy money and free housing, health care and schools looming just across an unprotected border draws those now living in the failed socialist Mexican system. The risk is low and the rewards are high. And so they come in ever growing numbers, swamping the systems that were set up to serve American taxpayers.
Desperate Arizonians have had enough and have taken steps to do something about it. As a result, the state has passed and is ready to enforce legislation (SB1070) that has become a national debate on how to best secure our nation against this ever growing invasion. The problem is, in spite of its courageous stand as an example to the rest of the nation, Arizona may not have it right and will do more harm than good to the all-important fight to stop illegal immigration. Worse, it may stand as a direct threat to the liberties of all Americans, which the law was actually intended to protect.
To understand the potential threat to Americans liberties posed by SB1070, it must be put in the proper context of what the federal government is driving towards – a total surveillance society, seeking any and all information about each and every American citizen.
In that vein, it is important to note that information is power and currently, only the federal government is collecting such information. SB1070 could change that, not only in Arizona, but in states that are now considering enacting similar laws. Moreover, the information the federal government is collecting is your information and it is being shared with international law enforcement agencies and foreign governments at the discretion of the federal government.
Unintended Consequences
There is no question that our country must deal with the problem of illegal immigration. The purpose of SB1070 is to identify people in our country illegally, specifically Arizona, and insure those people are sent back to their country of origin. But how is that to be accomplished, according the SB1070?
1) The following is the wording contained in the legislation:
E. Except as provided in federal law, officials or agencies of this state and counties, cities, towns and other political subdivisions of this state may not be prohibited or in any way be restricted from sending, receiving or maintaining information relating to the immigration status, lawful or unlawful, of any individual or exchanging that information with any other federal, state or local governmental entity for the following official purposes:
1. Determining eligibility for any public benefit, service or license provided by any federal, state, local or other political subdivision of this state.
2. Verifying any claim of residence or domicile if determination of residence or domicile is required under the laws of this state or a judicial order issued pursuant to a civil or criminal proceeding in this state.
2) SB1070 is and will be used as a“tool”allowing the federal government to have at its disposal more information about U.S. citizens. This is an example of unintended consequences.
The wording of the bill (see above) calls for the personal information of all Arizona citizens to be sent to DHS/federal government whether the person is seeking any public benefit or applying for any type of license (can be a fishing license, driver’s license, business license, hunting license or even a permit for a weapon). Although there is a minimum amount of information that will be provided to the federal government the legislation does not set any limit on just how much information can or should be provided the federal government.
3) The domicile issue must and should be handled by those responsible for the issuance of driver’s licenses and not every other state agency and/or department. Many women do not want their physical address shared with potentially many people because of domestic violence issues. Many Americans were concerned about the census this year. It is one thing for the government to have a count of the population but another to have the exact location (GPS) of every person’s residence.
Advertisement
4) The federal government has a number of pieces of proposed legislation that will result in what some refer to as a “national ID”. These various ID’s all incorporate biometrics (measurements of the body). The standards for the biometrics (facial recognition) are the adopted standards of the ICAO (International Civil Aviation Organization) an agency of the United Nations. U.S. citizens are not just being enrolled into a national identification system but an international system of identification that applies to all people of the world. This “system” directly links your body to a system of financial control.
5) Currently the Real ID Act 2005 is federal law. Congress is considering repealing Title II of the Real ID Act and passing the PASS ID Act. This would NOT change U.S. citizens being enrolled into a single global system of identification that directly links that identification to a person’s ability to buy, sell or travel. Also, Congress is considering a new biometric social security card and as part of the Immigration Reform legislation, a biometric “National Worker’s Identification” card. The recently passed Obama Healthcare Reform bill will result in some type of national medical identification card. The details on that card will become more apparent as the rulemaking process plays out for the legislation.
6) At what point will the states stop relying on the federal government to accomplish what the states can do for the most part without the reliance on the federal government? The federal government has made no secret of its intention to compile as much information about each citizen as possible. This includes your biometric samples and data.
6A) The federal government wants the personal information of Americans either through direct electronic access or indirect access. Currently the “federal government” has much of our personal information already. The fact is “that information” is spread out over many departments and agencies of the federal government. DHS wants a more centralized system and thus we have witnessed the Real ID Act 2005 and now the PASS ID Act.
Because the standards for both Real ID and PASS ID are the adopted standards of two international organizations, AAMVA (American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators-An international organization by their own admission that currently includes the provinces of Canada and the states and territories of the United States and the ICAO, the driver’s license would become not simply a national ID but more accurately an international ID. International standards are only used to facilitate global information sharing.
U.S. citizens should know that their federal tax dollars were used to provide states with grant money in order to assure that the districts of Mexico are added to AAMVA’s jurisdiction. AAMVA wants a single jurisdiction of the United States, Canada and Mexico. It was no accident this single jurisdiction concept began in 1994 when the NAFTA treaty was signed.
The Fed’s “free pass” – Exemption
The following comes from a February 2006 GCN (Government Computer News) article: (Mocny/DHS) said, ‘We have a responsibility to make a Global Security Envelope that would coordinate information policies and technical standards.’
Robert Mocny, of the Department of Homeland Security, conceded that each of the 10 privacy laws currently in effect in the United States has an exemption clause for national- security purposes. He added that the department only resorts to its essentially unlimited authority under those clauses when officials decide that there are compelling reasons to do so.
In a 2007 article in the same publication Mocny stated “We’re starting the process of biometrifying [sic] a good proportion of the world population.” Robert Mocny also stated that “information sharing is appropriate around the world, and DHS plans to create a “Global Security Envelope of internationally shared biometric data that would permanently link individuals with biometric ID, personal information held by governments and corporations.”
Mocny’s Department of Homeland Security is the same government agency that has stated nearly all Americans are potentially domestic terrorists. Under Real ID, the Secretary of DHS is given the authority in the “Official Purposes” section to add restrictions at his or hers own discretion. Real ID currently restricts entrance to a federal facility, flying on a commercial airliner or entering a nuclear facility. Tomorrow we could see restrictions on purchasing weapons, ammunition or even prescription drugs. This kind of unfettered authority is unacceptable.
In Mocny’s statement we see that DHS can decide when to ignore our privacy laws. He never mentions consulting with Congress or even the President for that matter.
SB1070 does not create a national ID card but it does embolden the federal government. States should not and must not depend or rely on the federal government when the states themselves can go a long way towards resolving the issue of citizenship.
There would be times when the federal government might be needed but first every state has a responsibility to only involve the federal government when all other means have been exhausted. We cannot comprehend why a state would offer up/volunteer their own citizen’s personal information to a department of the federal government that has made their intentions clear. Let us not forget DHS had made it clear that it believes domestic terrorism is a much threat as terrorism initiated outside our borders. If they felt you were a potential terrorist would they share your personal information with other governments and/or corporations?
Do you belong to a third party or support a third party candidate? Are you an anti-war activist or environmentalist? Are you an Evangelical Christian? Do you believe the militias are constitutional? If you answered yes to any of the proceeding questions you are under the eye of DHS.
| Subscribe to the NewsWithViews Daily News Alerts! |
A real solution – the Hub System
The Real ID Act and the PASS ID Act breeder documents (documents needed to obtain a driver’s license) must be authenticated. Nearly all citizens of the United States have birth certificates or an acceptable alternative. We suggest a “hub” system be put in place that is solely controlled by the states. The hub itself would not retain any information, only act as a conduit. All DMV’s would have the capability to communicate with the state issuing agencies or departments of birth certificates. Not everyone has what is called a birth certificate. Certificates of Birth and other similar documents can be authenticated just as birth certificates can. For part two click below.
Click here for part -----> 2,
� 2010 Tom DeWeese - All Rights Reserved
Share
This Article
