The federal government would absolutely be okay with a federal ID. They even offer a few already. It is the states who are against mandating one.
Social security numbers (or cards) are not ID, in any meaningful sense.
> And if you're a man your selective service number, too.
Also not an ID.
> Both are technically not mandatory, but the steps to avoid them are incredibly byzantine and lock you out of lots of social services.
“Immigrate to the US after age 25” isn’t that byzantine. And, actually, selective service registration is technically mandatory, during a narrow age band.
You can't board a flight with it because there's no photo, but it's still a near-universal way to ID each person residing in the US.
They are, pedantically, "an ID". Just like a UUID is an ID. They're just not the type of ID we're talking about: an ID that authenticates the identity of a human who possesses it.
So will you, because your database is now bleeding red-hot PII across every query and foreign key. Chances are you'll now end up with a web interface that uses SSNs in its URLs.
Holy hell, how was this even considered?
Exactly. When we discuss “national ID” we are talking about an identification document: a tool that allows authenticating a person; an SSN doesn’t do that. It is an identifier, not an identification document.
(We do have a actual national IDs, but they aren’t universal or mandatory, either in theory or in practice, though they are required for certain purposes and will be soon for more, and are increasingly common. Passports, state-issued IDs meeting REAL ID standards, Enhanced Driver’s Licenses, etc.)
Cedes control, which is a political and minor economic issue.
National ID was a core GOP platform issue post 911. It never happened because both extremes of the political spectrum are against it. Right wingers are into the mark of the beast stuff and see it as a tool of government tyranny. Left wing types see it as a way to disenfranchise voters and deny resources to marginalized people.
Both are right and wrong. So the status quo prevails.
It would also streamline lots of use cases that require ID. Various federal programs administered by states require that you authenticate people in different ways. The states spend millions to do a shitty job (driven by Fed requirements) for unemployment, social services, Medicaid, etc.
Second of all, the most common state ID is a drivers license. A federal ID would not replace the state's need to license drivers.
How do you know?
State motor vehicle orgs are revenue generators. ID operations are expensive and operationally risky.
A federal ID would put the states in the business of selling endorsements. A drivers license would be like a deer tag or fishing license - higher margin and lower overhead.
It would also enable online services and local/county/state government could significantly reduce workforce and other expenses.
The answer is that they'd have to rely on the federal government instead, and given the functional relationship between the states and the federal government, states just aren't going to voluntarily give up that power and trust them to do this for them. It is in the existential interest of the states to maintain as much power as they can, despite the associated cost.
Because state dmv compacts govern data exchange and DMVs are all about selling stickers, state programs don’t have access to the ID data they own, except for law enforcement purposes. Companies like id.me, experian, etc buy that data from states and the. sell it back. (usually do a shitty job at it to boot)
which is funny since the GOP were so adamantly against a national ID when the Clintons tried to introduce it.
For “normal” people, it’s a non-issue. Once you get to the people who fall out of the funnel, it gets more complex. How do you keep ID current for a 95 year old in a nursing home? Or a kid who can’t get vital records documentation?
Compulsory federal ID is a weird issue that the extremes of political discourse agree on, and the moderates mildly support or meh.
A kid that can't get vital records is also going to have an issue with getting a state ID. So again, doesn't matter if state/national.
If this is provided free of charge wouldn't it actively enfranchise people who don't presently have ID?
> It also forced all people, great and small, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on their right hands or on their foreheads, so that they could not buy or sell unless they had the mark, which is the name of the beast or the number of its name. [1]
Sources:
0 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uniform_Interstate_Family_Supp...
1 - https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Revelation%2013....