National Park Service Sued over New No-Cash Policy at National Parks
cowboystatedaily.com
cowboystatedaily.com
This increasing trend towards exclusively accepting electronic payment with private money:
- unjustly enriches the payments cartel
- excludes unbanked people, privacy-conscious people, and conscientious objectors from the fractional reserve banking scam--all of whom ought to have equal access to public infrastructure
- presents unnecessary resiliency and national security risks--if the payments system goes down, no payments can be made
On a related note, this trend is particularly acute in the EV charger space. Whereas every gas station accepts cash, practically no EV charging station accepts cash. This will have the same effects on EV ownership and mobility as I listed above. And in addition, undocumented people will face serious risks charging their EV at a public charging station once ICE catches on.
It's a huge and definitely under-reported shift in our societal status quo, especially given the contemporary hyper-focus on underprivileged groups, equity, and inclusion.
ICE will still be able to track anyone they wish this way. Every time you plug in an EV it creates a data point (location, timestamp, vehicle ID) in an ongoing tracklog.
I'm surprised we don't have license plates on our roofs yet but I'm sure it's coming real soon
Also, VINs and number plates are linked to (someone’s) strong government ID. Mobile phone IMEIs and mobile plan IMSIs are not; both can be obtained anonymously for cash, and given away or traded without a trace.
https://www.nationalparkstraveler.org/sites/default/files/at...
It refers to 31 U.S. Code § 5103:
> United States coins and currency (including Federal reserve notes and circulating notes of Federal reserve banks and national banks) are legal tender for all debts, public charges, taxes, and dues. Foreign gold or silver coins are not legal tender for debts.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/31/5103
They argue that the fees at the parks are public charges, not debts. I can't find anything in the US code that provides a definition for "public charge." It may be there and I just haven't found it. It seems likely that there are prior judicial cases that help shine a light on what is and is not a public charge. I hope these folks win.
There is a cost for taking cash. And our parks are underfunded. Maybe a no-change policy might work. But mandating such requirements without balancing funding just means more gates closed while rangers, instead of accepting visitors or keeping eye on errant hikers, must sit indoors to count cash and draw up the rules for doing so.
I think the argument to ban cash due to handling cost, is actually a mask for the real reason: preventing fraud by employees pocketing payments.
You can generally deposit cash into any bank with no fees - the issue is getting the right amount of cash there on time.
I’m very glad to see people keeping the federal government accountable when it comes to these privacy-destroying, exclusionary policy decisions.
The park doesn’t require your identity to enter; everyone who can pay is allowed to enter without identifying themselves.
Payment cards are strong identity, thereby deanonymizing park visitors.
At JTNP we'd just get waved through the gates without even stopping by presenting one on approach. It's common for the locals to loan theirs to friends/family/guests...