You could probably look up a name and birth date and establish if a citizen exists with that information, I guess. You could check social security (which I'm not sure definitively indicates status) and see the same for that. But it's a very messy system in general.
My name is actually different in a few government databases - in one I have two middle names, in the other two last names. Just random clerical stuff like that is common.
(yes, checking against name / DOB / ssn always has some inherent messiness to it)
But there are reasons for people to oppose it on both sides of the aisle (states rights, immigration views, anti federalism, libertarians) so it's a pretty hard task. Maybe this admin could try it as an immigration security measure and get some support that way but I have my doubts.
It doesn't. When I naturalized, I had to schedule an in person appointment at the Social Security offices to change my status in their systems. There was a time gap between me being American, me having a passport, me being recorded as American as far as SS was concerned and me having a SS card that didn't have caveats written across it.
I naturalized over a decade ago and just realised this is still on my social-security card.
Do I actually have to do anything about it before I go to claim benefits?
One of the things I was concerned for months until I got the new card is the federal government querying the social security database looking for immigrants or discrepancies with any of their other databases and not caring that the discrepancies are of their own making. Being a naturalized citizen with an accent, I keep traveling with my passport for internal trips.
Isn't a passport a unified government ID?
Countries with national IDs charge you to replace one if it gets lost, and it usually costs less than 10 USD.
What people are arguing against is that making having a passport mandatory to participate in society is an unreasonable burden, under the current structures. If you wanted to mail a passport to every American in the mail, at no cost, no questions asked, that would be a very different proposition to what is being discussed.
I was responding to that, a few replies up. So, yes, it was disputed. Why do you ask?
Why not?