Statement of Hon. Ron Paul
Before the House SubCommittee on National Economic Growth, Natural Resources, and Regulatory Affairs
Hearing on National Identifiers
September 17, 1998

Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the opportunity to present my views regarding the Federal Government's plan to create a national ID card, assign every American a uniform health identifier, as well as the trend toward transforming the Social Security number into a uniform numeric identifier. The creation of these identifiers represent perhaps the greatest threat to liberty facing Americans today. When one closely examines the details of these schemes it becomes clear that the proponents of Big Government wish to forbid Americans from going to work, getting a job, boarding a plane, seeing a doctor or conducting any other major life activity without their federally-approved identifier.

Such a system is incompatible with American liberty. If history teaches us anything, it is that when government gains the power to monitor the actions of the people, it eventually uses that power to impose totalitarian controls on the populace. American could very well come to resemble Nazi Germany or Soviet Russia, where state officials could arbitrarily punish innocent citizens for failure to produce the correct "papers!"

However, Congress does not need to look at this century's totalitarian societies for a clear view of the dangers of national identifiers. Just consider the numerous cases of IRS abuses that have been brought before Congress in the past few months, the history of abuse of FBI files and the case of a Medicaid clerk in Maryland who accessed a computerized data base and sold patients' names to an HMO.

I have introduced three pieces of legislation to protect the American people: the Freedom and Privacy Restoration Act (HR 4217) which repeals those sections of the 1996 Immigration Act that established federal standards for state drivers' licenses; the Patient Privacy Act (HR 4281) which repeals those sections of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 that require the Department of Health and Human Services to establishes a uniform standard health identifier; and the Privacy Protection Act (HR 3261), which forbids the federal and state governments from using the Social Security number for purposes unrelated to Social Security. HR 3261 and HR 4217 are currently pending before the Government Reform Committee.

Mr. Chairman, while I do not question the sincerity of those members who suggest that Congress can ensure citizens' rights are protected through legislation restricting access to personal information, the fact is the only solution to the threat to liberty created by the national drivers' licenses and the medical ID proposal is simply to repeal the provisions of law authorizing those identifiers. Legislative "privacy protections" are inadequate to protect the liberty of Americans for several reasons. First, federal laws have not stopped unscrupulous government officials from accessing personal information. Did laws stop the permanent violation of privacy by the IRS, or the FBI abuses by the Clinton and Nixon administrations?

Secondly, the federal government has been creating property interests in private information for certain state-favored third parties. For example, a little-noticed provision in the Patient Protection Act established a property right for insurance companies to access personal health care information. Congress also authorized private individuals to receive personal information from government data bases in the recent copyright bill. The Clinton Administration has even endorsed allowing law enforcement officials' access to health care information, in complete disregard of the fifth amendment. Obviously, "privacy protection" laws are inadequate to protect personal information when the government is the one providing the information!

The primary reason why actions short of the repeal of laws authorizing privacy protection is insufficient is because the federal government lacks constitutional authority to force citizens to adopt a universal identifier for health care, employment, or any reason. Any federal action that oversteps constitutional limitations violates liberty for it ratifies the principle that the federal government, not the Constitution, is the ultimate judge of its own jurisdiction over the people. The only effective protection of the rights of citizens is for Congress to follow Thomas Jefferson's advice and "bind (the federal government) down with the chains of the Constitution."

Mr. Chairman, those members who are unpersuaded by the moral and constitutional reasons for embracing my privacy package should consider the overwhelming opposition of the American people toward national ID cards and medical IDs. My office has been inundated with calls from around the country protesting the movement toward a national ID card and encouraging my efforts to thwart this scheme. Imagine the public reaction if we do nothing and Americans are forced to accept a federal ID and a uniform health identifier.

I need not remind the members of the Committee of the public outcry over the federally-approved drivers' licenses and uniform health identifier. All defenders of liberty must be heartened by the public outcry against these plans. I am also pleased that many other members of Congress, particularly Mr. Barr, have been working to reverse this scheme. Mr. Chairman, I hope to continue working with the members of this SubCommittee and all members of Congress to stop implementation of the federally-approved drivers' license and the uniform health identifier. However, I also hope this Committee, and other members of Congress who are concerned about privacy, will join my efforts to stop the use of the Social Security number as an identifier. While it has not gotten as much attention as the attempt to nationalize drivers' licenses or assigning each American a unique health identifier, the abuse of the Social Security number may pose an even more immediate threat to American liberty. For all intents and purposes, the Social Security number is already a national identification number. Today, in the majority of states, no American can get a job, open a bank account, get a drivers' license, or even receive a birth certificate for one's child without presenting their Social Security number. So widespread has the use of the Social Security number become that a member of my staff recently had to produce a Social Security number in order to get a fishing license!

Perhaps the most disturbing abuse of the Social Security number is the congressionally-authorized rule forcing parents to get a Social Security number for their newborn children in order to claim them as dependents. Forcing parents to register their children with the state is more like something out of the nightmare of George Orwell than the dreams of a free republic that inspired the nation's founders.

Since the creation of the Social Security number in 1935, there have been almost 40 congressionally-authorized uses of the Social Security number as an identification number for non-Social Security programs! Many of these uses, such as the requirement that employers report the Social Security number of new employees to the "new hires data base" have been enacted in the past few years. In fact, just last spring, 210 of members of Congress voted to allow states to require citizens to allow states to force citizens to produce a Social Security number before they could exercise their right to vote.

In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, I once again thank the members of the subcommittee for their interest in this vital issue. I hope that the members will work with me to pass the Freedom and Privacy Restoration Act (HR 4217) and the Patient Privacy Act (HR 4281). It is also my sincere hope that after Congress has indeed stopped the national ID card and the medical ID we are not fooled into thinking that we have addressed all threats to the privacy of the American people. Only when Congress stops the use of the Social Security number as a de facto national ID number by passing my Privacy Protection Act (HR 3261), will Congress have done its constitutional and moral duty to protect the privacy of the American people.