Ron Paul Denounces National ID Card

[CSA_TX]

Found at http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul222.html

[font=Times New Roman, Times, serif]Congressman Ron Paul today denounced the national ID card provisions contained in the intelligence bill being voted on in the U.S. House of Representatives, while urging his colleagues to reject the bill and its new layers of needless bureaucracy.[/font]​

[font=Times New Roman, Times, serif]“National ID cards are not proper in a free society,” Paul stated. “This is America, not Soviet Russia. The federal government should never be allowed to demand papers from American citizens, and it certainly has no constitutional authority to do so.”[/font]​

[font=Times New Roman, Times, serif]“A national identification card, in whatever form it may take, will allow the federal government to inappropriately monitor the movements and transactions of every American,” Paul continued. “History shows that governments inevitably use such power in harmful ways. The 9-11 commission, whose recommendations underlie this bill, has called for internal screening points where identification will be demanded. Domestic travel restrictions are the hallmark of authoritarian states, not free nations. It is just a matter of time until those who refuse to carry the new licenses will be denied the ability to drive or board an airplane.”[/font]​

[font=Times New Roman, Times, serif]“Nationalizing standards for drivers licenses and birth certificates, and linking them together via a national database, creates a national ID system pure and simple. Proponents of the national ID understand that the public remains wary of the scheme, so they attempt to claim they’re merely creating new standards for existing state IDs. Nonsense! This legislation imposes federal standards in a federal bill, and it creates a federalized ID regardless of whether the ID itself is still stamped with the name of your state.”[/font]​

[font=Times New Roman, Times, serif]“Those who are willing to allow the government to establish a Soviet-style internal passport system because they think it will make us safer are terribly mistaken,” Paul concluded. “Subjecting every citizen to surveillance and screening points actually will make us less safe, not in the least because it will divert resources away from tracking and apprehending terrorists and deploy them against innocent Americans! Every conservative who believes in constitutional restraints on government should reject the authoritarian national ID card and the nonsensical intelligence bill itself.[/font]​

​

​

​

​

We need more members of congress like Ron Paul. He always votes per the constitution before anything else.What do you think?​

 

[LiberalFINGER]

​

We need more members of congress like Ron Paul. He always votes per the constitution before anything else.What do you think?​

​

​

​

Even though a strong part of me agrees with his position, I don't think his decision to stand against the bill has anything to do with the constitution. I think that it's a mixture of healthy paranoia and common sense.​

​

The national ID plan could easily be used in possitive ways, but it also lays foundations for what I would consider creepy as hell. Sure, it's a bit of a stretch, but it's still a little further then I care to go. First, a national ID. Then magnetic strips with your financial info. Encode your DNA. Move to a RF pill. Lose your card and your identity. Get your new card imbeded in your arm.​

​

Ya. It's paranoia. But that doesn't mean I have to accept it.​

​

​

 

[Pacridge]

Just because you're paraniod, doesn't mean their not after you.

Not in favor of national ID cards. Except for Paris Hilton- her we should keep track of.

 

[Schweddy]

​

Even though a strong part of me agrees with his position, I don't think his decision to stand against the bill has anything to do with the constitution. I think that it's a mixture of healthy paranoia and common sense.​

If you knew Ron Paul, you would know that he is a FIRM and very strict constitutionalist. I get letters from him all the time. He always determines his vote on if it is constitutional or not.

Every now and again he will say somthing along the lines of "this is what I think, but the constitution doesn't allow it so I will vote against it." OR "My constituants have told me to vote this way, and I am a representative of them. Here are the 10,000 letters that I have recieved."

He is probably the only politician true on his word.
That may be why he is so unpopular in the house as well.