Pending Bill Imposes
Mandatory SSN Requirements
Upon The States
Legislation is currently pending before Congress which will make it MANDATORY for states to collect social security numbers before they can grant any state-issued license or certificate. The bill under consideration, H.R. 3130, mandates that states "SHALL" require SSNs from ALL applicants for any professional license, driver's license, occupational license, or recreational license in addition to requiring SSNs on all birth certificates, marriage certificates, divorce decrees, and death certificates. This is a major change from the present law which merely "coerces" states to collect SSNs under the child support enforcement program as a condition to their receiving federal welfare funding.
The original bill passed the House in March of this year as the "Child Support Performance and Incentive Act of 1998". The House measure provided "bonuses" for states which achieve acceptable "performance scores" in tracking down deadbeat dads and collecting unpaid child support payments. The House-approved version did not contain any SSN reporting requirements. But when H.R. 3130 went to the Senate a "substitute" bill was quickly approved including the mandatory provisions. The Senate substitute, sponsored by Senator William Roth, was approved by unanimous consent on April 2, 1998.
Section 403 of this bill will amend Title 42 U.S. Code section 405(c)(2)(C) by changing the word "MAY" to the word "SHALL." The U.S. Code presently only "permits" the states to obtain social security numbers for certain limited purposes. And, as presently worded, any request for a social security number by a state must be done in compliance with the Privacy Act requirements. The Privacy Act provides: "It shall be unlawful for any Federal, State or local government agency to deny to any individual any right, benefit, or privilege provided by law because of such individual's refusal to disclose his social security account number." But if this bill is approved -- with the proposed wording changes -- it will become MANDATORY that all states "SHALL" require SSNs for ALL state-issued licenses and certificates -- the Privacy Act protections will become inconsequential.
There has been a plan in the works for many years to make driver?s license (DL) documents the de facto national ID. The American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators (AAMVA) has promoted this notion since at least 1979. Their plan was exposed in the "Driver?s License Applicant Identification and Licensing System Security" guidelines booklet published by the U.S. Department of Transportation, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) in conjunction with the AAMVA. On page 7, the AAMVA stated:
"The AAMVA reiterates its position and the NHTSA concurs that social security numbers should be collected and used by each State licensing agency for purposes of interstate driver identification." (Booklet available from the AAMVA)
Also in 1995, during Congressional hearings on ways to curb illegal immigration held before the Subcommittee on Immigration, Senate Committee on the Judiciary, the subject of national ID cards was openly discussed. A spokesman for the AAMVA, Marshall Rickert, Motor Vehicle Administrator, State of Maryland, acknowledged AAMVA's desire to establish a national ID system using social security numbers for identification in combination with driver's license cards. He said:
"There has been much talk of a national identification card. The Oklahoma disaster supports such a concept and I would submit that such a system is already in place... the driver?s license."
"A key element of the [driver's licenses standardization] program is the development of a unique identifier which will allow a person to be tracked throughout North America. AAMVA is recommending that the social security number serve as the unique identifier and that the number be verified through the Social Security Administration prior to issuance [of a driver's license]."
Recently, the AAMVA was instrumental in developing a national "social security number on-line verification" (SSOLV) system which licensing jurisdictions can use to verify an applicant's SSNs at the time a driver's license is issued. (A link regarding the SSOLV system is provided at the bottom of this page.)
The AAMVA is a pseudo-private/quasi-governmental organization. It is regularly called upon by the DOT, the NHTSA, and by Congress to help establish national "public safety" and "traffic enforcement" policy for the country. Then it lobbies Congress to implement the governmental agencies' plans. It is also one of this country's leading promoters of the national DL/ID concept. The AAMVA is funded through dues paid by state motor vehicle administrative agencies. It is also my understanding that AAMVA receives money -- either in the form of grants or as contract payments -- for the governmental research projects it often conducts in partnership with the DOT and NHTSA. The bottom line is that AAMVA's funding originates as taxpayer money. Consequently, taxpayers are paying for the lobbying effort TO ESTABLISH A NATIONAL DL/ID SYSTEM -- which they themselves have consistently opposed. Ironic isn?t it.
The national DL/ID scheme has been intentionally implemented incrementally and surreptitiously. It began in 1996 when Congress enacted the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reform Act, (PRWORA) which required that in order for states to receive federal welfare funding they must collect social security numbers from "commercial driver?s license" applicants. Then, in 1997 Congress passed the Balanced Budget Act of 1997 which included "technical corrections" to the PRWORA; the substance of which was to delete the limiting word "commercial" from the "commercial driver?s license" clause thereby causing the SSN requirement to apply to ALL driver's license applicants. This supposedly minor "technical correction" impacted more than 6 million drivers in this country. And now the "Child Support Performance and Incentive Act of 1998" proposes to once again "tweak" the SSN requirement; again under the false pretense of being a "technical correction." This bill will effectively consummate AAMVA's national DL/ID plan.
One other point: H.R. 3130 also initiates the establish a national "instant check" database system which employers will be required to use for "screening" every new employee or job applicant against a national directory of child support order obligees. Employers will become the government?s child support enforcement arm. No cardie, no workie.
The wording of H.R. 3130 blatantly violates the principle of "dual sovereignty" which serves to protect the states from direct regulation by Congress. Relevant sections of the Brady Act were recently held unconstitutional under this principle. In the case of Sheriffs Richard Mack and Jay Prince v the United States the Supreme Court ruled that:
"Congress cannot compel the States to enact or enforce a federal regulatory program. ... The Federal Government may neither issue directives requiring the States to address particular problems, nor command the States' officers, or those of their political subdivisions, to administer or enforce a federal regulatory program. It matters not whether policymaking is involved, and no case-by-case weighing of the burdens or benefits is necessary; such commands are fundamentally incompatible with our constitutional system of dual sovereignty."
But the proponents of the national DL/ID plan have no regard for our constitution. Furthermore, if this bill passes it will be up to the states to challenge the requirement. In the recent past the states have shown little willingness to oppose unconstitutional mandates dished out by Congress (with few exceptions). And many of the states' driver's licensing officials SUPPORT these requirements anyway. Therefore, if this bill becomes law you can expect that it will be enforced by the several states. Goodbye freedom, goodbye liberty, goodbye privacy -- Hello Big Brother.
This bill MUST BE STOPPED! An excellent link is provided below for contacting Congress members. Also included is the contact information for the key committee members which will be drafting the compromise bill.
SM -----------------------------------------------------------
On April 23, 1998, the House disagreed to the Senate amendments, and requested a conference. The Speaker appointed conferees - from the Committee on Ways and Means for consideration of the House bill and the Senate amendments, and modifications committed to conference: Archer, Shaw, Camp, Rangel, and Levin. We need to contact these committee members and insist that they remove the SSN reporting and database provisions. Contact information for these committee members is included at the bottom of this notice.
It is my understanding that H.R. 3130 will have to go before the full House once again for final approval after the conference committee hashes out a compromise. As I find out more, I'll pass it along. Representative Bill Archer is the chairman of the Ways and Means Committee. He is THE KEY MEMBER.
Bill Archer (R- TX) 202-225-2571 202-225-4381
Clay Shaw, Jr. (R-FL) 202-225-3026 202-225-8398
Dave Camp (R-MI) 202-225-3561 202-225-9679
Charles B. Rangel (D-NY) 202-225-4365 202-225-0816
Sander M. Levin (D-MI) 202-225-4961 202-226-1033
----------------------------------------------------------- The best page I?ve found for contacting members of Congress located at:
You can also write your Congressman at:
[Following is an excerpt taken from the Congressional Record regarding the Roth amendment to H.R. 3130. Notice that it calles the SSN requirements a "technical" amendment -- Right! Funny, this sort of deception used to be called "LYING".]
[Page: S3184, 1998]
"Technical and conforming amendments. There are several technical and conforming amendments made. The two most noteworthy amendments deal with data collection in the calculation of the adopting incentive payments and collection of Social Security numbers and are described below."
"(2) The 1996 welfare reform law requires states to collect Social Security numbers on applications for state licenses for purposes of matching in child support cases by January 1, 1998. The `Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigration Responsibility Act of 1996' required states to collect Social Security numbers on applications for state licenses for purposes of checking the identity of immigrants by October 1, 2000. This amendment would conform the differing requirements by changing the date for child support cases to October 1, 2000, or such earlier date as the state selects."
[The above statements taken from the Congressional Record are all either miss-statement of facts or half-truths, i.e. LIES.]
[Excerpts from the Senate-approved version provided below.] [The first proposed change to U.S.C. 405(c)(2)(C) "clause (i)" is with regard to the provision in current law which presently says that states "may" use SSNs in their licensing programs. Currently, usage must be in conformity with the Privacy Act.]
H.R.3130 Child Support Performance and Incentive Act of 1998 (Engrossed Senate Amendment)
S.AMDT.2286 AMENDS: H.R.3130 AMENDMENTS SPONSORED BY: Sen Roth, (introduced 04/02/98)
(a) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS- Section 205(c)(2)(C) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 405(c)(2)(C)) is amended--
(1) in clause (i), by striking `may require' and inserting `shall require';
(2) in clause (ii)--
(A) by inserting after the 1st sentence the following: `In the administration of any law involving the issuance of a marriage certificate or license, each State shall require each individual named in the certificate or license to furnish to the State (or political subdivision thereof), or any State agency having administrative responsibility for the law involved, the social security number of the individual.'; and
B) by inserting `or marriage certificate' after `Such numbers shall not be recorded on the birth certificate';
3) in clause (vi), by striking `may' and inserting `shall'; and
4) by adding at the end the following:
`(x) An agency of a State (or a political subdivision thereof) charged with the administration of any law concerning the issuance or renewal of a professional license, driver's license, occupational license, or recreational license shall require each applicant for issuance or renewal of the license to provide the applicant's social security number to the agency for the purpose of administering such laws, and for the purpose of responding to requests for information from an agency operating pursuant to part D of title IV. If a State allows the use of a number other than the social security number to be used on the face of the document while the social security number is kept on file at the agency, the State shall so advise any applicants.
(xi) All divorce decrees, support orders, and paternity determinations issued, and all paternity acknowledgments made, in each State shall include the social security number of each individual subject to the decree, order, determination, or acknowledgment in the records relating to the matter, for the purpose of responding to requests for information from an agency operating pursuant to part D of title IV.'.
(b) RETROACTIVITY- The amendments made by subsection (a) shall take effect as if included in the enactment of section 317 of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-193; 110 Stat.2220).
SEC. 405. GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE REPORTS. (a) Report On Feasibility of Instant Check System: Not later than December 31, 1998, the Comptroller General of the United States shall report to the Committee on Finance of the Senate and the Committee on Ways and Means of the House of Representatives on the feasibility and cost of creating and maintaining a nationwide instant child support order check system under which an employer would be able to determine whether a newly hired employee is required to provide support under a child support order.
You can view the full bill on Thomas.
[Incidentally, if you access this bill on "Thomas," section 403
does not display on the main page. You have to click on section
402, then select "forward" in order to access section 403.
Curious, ALL sections are normally shown???]
[Here are the amendment sponsors]
AMENDS: H.R.3130
Apr 2, 98 Proposed by Senator Collins for Senator Roth.
Sen Moynihan - 04/02/98
Sen Murkowski - 04/02/98
Sen Rockefeller - 04/02/98
Sen Baucus - 04/02/98
Sen Chafee - 04/02/98
Sen Kennedy - 04/02/98
Sen Abraham - 04/02/98
Sen Jeffords - 04/02/98
Sen Santorum - 04/02/98
Sen Grassley - 04/02/98
Sen Graham - 04/02/98
Sen Moseley-Braun - 04/02/98
Here's the contact information for Senator Roth, should anyone wish to
thank him...
Sen. William Roth, Jr. (R-DE) 202-224-2441

Sightings HomePage