Ceci N'est Pas Une ID

I don't think this story about proposed legislation to clamp down on hiring of illegal immigrants requires any comment:

Under the plan, any person seeking a new job would be required to obtain an updated "counterfeit-proof" Social Security card, equipped with a digitized photo and an electronic identification strip containing the person's legal status. To offset fears of government intrusion, the card would be clearly marked, "This is not a national ID card," [California Republican congressman David] Dreier said.

Employers would have to check a prospective employee's legal status against a new employment eligibility database either by swiping the card or calling a hot line. Those who fail to do so, or knowingly hire an undocumented worker, would face fines of up to $50,000 and five years in prison for each occurrence.

Emphasis mine. (Hat tip: The Agitator)

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • damaged justice||

    Ceci n'est pas une pipe.

  • gaius marius||

    lol -- say it isn't so and voila! it isn't so.

  • ||

    Hmmm.....an ID card issued by the national government that is required to obtain a job. Exact what drugs do you need to take to believe this isn't a national ID card? Next they'll evade habeus corpus by printing "you are not under arrest and this is not a jail cell" on prison walls.
    Perhaps I should shut up before I give them ideas.

  • ||

    I tried to come up with a way to rationalize this, but man Congressman Dreier is either a fool or a charlatan. Doesn't seem to popular, either, according to google.

  • ||

    Good one, Eryk. How about adding a blinking on-screen statement saying "This is not police brutality" whenever a Rodney King-like incident occurs and is captured on police video.

  • ||

    I guess they'll have to post the following notice at all Ports of Entry:


  • DaveInBigD||

    Yep, and if anybody at Guantanamo gets hold of a sharpie and scrawls "THIS IS NOT AN ENEMY COMBATANT" on themselves, I guess we gotta let 'em go. Can I broadcast "THIS IS NOT INDECENCY" and then tell the FCC to go fuck themselves? Yeah, I can think of all sorts of fun things to do with this one.

    My favorite mental image so far - "THIS IS NOT A TANK"

  • ||

    Oh god, that would cause a headache... We have enough problems getting student workers to convince their parents to let them have their Social Security cards as it is. I can just imagine trying to get a bunch of 18 year old college freshmen to go get new cards made in a timely fashion. As it is, we get their I-9 info way past the 3 day limit.....

  • ||

    How Orwellian.

  • ||

    Contrary to what the idiot author of this article writes, Social security cards are not required to get a job. The law requires proof of citizenship or a green card. Citizens can provide passports, birth certificates, military ID cards, etc, in place of a SSC.

  • The Lonewacko Blog||

    Non, mais il est un pischer.

    Here's the backstory on Dreier. Anyone who looks into this will realize he's full of hot air, making this post a strawman.

  • ||

    Crimethink. fair point but never forget the law of function creep. The new card will be required to get a job and more in very little time. That is if the new legislation doesn't itself require it. I haven't read the law but it seems like the exercise is pointless if the requirement isn't part of it.

  • ||


    Yet most people would end up using the SSC.

  • ||

    "Citizens can provide passports, birth certificates, military ID cards, etc, in place of a SSC."

    But, social security numbers or taxpayer ID numbers ARE required. Part of me wonders if we aren't already there in a de facto sort of way.

  • dagny||

    My last job, working for a city government, required a social security card. I tried using a passport (because I lost my card), but they wouldn't accept it.

  • ||

    This would require periodic renewal of the SS card. Otherwise there's no point in having the photograph, people generally get their SS numbers and cards assigned during infancy nowadays.

  • ||

    "but i swear it's me...look how cute i was!"

  • ||

    This would require periodic renewal of the SS card.

    Great, I don't just have to get a license to work, I'll have to renew it every few years.

  • ||


    I'm not sure about how it applies to city govts, but I believe private employers at least are required by law to accept any valid document listed on the I-9 form.

  • ||

    Check with your local bank and you'll find that your Social Security Number,
    which on my card still says "NOT FOR IDENTIFICATION", is now your "National
    Tax ID Number".

    Sorry, but we've all been pushed,
    filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed, and most importantly NUMBERED

  • ||


    I'm sure Congressman Drier would point out that you don't have to put your money in a bank, so it's not like you're required to use your SSN as ID... ;-)

  • ||

    . . . and it will be delivered to your door in a discreet envelope with "Not Penis Creme" stamped on it . . .

  • ||

    Most of the time I think people who use terms like "Totalitarian" and "It's just like 1984!" when describing the US government need to tone it down a little and remember what REAL police states (USSR anyone?) were like. But Jesus. "This is not a national ID card"!? "Freedom is slavery, peace is war", etc etc aren't too far off from that. Why don't Mexicans just wear t-shirts that say "I'm not an illegal alien" and then we won't have to worry about it anymore.

  • ||

    I'm with Dave. What bothers me more than the ID card itself is the blatant lie in the label. Why not at least be honest?

    The cynical manipulation of the language, and the expectation that nobody will notice, disturbs me greatly.

  • Brendan Perez||

    I wonder, could I calm gun control groups by placing a label on a semi-auto rifle that says "This is not an assault weapon" or obtain a full-auto weapon and place labels on it that say "This is not a machinegun" to calm down the ATF? How about labels on my 1040 that say "This is accurate to the penny, no need to check any further"? :)

    This whole labeling regime could be very lucrative.

  • coyote||

    Gosh, what a great solution. Think of the applications. All Phillip Morris has to do is write "this is not a cigarette" on each Marlboro and poof: all that nasty regulation and litigation goes away. I guess I would not need a liquor license to sell Budweiser's labeled "this is not beer". Or maybe Pamela Anderson can get a T-shirt that says "these are real". LOL.

  • ||

    "This is not an assault." -- BATF agents assaulting the Branch Davidians.

  • JACK||

    good idea!

  • shox||

    Or maybe Pamela Anderson can get a T-shirt that says "these are real". LOL.

  • Gucci clothes||

    Exactly why you might ask, well you may want to sell a product or service and target webmasters or simply just improve the quantity of backlinks your web site has which will improve your Google rankins which will then bring your web site more traffic and cash. Take a fast take a look at this website for more information.


Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Progressive Puritans: From e-cigs to sex classifieds, the once transgressive left wants to criminalize fun.
  • Port Authoritarians: Chris Christie’s Bridgegate scandal
  • The Menace of Secret Government: Obama’s proposed intelligence reforms don’t safeguard civil liberties