Driver's license was never sufficient as proof of ID - was never intended for that purpose. Driver's license was only valid as part of an ID system that includes a state government database. But in America with no ID system, the driver's licenses were being used for purposes not intended. That is a system all but setup for corruption.

Monster - before continuing to post, you want to read a previous discussion in November 2001 entitled A National ID Card . Defined are two fundamental objectives that a National ID must achieve AND that a National ID card must not serve government - must instead serve citizens. Obviously that would be completely contrary to the dictator President Cheney which is why a National ID card cannot be created by the mental midget administration.

Meanwhile, learn what a National ID card must do from that previous discussion.

A mental midget administration will always be available to adjust any "good" national id for abuse.

What's the big deal? Don't you already have a driver's license, social security card and passport? Seems like a national ID could conveniently replace all three.

I don't carry my driver's lic any longer, I don't give anyone my social security number any longer and I do not have a passport.
There is nothing convenient about being forced to have "papers"... it is not their place nor their business to know who I am or what I am doing if I am breaking no laws.

If I am requested to show ID, I show it. What is your concern? You can't fly without ID. Never travel by plane?

Also, the few times I have left the country, I have needed a passport and driver's license to get back in. Do you ever travel out of the country?

I travel very little, too sick too, when I do I have to take my drivers lic. I know in advance and everyone is showing it... not the same as having to have it on the street just to be a citizen, that is wrong.
Cops have forgotten who they work for.

Sorry to hear of your illness. I truly hope things improve.

And also sorry to hear of your concerns with law enforcement. My experience has been that when I show my ID as requested, they do immediately recognize who they work for.

Also, I feel compelled to carry ID. If something were to happen to me where I was incapacitated, I could be identified in order to have my family prompty notified.

I have MedicAlert for that. The national ID card is just another, but major, step toward the police state.

After lengthy consideration, I must admit I'm having a difficult time imagining how a change of identification method is going to lead to some sort of "police state."

I already have a driver's license, social security card and passport. What difference does it make if this information is consolidated? Just because someone is walking on the streets doesn't mean they are a citizen and should automatically be recognized as one. How do you determine who is a citizen and who is not without ID?

Who controls when and how your ID is accessed and used? Who determines what is and is not in that database? And who has the power to confirm your ID security is not compromised? In this president's proposals for a National ID program, none of that is addressed. His program is not for your ID security. His program is for government security. A massive difference exists between what WE need and what HE wants. But again, read that entire and previous discussion in A National ID Card.

Where does a driver's license, social security card, or passport serve your needs as proof of identity AND so that you can protect your own identity? None do AND none were intended as personal ID. They were only intended for police type purposes - except SS which was never intended for most anything we use it today. Using SS for identity is probably a biggest reason for ID theft. Obviously. What was the strategic objective of a SS number? If you are not thinking this way, then you are all but inviting government to institute a police state. Much reading to do in A National ID Card before posting again. Always keep asking yourself what those ID serve – you or a government security function?

Even a driver’s license is not acceptable ID proof. But if we have no other method, then we use driver’s licenses. Why is a driver’s license not acceptable as ID proof? Should be obvious after reading that previous discussion.

If it serves government security, it serves me. I'm not sure what you're all worked up about tw. Why do you assume evil intent?

The more power you have the more corrupt you become.

Because that is the only use for which it can be used. Taking away freedom is not needed, doing so is wrong and tyrannical, easy.

It serves government ‘exclusive or’ serves you. It does not and cannot serve both because you and government are completely different entities obviously with completely different objectives and needs. You did not even read that previous discussion - did you? Your question was predicted; the answer provided – and you did not read it. The hyperlink was provided three times so that you could not ignore it.

Why do you naively believe anyone is magically and only working for you - the predicate of your question? Let’s see. Those sentences said what your question would be AND where an answer resides. Instead, you want me to rehash what has already been answered? Well that is the fourth time I gave you the hyperlink to read before ever posting anything again in your life. Not difficult. Just put your lips together and just … sorry … wrong quote.

There is something people have forgotten, the government has no rights, only citizens.
"Protect and serve" means the citizens, not the establishment.
They have no right to ask what you are doing or who you are unless you are actively committing a crime, that is all.