------------------------------------------------------------------------
   ******    ********    *************
  ********   *********   *************   
  **         **      **       ***               POLICY POST  
  **         **      **       ***               
  **         **      **       ***               May 31, 1995
  **         **      **       ***               Number 15
  ********   *********        ***              
   ******    ********         ***
                
  CENTER FOR DEMOCRACY AND TECHNOLOGY
------------------------------------------------------------------------
  A briefing on public policy issues affecting civil liberties online
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CDT POLICY POST Number 15                       May 31, 1995

CONTENTS: (1) Senate Proposals Will Create National Identification
              System
          (2) Letter from Right-Left Coalition Members Opposing National
              ID System.
          (3) Status of and Paths to Relevant Documents
          (4) About The Center For Democracy and Technology/Contacting
              Us

This document may be re-distributed freely provided it remains in its 
entirety.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

SUBJECT: SENATE PROPOSALS WILL CREATE A NATIONAL IDENTIFICATION SYSTEM
        
The Senate is currently considering proposals to create a national 
database containing personally identifiable information on every 
individual in America.  Recommendations to create a national "worker 
verification" data system are central components of 3 bills currently 
before the Subcommittee on Immigration of the Judiciary Committee:  S. 
269, "The Immigrant Control and Financial Responsibility Act of 1995," 
introduced on January 24, 1995, by Senator Simpson (R-WY), Chairman of 
the Subcommittee, is scheduled for mark-up on June 6th; S. 580, the 
"Illegal Immigration Control and Enforcement Act of 1995," introduced on 
March 21, 1995, by Senator Feinstein; and, S. 754, the "Immigration 
Enforcement Improvements Act of 1995," introduced on May 1, 1995, by 
Senators Kennedy, Simon and Boxer.  

The Center for Democracy and Technology is opposed to the creation of a 
computerized system to verify work eligibility.  Such a system poses a 
substantial threat to privacy and is unlikely to accomplish the goal of 
eliminating the job market for undocumented immigrants.

Leading the opposition to the national identification system proposals 
is a coalition of organizations and individuals, including 
conservative/free market groups, representatives of the business 
community, civil rights organizations and civil liberties organizations.  
The loudest protest against the pending bills has been voiced by the 
conservative and libertarian communities.  

In a speech at the Cato Institute, House Majority Leader Dick Armey 
stated, "I will fight it. . .Any system in which Americans would be 
forced to possess such a card, for any reason, is an abomination and 
wholly at odds with the American tradition of individual freedom."  

The Center for Equal Opportunity and the Alexis de Tocqueville Institute 
are leading the conservative/libertarian outcry.  Stuart Anderson, 
Policy Director at the Alexis de Tocqueville Institute spoke out against 
the proposals in a recent Washington Times editorial, "The federal 
government has never before held detailed information on all Americans 
in one consolidated place accessible to government officials and outside 
entities. . . The IRS, Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms, computer 
hackers, even private organizations such as banks, could potentially 
access a national computer database."  

IN AN ATTEMPT TO ADDRESS THE PROBLEM OF UNDOCUMENTED WORKERS, ESTIMATED 
TO COMPRISE 1.5% OF THE TOTAL POPULATION, THE PROPOSALS CAST A 
BUREAUCRATIC NET AROUND 100% OF THE UNITED STATES POPULATION.  

The coalition questions the logic of imposing a multi-billion dollar 
system of increased government bureaucracy upon the daily lives of 
Americans, at a time when less federal power and intrusion is the mantra 
of the day.  As Anderson says, "The price of fake documents and 
acceptable Social Security numbers will likely increase, but there is no 
reason to believe the number of illegal immigrants working here will 
decrease."  In this ill-conceived effort to address the problem of 
undocumented workers, every American worker will be forced to 
participate in an intrusive government system.  This is truly an 
Orwellian nightmare.

Under the guise of reforming immigration policy the bills sponsors are 
asking Congress to authorize the creation of a broad worker verification 
registry that by design must contain information not just on illegal 
immigrants, but on every American and legal immigrant who desires to 
work.  For the first time the federal government has created a detailed 
system of records on individuals that it intends to make accessible to 
the public.  Rather than designing an effective system to manage 
immigration, these bills propose a national database that tramples on 
the civil rights and liberties of every American citizen and resident by 
subjecting each to unwanted and unnecessary invasions of privacy.  

A NATIONAL WORKER VERIFICATION SYSTEM WILL NOT ACCOMPLISH ITS GOAL -- 
ELIMINATING THE JOB MARKET FOR UNDOCUMENTED IMMIGRANTS -- BUT IT WILL 
INCREASE DISCRIMINATION.  

A worker verification system is an ineffective tool for curbing the job 
market for unauthorized workers, and is very likely to lead to increased 
discrimination and erode individual privacy.  No matter what system or 
card is developed, the black market will continue to meet the demand for 
false documents.  Employers who hire undocumented workers will continue 
to violate the law; they do so intentionally and are unlikely to use a 
verification system.  Instead they will continue to hire undocumented 
workers, while law-abiding employers are subject to new and costly 
government regulation.  During the pilot study of the Telephone 
Verification System the projected costs to employers, for equipment and 
administration, ran between $1,075.00 and $16,155.

THE PROPOSALS WILL LEAD TO THE CREATION OF AN ALL PURPOSE NATIONAL 
IDENTITY DOCUMENT.  

In a "Roll Call" article on May 22, 1995, Senator Feinstein made her 
preference for a single fraud-resistant document clear.  Feinstein 
stated, "I believe that a new, phone or machine-readable card that all 
job and benefits applicants would be required to present . . . deserves 
careful consideration. . . counterfeit-resistant cards that incorporate 
'biometric' data are available and in use today . . . whether the card 
carries a magnetic strip on which the bearer's unique voice, retina 
pattern, or fingerprint is digitally encoded. . . it is clear to me that 
state-of-the-art . . . IDs can and must replace the dinosaur age 
documents now being used."  Although the Senate proposals do not call 
for the creation of a document to verify identity, the very design of a 
vast system of information makes the development of such a document 
inevitable.  At a hearing held by the Subcommittee on Immigration on May 
10, 1995, "Verification of Applicant Identity for Purposes of Employment 
and Public Assistance," it was quite clear that the creation of a 
national identity document is at the core of the "worker verification 
system" proposals.   

The proposals will expand the treasure trove of information accessible 
to the unscrupulous individual who gets hold of another's SSN.  The use 
of the SSN as the "worker verification identifier" will facilitate 
linkage between various systems of governmental and private sector 
records, making the inevitable temptation to use the data base for other 
purposes even stronger.  

The proliferation of the Social Security Number, a number that by law 
was to be used exclusively within the social security system, offers a 
telling example of the Government's inability and unwillingness to limit 
the uses to which such a massive system of identification and tracking 
can be put.  The SSN was created for a limited purpose.  Over the past 
fifty years its use by both the government and private sector has 
proliferated.  The SSN has become a multi-use identifier that can be 
used to link information contained in public and private sector 
databases.  The SSN is a key that unlocks vast storehouses of 
information collected on American citizens, such as credit, health, 
driving and banking records.

AMERICANS WILL BE WRONGLY DENIED JOBS DUE TO INACCURATE DATA.  According 
to a recent GAO report, over 65 million American's change jobs or enter 
the workforce each year.  Even if the system's error rate was reduced to 
1% over 650,000 people would inaccurately be denied the right to work 
each year due to faulty data.  Each Americans' ability to work will be 
dependent on the accuracy of data from the Social Security 
Administration and Immigration and Naturalization Service, both of which 
have been widely criticized for keeping inaccurate records.  The INS 
recently admitted to losing 60,000 files of green-card applicants in 
California and is currently being sued by the American Civil Liberties 
Union.  Current estimates reveal error rates in INS records as high as 
30%.  The Commissioner of Social Security, testifying in 1991 stated, 
"over 60 percent (of the SSNs in use today) are based on the assertions 
a person made at the time he or she applied for a SSN."  According to 
the testimony of Gilbert Fisher, Assistant Deputy Commissioner of SSA 
before the Subcommittee on May 10th, the cost of reissuing the 270 
million cards necessary to address the problem of cards issued without 
proof of identity would cost between 3 and 6 billion dollars.  

In fact, during a recent hearing it became apparent that a bottom line 
figure for the accuracy level to be reached prior to deploying the 
"worker verification system" has not been established or seriously 
considered.  It seems that the supporters of the bills would move 
forward on the "worker verification system" with full knowledge that 
individuals will be unfairly denied employment and benefits due to 
inaccurate data.  Senator Feinstein seems to be the least concerned with 
the loss of employment and benefits by eligible individuals.  In a Roll 
Call article on May 22, 1995, Senator Feinstein advocated moving forward 
immediately without the "pilot" studies and information gathering 
included in the majority of proposals.    

A WORKER REGISTRY WILL BE ABUSED TO DISCRIMINATE AND INVADE PRIVACY.  

The ability of the SSA or other government agency to monitor and control 
access to and use of an information system that is available to both 
agency employees and all potential employers is dubious.  A "worker 
verification system" or national identity document is prone to abuse by 
persons who use it to selectively screen individuals whose appearance, 
surname or accent suggests they are foreign, or to screen such persons 
outside the employment context.  The system or document will place a 
powerful weapon in the hands of those seeking to harass and 
discriminate.  
        
In addition to unauthorized outside use of the system, the creation of a 
worker verification data system will subject individuals to invasions of 
privacy and discrimination from agency employees.  Both the IRS and the 
SSA have recently been subject to criticism for their lack of control 
over agency employees who were both browsing through information for 
their own purposes, and making information available to outsiders for 
monetary compensation.  The openness of the proposed worker verification 
system will make it more difficult to monitor and control the use of 
sensitive personal information and therefore subject individuals to 
greater invasions of personal privacy and discrimination from system 
misuse.  

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
* ANALYSIS OF SELECT SECTIONS OF BILLS:

1. The bills propose to expand the existing Telephone Verification 
   System (TVS) pilot  

The TVS pilot project should not be expanded.  During phase I, nine 
companies participated in a pilot to test the TVS project.  This pilot 
has allowed companies to call the INS and ask for verification that non-
citizens applying for work are eligible for employment.  Both S. 269 and 
S. 754 call for an expansion of TVS.  

Numerous flaws were illuminated during phase I of the TVS pilot which 
counsel strongly against its expansion and undermine its utility.  
First, it relies on "self- attestation" -- those presenting for 
employment must self identify as aliens -- to trigger the system.  
Illegal immigrants can avoid the pilot and never have their eligibility 
to work checked by simply claiming to be a citizen.  Second, during the 
initial pilot, the INS found it was unable to make a determination of 
employment eligibility based on information contained in its 
computerized files 28% of the time, thus the INS had to perform a manual 
search to fulfill 28% of the verification requests.  

2. S. 754 and S. 269 both recommend additional pilots that will improve,
   utilize and link the Social Security Administration (SSA) and
   Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) records and data systems 

S. 754 recommends the establishment of additional pilot projects that 
may include:  a process which allows employers to verify the eligibility 
for employment of new employees using the SSA's records and if 
necessary, to conduct a cross-check using INS records;  a simulated 
linkage of the electronic records of the INS and the SSA; and, 
improvements and additions to the electronic records of the INS and the 
SSA for the purpose of using such records for verification of employment 
eligibility.  (Section 202)  S. 269 directs the Administration to 
conduct demonstration projects in five states to test the feasibility of 
the system.  (Section 112 (a),(b))  

More importantly, Section 113 of S. 269 directs the Attorney General to 
establish a database containing information obtained from the Social 
Security Administration and the Immigration and Naturalization Service 
to be used in determining work authorization for individuals living in 
the United States within one year.  The database may be used in 
conjunction with both the demonstration projects and the final system.  
This new data system will be managed by a new Office of Employment and 
Public Assistance Eligibility Verification.  

The information collected by the Social Security Administration is 
insufficient for establishing identity.  The creation of a national 
identification system run by the SSA, INS or a new agency would require 
a vast increase in data collection on individuals.  For a system to 
accurately establish the identity of individuals it would need to 
contain information as to their identity - name, birth date and 
location, height and weight, for example - citizenship status, and most 
likely a biometric identifier, such as a fingerprint.  Such a system 
would provide the government and private institutions with the ability 
to track and profile people from birth to death, creating what Professor 
Arthur Miller termed a "womb-to-tomb" dossier.

Linking information contained in separate databases raises privacy 
concerns.  By allowing government agencies to share information we 
accelerate the creation of a system of national identification, and 
condone the use of information individuals provided to the government 
with the understanding that it would be used for a limited purpose for 
additional purposes without the individual's consent.  

Use of the Social Security Number (SSN) and the underlying SSA database 
to verify the eligibility of individuals to work is impracticable and 
threatens privacy.  Like the INS database, the SSA database is riddled 
with errors.  The SSN was never intended to be relied on by itself as 
foolproof identification.  Historically, SSNs have been easy to obtain 
because there was no need for a secure card for Social Security 
Administration purposes.  

Even with the strictest security measures it is impossible to build an 
impenetrable system.  The database will be a target for computer hackers 
who want information on individuals.  Although both S. 269 and 2. 745 
contain provisions regarding use and protection of the data, the ability 
of the federal government to limit the use of large databases by the 
government and private sector is doubtful.  

The "pilot" programs and "worker verification" system proposed by these 
bills are a huge step toward the establishment of a system of national 
identification and the creation of a national identification document.  
The designation of the projects as "pilots" is misleading.  Under the 
guise of limited "pilot" projects the government is building the basic 
infrastructure necessary to implement a wholesale worker verification 
system.  The language used in the proposals masks the cold fact that 
actual individuals will be denied jobs and benefits, during the "test" 
of these "pilots."  A significant number of denials will be based on 
inaccurate information.  

As the proliferation of the SSN demonstrates, the creation of a national 
database to verify each American's eligibility to enter the work force 
will lead to increased sharing of information, increased demands for 
access for purposes other than the one the system was designed to 
support, and increased demands on individuals by third parties for 
access to this information --  a heavy price to ask all American's to 
pay and one that has not been justified by the problem of illegal 
immigrant workers.  

The "worker verification" system proposals open the door to an Orwellian 
nightmare.  Handing over the civil liberties of 98.5% of the American 
public is not the way to deal with the estimated 1.5% of the population 
that are illegal immigrants.  In the final analysis, the establishment 
of a "worker verification registry," is a solution that threatens to 
create more serious problems than it solves.  Given the tarnished 
history of national identification systems in America and other 
countries, the public distrust of data collection, and the extreme 
threat to civil liberties and civil rights posed by such systems, a 
"worker verification" database should not be adopted as the "quick fix" 
to the problem of undocumented workers.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
2) LETTER SENT FROM RIGHT-LEFT COALITION MEMBERS OPPOSING NATIONAL ID
   SYSTEMS.

May 23, 1995

Dear Member of Congress: 
We are writing to express our concern that both Congress and the 
Administration are moving toward the implementation of a national worker 
registry. We believe such a plan put forward in the name of immigration 
control, is both misguided and dangerous for the following reasons: 

It will not work. Those employers who rely on undocumented labor are 
already violating the law; they do so intentionally and are unlikely to 
use a verification system. Instead, they will continue to violate the 
law by hiring undocumented workers while employers who already comply 
with the law are subjected to new, costly requirements for the hiring 
process. 

Faulty data. The data which a nationwide verification system would use 
would rely on two highly flawed data bases, one by the Social Security 
Administration (SSA) and the other the Immigration and Naturalization 
Service (INS~. Both are notorious for containing incorrect or outdated 
information, with error rates as high as 28 percent. Roughly 65 million 
Americans either enter the work force or change jobs every year. Even an 
error rate of no higher than one percent would mean that 650,000 
Americans could be denied jobs every year. 

An unfunded mandate on employers. The creation of a national 
verification system for every workplace in America would present a huge 
administrative burden to the nation's employers, especially small 
business. All employers would be required to ask the federal 
government's permission every time they want to hire somebody. Americans 
want fewer burdensome regulations, not new ones. 

A threat to privacy and civil rights. Worker registry proposals ask 
Congress to create a database of personal information on all Americans 
and make it accessible to all employers. The openness of the proposed 
systems raises barriers to controlling and monitoring the use of 
information. Such systems are prone to abuse by persons who use it to 
selectively screen individuals whose appearance, surname or accent 
suggests they are foreign or to screen such persons outside of the 
context of employment. In addition, government often lacks the political 
will to limit access to information once collected. Indeed, other 
purposes for the data base are already being proposed, including 
verifying eli~ibility for public benefits, tracking childhood 
immunizations, and tracking child support payments. Once a system of 
information on all Arnericans is in place, it will inevitably become 
ubiquitous in American life, presenting an enormous threat to the 
privacy and liberty of Americans. 

We believe it is unwarranted and unwise to create a data system 
involving 100 percent of Americans in an effort to identify the 1.5 
percent who live illegally in the United States. We urge you to oppose 
the creation of a nationwide verification system. 
Sincerely,

NATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS

American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU)
American Immigration Lawyers Association
Center for Democracy and Technology
Citizens for a Sound Economy
Immigration and Refugee Services of America
MALDEF, Los Angeles
National Asian Pacific American Legal
Consortium
National Association of Korean Americans
National Council of La Raza
National Federation of Independent Business
Organization of Chinese Americans
Small Business Survival Committee
Southwest Voter Registration Education Project
U.S. Hispanic Chamber of Commerce

INDIVIDUALS

Martin Anderson, Hoover Institution
Stuart Anderson, Alexis de Tocqueville
Institution
Ronald Bailey, Think Tank
Bernard Baltic, Reason Foundation
Douglas Bersharov, American Enterprise
Institute
David Boaz, Cato Institute
Clint Bolick, Institute for Justice
Matthew Brooks, National Jewish Coalition
Phillip M. Burgess, Center for the New West
Merrick Carey, Alexis de Tocqueville
Institute
Linda Chavez, Center for Equal Opportunity
Bryce Christensen, Editor, The Family in
America
Jeff Eisenach, Progress & Freedom Foundation
Diana Furchtgett-Roth, American Enterprise
Institute
Steve Gibson, Bionomics Institute
Stina Hans, Vista Hospital Systems
Robert B. Helms, American Enterprise Institute
Rick Henderson, Reason
John Hood, Bradley Fellow-Heritage Foundation
David Horowitz, Center for the Study of
Popular Culture
Joseph J. Jacobs, Jacobs Engineering Group
Paul Jacobs, U.S. Term Limits
Kent Jeffreys, National Center for Policy
Analysis
Thomas L. Jipping, Free Congress Foundation
Donna Kelsch, YMCA, NY
Jack Kemp, Empower America
Manuel S. Klausner, Kindel & Anderson 
David Koch, Koch Industries 
William Kristol, Project for the Republican Future 
James P. Lucier, Jr., Citizens Against a National Sales Tax/VAT 
John McClaughery, Ethan Allen Institute
Michael T. McMenaim, Walter & Haverfield 
William H. Mellor III, Institute for Justice 
Stephen Moore, Cato Institute
Reverend Craig B. Mousin, United Methodist Church of Christ 
Richard S. Newcombe, Creators Syndicate
Grover Norquist, Americans for Tax Reform 
Walter K. Olson, Manhattan Institute 
Ellen Frankel Paul, Social Philosophy & Policy Center at Bowling Green 
State University 
Jeffrey Paul, Social Philosophy & Policy Center, Bowling Green State 
University 
Sally Pipes, Pacific Research Institute
Joyce Antilla Phipps, Clinical Professor at Seton Hall University Robert 
W. Poole, Jr., Reason Foundation
Steven R Postre, Graduate School of Management at the University of 
California at Irvine
Virginia Postrel, Reason Foundation
T.J. Rodgers, Cypress Semiconductor
Michael Rothschild, Bionomics Institute Rev. Don Smith 
Dr. Christine Sierra, University of New Mexico 
Julie Stewart, Families Against Mandatory Minimums Ron K. Unz, Wall 
Street Analytics
Richard J. Wilson, Professor, American University 
Cathy Young, Women's Freedom Network
Benjamin Zycher, Department of Economics UCLA 

LOCAL ORGANIZATIONS:

Albuquerque Border City Project
Asian Law Alliance
Asian Pacific American Legal Center of
Southern California
Asylum and Refugee Rights Law Project
AYUDA
California Humane Development
Californians United for Equality
Center for Immigrant Rights
Chicago Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee
Protection
Coalition for Humane Immigration Rights of Los
Angeles (CHIRLA)
Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights and
Services
Dominican Sisters of San Rafael, CA
El Centro Hispanoamerico, NJ
Immigrant Legal Resource Center, San Francisco
Immigrant's Rights Project
Immigration Law Project
Independent Women's Forum
International Assistance Program of Alabama,
Inc.
International Institute of Los Angeles
Korean Youth and Community Center, Los
Angeles
Lawyer's Committee for Civil Rights
Legal Assistance Foundation, Legal Services
Center
Massachusetts Immigrant and Refugee Advocacy
Coalition, Boston
New York Immigration Coalition, NY
North Texas Immigration Coalition of Dallas
Northwest Immigrant's Rights Project
Pacific Research Institute
Proyecto Adelante
Proyecto Libertad, Texas
Riverside Language Project, New York
Santa Clara County Network for Immigrant &
Refugee Rights & Services
Sponsors to Assist Refugees, Portland, OR
Travelers and Immigrants Aid

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

3) CURRENT STATUS AND PATHS TO RELEVANT LEGISLATIVE DOCUMENTS

The sections of these bills pertaining to the Worker Verification 
Database 
issue are available from CDT's ftp archive:

ftp://ftp.cdt.org/pub/cdt/policy/legislation/

s269 --  "The Immigrant Control and Financial Responsibility Act of 
1995," introduced on January 24, 1995, by Senator Simpson (R-WY), 
Chairman of the Subcommittee, is scheduled for mark-up on June 6th;

s580 -- The "Illegal Immigration Control and Enforcement Act of 1995," 
introduced on March 21, 1995, by Senator Feinstein; 

s754 --  The "Immigration Enforcement Improvements Act of 1995," 
introduced 
on May 1, 1995, by Senators Kennedy, Simon and Boxer.  


------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----

(4) ABOUT THE CENTER FOR DEMOCRACY AND TECHNOLOGY

The Center for Democracy and Technology is a non-profit public interest
organization. The Center's mission is to develop and advocate public
policies that advance constitutional civil liberties and democratic
values in new computer and communications technologies.

Contacting us:

To subscribe to CDT's news distribution list (to receive future Policy 
Posts directly), send email to  with a subject of 
'subscribe policy posts'.

** NOTE TO THOSE WHO HAVE ALREADY REQUESTED TO BE ADDED TO CDT's 
   DISTRIBUTION LIST:  We are still working to build our listserv -- you 
   will begin receiving Policy Posts on this list very soon. We
   appreciate your patience!

General information on CDT can be obtained by sending mail to
 

CDT has set up the following auto-reply aliases to keep you informed on 
the Communications Decency Act issue.

For information on the bill, including
CDT's analysis and the text of Senator
Leahy's alternative proposal and
information on what you can do to
help                                         -- cda-info@cdt.org

For the current status of the bill,
including scheduled House and
Senate action (updated as events
warrant)                                     -- cda-stat@cdt.org

World-Wide-Web:

   http://www.cdt.org/

ftp:

   ftp://ftp.cdt.org/pub/cdt/

gopher:

   CDT's gopher site is still under construction and should be 
operational
   soon.

snail mail:

Center For Democracy and Technology
1001 G Street, NW Suite 700 East
Washington, DC 20001
voice: +1.202.637.9800
fax:   +1.202.637.9800
                                  ###