"Stop Identity Theft ­ Make Social Security Numbers Confidential"

by Rep. Ron Paul, MD
Introduction of Bill to Congress

January 7, 2003

Mr. Speaker, today I introduce the Identity Theft Prevention Act. This
act protects the American people from government mandated uniform
identifiers that facilitate private crime as well as the abuse of
liberty. The major provision of the Identity Theft Prevention Act halts
the practice of using the Social Security number as an identifier by
requiring the Social Security Administration to issue all Americans new
Social Security numbers within five years after the enactment of the
bill. These new numbers will be the sole legal property of the recipient
and the Social Security administration shall be forbidden to divulge the
numbers for any purposes not related to Social Security administration.

Social Security numbers issued before implementation of this bill shall
no longer be considered valid federal identifiers. Of course, the Social
Security Administration shall be able to use an individual's original
Social Security number to ensure efficient administration of the Social
Security system.

Mr. Speaker, Congress has a moral responsibility to address this problem
because it was Congress which transformed the Social Security number
into a national identifier. Thanks to Congress, today no American can
get a job, open a bank account, get a professional license, or even get
a driver's license without presenting their Social Security number. So
widespread has the use of the Social Security number become that a
member of my staff had to produce a Social Security number in order to
get a fishing license!

One of the most disturbing abuses of the Social Security number is the
congressionally-authorized rule forcing parents to get a Social Security
number for their newborn children in order to claim them as dependents.
Forcing parents to register their children with the state is more like
something out of the nightmares of George Orwell than the dreams of a
free republic which inspired this nation's founders.

Congressionally mandated use of the Social Security number as an
identifier facilitates the horrendous crime of identity theft. Thanks to
Congress, an unscrupulous person may simply obtain someone's Social
Security number in order to access that person's bank accounts, credit
cards, and other financial assets. Many Americans have lost their life
savings and had their credit destroyed as a result of identity theft ­
yet the federal government continues to encourage such crimes by
mandating use of the Social Security number as a uniform ID!

This act also forbids the federal government from creating national ID
cards or establishing any identifiers for the purpose of investigating,
monitoring, overseeing, or regulating private transactions between
American citizens, as well as repealing those sections of the Health
Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 that require the
Department of Health and Human Services to establish a uniform standard
health identifier. By putting an end to government-mandated uniform IDs,
the Identity Theft Prevention Act will prevent millions of Americans
from having their liberty, property and privacy violated by
private-and-public sector criminals.
In addition to forbidding the federal government from creating national
identifiers, this legislation forbids the federal government from
blackmailing states into adopting uniform standard identifiers by
withholding federal funds. One of the most onerous practices of Congress
is the use of federal funds illegitimately taken from the American
people to bribe states into obeying federal dictates.

Mr. Speaker, of all the invasions of privacy proposed in the past
decade, perhaps the most onerous is the attempt to assign every American
a "unique health identifier'' ­ an identifier which could be used to
create a national database containing the medical history of all
Americans. As an OB/GYN with more than 30 years in private practice, I
know the importance of preserving the sanctity of the physician-patient
relationship. Oftentimes, effective treatment depends on a patient's
ability to place absolute trust in his or her doctor. What will happen
to that trust when patients know that any and all information given to
their doctor will be placed in a government accessible database?

Some members of Congress may claim that the federal monitoring of all
Americans will enhance security. However, the fact is that creating a
surveillance state will divert valuable resources away from
investigating legitimate security threats into spying on innocent
Americans, thus reducing security. The American people would be better
served if the government focused attention on ensuring our borders are
closed to potential terrorists instead of coming up with new ways to
violate the rights of American citizens.

Other members of Congress will claim that the federal government needs
the power to monitor Americans in order to allow the government to
operate more efficiently. I would remind my colleagues that in a
constitutional republic, the people are never asked to sacrifice their
liberties to make the job of government officials easier. We are here to
protect the freedom of the American people, not to make privacy invasion
more efficient.

Mr. Speaker, while I do not question the sincerity of those members who
suggest that Congress can ensure that citizens' rights are protected
through legislation restricting access to personal information, the only
effective privacy protection is to forbid the federal government from
mandating national identifiers. Legislative "privacy protections'' are
inadequate to protect the liberty of Americans for several reasons:

First, it is simply common sense that repealing those federal laws that
promote identity theft is more effective in protecting the public than
expanding the power of the federal police force. Federal punishment of
identity thieves provides cold comfort to those who have suffered
financial losses and the destruction of their good reputation as a
result of identity theft.

Federal laws are not only ineffective in stopping private criminals, but
have not even stopped unscrupulous government officials from accessing
personal information. After all, laws purporting to restrict the use of
personal information did not stop the well-publicized violations of
privacy by IRS officials or the FBI abuses by the Clinton and Nixon
administrations.
Just last month, thousands of active-duty soldiers and veterans had
their personal information stolen, putting them at risk of identity
theft. Imagine the dangers if thieves are able to obtain the universal
identifier, and other personal information, of millions of Americans
simply by breaking, or hacking, into one government facility or one
government database?

Second, the federal government has been creating proprietary interests
in private information for certain state-favored special interests.
Perhaps the most outrageous example of phony privacy protection is the
``medical privacy´´ regulation, which allows medical researchers,
certain business interests, and law enforcement officials´ access to
health care information, in complete disregard of the Fifth Amendment
and the wishes of individual patients! Obviously, "privacy
protection´´ laws have proven greatly inadequate to protect personal
information when the government is the one providing or seeking the
information.

The primary reason why any action short of the repeal of laws
authorizing privacy violations is insufficient is because the federal
government lacks constitutional authority to force citizens to adopt a
universal identifier for health care, employment, or any other reason.
Any federal action that oversteps constitutional limitations violates
liberty because it ratifies the principle that the federal government,
not the Constitution, is the ultimate judge of its own jurisdiction over
the people. The only effective protection of the rights of citizens is
for Congress to follow Thomas Jefferson's advice and "bind (the federal
government) down with the chains of the Constitution.''

Mr. Speaker, those members who are not persuaded by the moral and
constitutional reasons for embracing the Identity Theft Prevention Act
should consider the opposition of the American people toward national
identifiers. The overwhelming public opposition to the various
"Know-Your-Customer'' schemes, the attempt to turn driver's licenses
into National ID cards, as well as the numerous complaints over the
ever-growing uses of the Social Security number, show that American
people want Congress to stop invading their privacy. Furthermore,
according to a survey by the Gallup company, 91 percent of the American
people oppose forcing Americans to obtain a universal health ID.
Several other recent polls show most Americans remain skeptical that a
national ID card would enhance their security or preserve their liberty.
In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I once again call on my colleagues to join
me in putting an end to the federal government's unconstitutional use of
national identifiers to monitor the actions of private citizens.
National identifiers threaten all Americans by exposing them to the
threat of identity theft by private criminals and abuse of their
liberties by public criminals, while diverting valuable law enforcement
resources away from addressing real threats to public safety. In
addition, national identifiers are incompatible with a limited,
constitutional government. I, therefore, hope my colleagues will join my
efforts to protect the freedom of their constituents by supporting the
Identity Theft Prevention Act.

Dr. Ron Paul is a Republican member of Congress from Texas.
Ron Paul Archives