Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Why Not Implant A Microchip?
The Cato Institute ^ | February 7, 2002 | Charlotte Twight

Posted on 02/09/2002 4:47:57 PM PST by handk

February 7, 2002

Why Not Implant a Microchip?

by Charlotte Twight

Charlotte A. Twight, professor of economics at Boise State University, is author of "Dependent on D.C.: The Rise of Federal Control over the Lives of Ordinary Americans" (Palgrave/St. Martin's Press, January 2002).

Why bother with national ID cards? Some in America have sought such cards for years. The most recent type comes with magnetic strips and biometric identifiers. It's being peddled by the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators (AAMVA) in concert with federal officials in the Department of Justice, Department of Transportation, the General Services Administration, and elsewhere. Yet these ID cards would be technologically obsolete before the system could be implemented. And think of the problems: physical cards can be counterfeited, damaged, misused, and more. Way too low-tech.

In their struggle to come up with a politically palatable national ID system, proponents of the ID card are being far too timid. So here's a modest proposal: Why not implant a microchip under everyone's skin?

If we mean to fully protect our security we should immediately seek federal legislation to establish standards for the implantation of microchips uniquely identifying each and every individual residing in this country, linked to central databases that could protect all Americans against terrorism. In fact, similar technology has been used in veterinary medicine for years to facilitate the return of lost dogs and cats to their owners.

The system could be voluntary at first, to allow time for Americans to get used to the idea. No doubt many Americans will quickly see the benefits of such an implant for themselves and their children. Think of it: a single microchip linked to a person's medical records as well as financial, tax, employment, Social Security, welfare, criminal and other records--along with appropriate biometric identifiers. It would be so much more convenient and less subject to abuse than physical cards. Even if terrorism does not strike us again, Americans could be sure that if they had a medical emergency in a distant city, authorized physicians could scan the microchip to access the patient's medical history and avoid administering an inappropriate--or potentially life-threatening--medicine.

Sound crazy? Well, it is. But as a thought experiment, it well illustrates how incremental incursions on liberty can lead to dramatic losses of privacy over time. Consider our experience with Social Security numbers.

People worried when the Social Security Act was passed in 1935 that the Social Security number (SSN) would become an all-purpose identifier--an understandable public response, at the time, to a rather dramatic institutional change. But government officials reassured the public that the SSN would not be used for any such purpose. Equally important, they showed restraint and only gradually expanded the federally mandated uses of the SSN--not mandating its use by other federal agencies until 1943. A step at a time, during the 1960s the SSN became the taxpayer identifier used by the IRS, the identifier for federal civilian and military personnel, the Medicare identifier, and more. In the 1970s Congress passed laws requiring the SSN's use for legally admitted aliens and anyone seeking federal benefits--and also gave the states free rein to use SSNs for identification purposes. A series of federal laws passed in the 1980s required the issuance of SSNs to ever-younger children if their parents wanted to claim them as dependents on federal tax forms--by age 5, age 2, age 1, now at any age. People got used to it.

Legislators so far have failed to establish a national ID card with any real public traction--despite extraordinary efforts by some proponents. In 1996 Congress did pass one law to establish what amounted to a national ID card. It was a provision called "State-Issued Drivers Licenses and Comparable Identification Documents," whose passage was achieved by placing it on page 716 of the 749-page Omnibus Consolidated Appropriations Act, tucked between a section entitled "Sense of Congress on Discriminatory Application of New Brunswick Provincial Sales Tax" and another entitled "Border Patrol Museum." But opponents discovered the measure, and it was repealed a few years later.

Now the AAMVA is proposing a similar system--this time initiated by state officials who are seeking federal financial, legislative, and rule-making support for their effort to turn American drivers' licenses into national ID cards.

Over half of the population now supports some form of national identification. If Americans accept a National ID system as they accepted SSNs, and if the intrusiveness of such a system expands as did government-mandated SSN usage, ten years from now the idea of a national microchip system may not seem as alien and repugnant as it does today. As with SSNs, people will get used to it.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Editorial
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-30 next last

1 posted on 02/09/2002 4:47:58 PM PST by handk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: handk

Dr. Charlotte Twight
Professor

Education Ph.D., Economics, University of Washington
M.A., Economics, University of Washington
J.D., University of Washington School of Law
B.A., English and American Literature, California
State University, Fresno

mailto:ctwight@boisestate.edu


2 posted on 02/09/2002 4:54:54 PM PST by handk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: handk
This from the CATO INSTITUTE???

There will be no microchip implanted in me. NEVER.

3 posted on 02/09/2002 4:59:00 PM PST by Dan from Michigan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: handk
re: your post 2 - woof! No wonder she's antsy about veterinary crossover technology
4 posted on 02/09/2002 4:59:26 PM PST by testforecho
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

Comment #5 Removed by Moderator

Comment #6 Removed by Moderator

To: Dan from Michigan
This from the CATO INSTITUTE???

There will be no microchip implanted in me. NEVER.

Yes. And they're advancing liberty. Elitist scum.

From their website:

meta name="description" content="Promoting an American public policy based on individual liberty, limited government, free markets and peaceful international relations.

7 posted on 02/09/2002 5:09:57 PM PST by handk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: handk
Dr Twight is not advocating a chip.

It's called sarcasm.

But, ya know what? You'd better get used to the idea. It's definitely on the way. There may be terminator chips, also. No need to chase a crook, just signal his chip via satellite and he dies. Of course, our government powers-that-be would NEVER abuse such a system, would they?

8 posted on 02/09/2002 5:19:26 PM PST by mfulstone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: handk
So here's a modest proposal: Why not implant a microchip under everyone's skin?

Did you not find this piece to be satirical, as in Swift's A Modest Proposal?

9 posted on 02/09/2002 5:19:46 PM PST by Calico
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: handk
If they can put microchips in dogs, they will put them in us. We will go into slavery whimpering, "Please Mr. President, the government must protect us".

By the way, SURFS in the Middle Ages were made to wear collars identifying who their master was. Ours will say "Property of the U.S. Government".

10 posted on 02/09/2002 5:21:26 PM PST by Magician
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mfulstone
"Dr Twight is not advocating a chip.

It's called sarcasm.

Well then, she's not very good at it. I found the article to be a bit schizophrenic.

11 posted on 02/09/2002 5:28:31 PM PST by handk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: handk
Chips for citizens? BS!!! Chips for immigrants! If we implanted chips in all non-citizens, we could track them and define visa violations, congregations of suspected terrorists (cells), and any other survalence activity that would be suitable to improve the quality of life for citizens. Why decrease freedom and remove rights from our citizens. Immigrant "tagging" would be much easier to implement because they constitute a much smaller % of the population and they are the ones needing herding.
12 posted on 02/09/2002 5:52:03 PM PST by ThinkLikeWaterAndReeds
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: handk
ten years from now the idea of a national microchip system may not seem as alien and repugnant as it does today. As with SSNs, people will get used to it.

Guess again, Big Brother.

13 posted on 02/09/2002 5:52:10 PM PST by captain11
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: handk
Twight is an educated fool. No way do I want the govt access to any or all of my background in a single chip. It's too much control and an invasion of privacy. It's eliminating our freedoms granted under the Constitution.

This idea is too frightening for words. If anyone is familiar with Revelations 13, verses 16-17 talking about the AntiChrist and his own number 666. "And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads: And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name." Many theologians are saying that this mark is a computer chip. God, I hope no one buys this idea from people like Twight.

14 posted on 02/09/2002 5:55:42 PM PST by lilylangtree
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Magician
If they can put microchips in dogs, they will put them in us. We will go into slavery whimpering, "Please Mr. President, the government must protect us".

See above. And by the way--the word is serf. Surf is what dudes do.

15 posted on 02/09/2002 5:55:50 PM PST by captain11
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: handk
sure!What a great idea! I'm amazed no one has thought of it before... how about on the right hand or the forehead?
16 posted on 02/09/2002 5:59:52 PM PST by Terriergal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: handk
Wonder if she has a twight tat?
17 posted on 02/09/2002 6:04:22 PM PST by lawdude
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: handk
--honestly, she's not promoting that you get a chip, she's ridiculing the idea, and showing how bigbro might try to pull it off just like they did with the ssn. Re read it again, you'll see it.
18 posted on 02/09/2002 6:07:46 PM PST by zog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: handk
Just wait til you have to reboot.
19 posted on 02/09/2002 6:10:39 PM PST by Jack Wilson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jack Wilson

Just wait til you have to reboot.

Of all things, life is about change. How does the information in the chip get updated and who gets to update it? Talk about separating good uses from evil uses, there's a quagmire!

Only a quagmire until the individual is the only person allowed to update their own chip. Thus obliterating the quagmire but also eliminating the purpose of the chip in the first place--government control. Implanted chip = a part of your body that you are not allowed control over.

The only way an implanted chip will be a net benefit to people will be when the individual controls that part of their body by being master of the information stored on the chip.

As with free market business a person may want to do business with a company that has the customer put certain information on their implanted chip. Whereas another person doesn't want that type of information on their chip goes to a business that doesn't require a customer to update their implanted chip. And there would be companies that offer both types of services.

Times have changed dramatically since the inception of the Social Security number and it's legacy. You see how the federal government ID control freaks are relegated to dancing on egg shells to make any headway. Already they've been reduced to circumventing honest discussion and have backed themselves into a corner of using a convoluted state driver's license data base to achieve their goals. Times are rapidly changing and the ID control freaks are being increasingly left in the dust with their outdated and rapidly obsolete dogma/status-quo/establishment/collectivist entrapments.

The key seminal question is: Who controls what information is or is not stored on the chip that is to become a body enhancement part not unlike a metal pin, breast implant or plastic surgery?

 

20 posted on 02/09/2002 7:24:48 PM PST by Zon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-30 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson