Posted on 04/21/2021 6:49:46 AM PDT by Kaslin
With ominous rumblings about vaccine passports, perpetual contact tracing, and other means of government and corporate surveillance, totalitarian spying on U.S. citizens seems closer than we could have imagined. Now the Senate has stepped in – again – to ramp up surveillance in the realm of higher education.
For several years, even so-called conservative Republican senators have pushed bills to allow the feds to track and compile data on any student from any institution of higher education (IHE) for the rest of his or her working life. The excuse for this startlingly intrusive initiative is twofold. First, lifetime tracking will allow prospective students to see what jobs people get and how much money they make after studying at particular institutions. Second, tracking will enable the federal government to evaluate its massive student-loan programs.
The short answer for excuse number-one is that no one has the right to demand surveillance of his fellow free-born citizens, regardless of whether the resulting data might theoretically help in his decision-making. To excuse number-two, any government program that requires dragooning citizens into a lifetime of governmental surveillance, without consent, is a program that should be abolished. This is one of a multitude of reasons the federal government should relinquish control over student loans.
But “conservatives” in Congress don’t see that. This year’s iteration of the surveillance bill is the College Transparency Act (CTA), recently reintroduced by Republican senators Bill Cassidy (LA) and Tim Scott (SC) and Democrat senators Elizabeth Warren (MA) and Sheldon Whitehouse (RI). Strange bedfellows indeed – and two of them are either being shamefully hoodwinked or are shamefully hoodwinking the voters who sent them to the Senate.
Here’s how CTA will work. First it will require any IHE that enrolls students with federal student loans – that is, almost every IHE in the country – to compile an enormous amount of student data and send it to the federal Commissioner for Education Statistics. The data must cover “enrollment patterns, progression, completion, and post-collegiate outcomes, and higher education costs and financial aid.” All the required data elements are specified in the bill (age, race, “gender,” full-time or part-time status, veteran status, program of study, etc.), but they’re just a beginning – the Commissioner may add others later when the mood strikes. And don’t think the voracious federal government will stop with the data requirements currently included.
Second, the Commissioner must share all this personal data with multiple other federal agencies. After all, the point of the new Chinese-style system is to track every student’s life choices, “including earnings, employment, and further education,” forever. So student data will be matched to data in the IRS, the Treasury Department, the Defense Department, the VA, the Census Bureau, and the Social Security Administration, among others.
CTA would apply even to students who don’t receive federal aid. So merely by the act of enrolling in higher education, every student will now have an official government dossier that will be updated as he progresses through life and career. There’s no requirement that the student consent, and there’s no opt out.
And this is individual, personally identifiable information that can be matched to particular students. In fact, Cassidy and Scott’s CTA would repeal current federal law that prohibits collecting “personally identifiable information on individuals receiving” federal student-loan assistance. It should be unthinkable that constitutional conservative senators would mandate government surveillance of individual, identifiable Americans, but the universe of the unthinkable is shrinking by the day.
Our political overlords do allow IHE’s to “provide notice to students outlining the data included in the system and how the data are used.” Students will star in their own Truman Show, but at least they’ll be told about it. And they’ll even be allowed to peek at their data and “request corrections to inaccuracies.” The bureaucrats won’t be required to actually make those corrections, but the peasants shouldn’t be too demanding.
Another assurance is that these dossiers won’t be kept in a “single-standing, linked Federal database at the Department.” Apparently students are to be comforted that bureaucrats will have to click several times, not just once, to access their highly personal information.
Even if “transparency” justified obliterating the right to privacy, what about the more pedestrian problem of hacking? Cassidy and Scott are on it. Under CTA, data matches among the various federal data troves will have to be “secure” and to comply with the same protocols that have created scandalously insecure data systems at multiple federal agencies (see here, here, and here). Feel better?
Not only bureaucrats but also “researchers” will have access to this highly sensitive data trove, but only “vetted” research will be allowed. Who will do this vetting and according to what criteria remains unspecified. And though the data given to researchers will be de-identified, with “direct [not indirect] identifiers removed,” anonymity won’t be guaranteed. Tech-savvy researchers who are told a citizen’s education history and job titles and earnings and whatever else any government agency may have collected on him over the years will find the absence of a name on the records merely an inconvenience, not an obstacle, to re-identification.
Americans who actually believe in freedom, privacy, and limited government are growing weary of “conservative” politicians who ignore the ramifications of what they propose. Just in the last few weeks, we’ve seen Republicans in Congress the imposition of radical “action civics” that will teach future generations to hate their country. Now Cassidy and Scott are pushing a government surveillance system that, if they bothered to think about it, should make them recoil in disgust.
These are not difficult issues. From a constitutional perspective, there are right and wrong answers. Why are politicians on the right so often choosing the wrong ones?
It’s important not to throw Conservative as a label around.
Conservatism starts with Build the Wall, and follows with drain the swamp. Then America first in all things.
Any senator who was not always for such things is not a conservative.
Ok, I’ll play Devil’s Advocate.
How “intrusive” is this really? The government can already deduce your income from the taxes one pays. One’s employer takes down the data regarding your degree and education when you apply for a job. Is tracking this type of info really in the realm of “surveillance”.
Maybe I’m just dense, but this seems like making a mountain out of a molehill, especailly when there are so many other pressing issues in the nation.
Now you begin to understand why they built that enormous storage facility for data, where was it,in Idaho?
“How “intrusive” is this really?”
I agree...there’s something about the ‘tone’ of the article that’s off, at least with me.
“Any senator who was not always for such things is not a conservative.”
In California some people who are pro-abortion consider themselves to be ‘conservative’, since abortion is ‘empowering’ the the individual, over the state.
...I don’t like when the term is loosely thrown around.
I have a better idea.
Terminate the U.S. department of education, end all federal money budgeted for “education”, including all of that department’s budget and any “education” allocated expenditures run outside of that department, and then reduce federal personal taxes commensurately.
Then our GOP governors and legislatures can get a hold on their own states education departments and implement Marxist zeroing reforms.
Consider the source of the article. It wasn't written by a conservative, because if it was, it wouldn't include the phrase, "But “conservatives” in Congress don’t see that". You see, a conservative would go for the core issues at hand.
The bill creates larger government, greater bureaucracy and consumes more tax dollars. To what end? Is their any really benefit to you or me?
As for the government deducing your income from taxes as you suggest, I would be quite fine if government knew zero about my income and knew nothing about the taxes I paid. Tax me with a use/sales tax instead. Get rid of the forms, tax accountants and lawyers. Be efficient.
Government need not know anything about my education. It is fine for any employer I have, but it really isn't anyone else's business. Almost everything done with education these days has zero to do with improving the quality of education. The proof is obvious. Since when has education become better. Every moment, every dollar spend on something other than real education moves us away from better education.
A real conservative should say government needs to get out of the business of student loans. Move that solely back in the private sector. Let banks access the risk of loaning tens of thousands of dollars to some "studies" major. The increased cost and decreased substance of education is directly related to ease of obtaining funds from government.
All of this can be distilled to one simple thing. Conservatives should be all about eliminating government, its spending, regulation, public sector debt, and taxes. There was a time when we didn't have all this government. We not only survived, we thrived.
The federal Department of Education probably has the Social Security numbers of students who take out federal loans.
The IRS certainly does have W-2 information based on Social Security numbers.
Prospective college students and their parents should take a look at this before signing for any student loan:
https://www.newyorkfed.org/research/college-labor-market/college-labor-market_compare-majors.html
Very good data
I do wonder what underemployment is (how is it defined in the data).
I used to send out resumes with the information listed.
Some were sent to federal government agencies.
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.