Gingrich braves the wrath of libertarians and privacy campaigners to endorse it. In today’s living-online, GPS-tracked world, I think a national identity card would find wide acceptance.Wait! Since when do liberal columnists love tough ID card policies? I don't know about Keller specifically, but I thought it was an article of faith that requiring a photo ID for voting is about disenfranchising minorities. Suddenly, a card with fingerprints is supposed to be a smart, brave, and compassionate idea?
Keller is talking about immigration policy, but I have to go over to Newt's website to puzzle it out:
There has to be a legal guest worker program....
We can build on the universal system of biometric, tamper-proof visa documents that all visitors must have, and invite a private-sector firm with a proven track record to monitor the guest worker program.
For guest workers, the new tamper-proof, biometric cards will replace the e-verify system, which has some promising elements, but is too error-prone. Employers will be able to swipe prospective employees biometric cards, and immediately be able to confirm that these workers are in the country legally.Oh, I see. Only the guest workers will need to have these cards in order to work. Not everyone else. Keller doesn't mention that, for some reason. Newt seems to be simply opening a path for some noncitizens to work here legally and to prove that's what they are doing. Obviously, others would continue to work here without the documentation, and then there's the problem of all the Hispanic people who really are citizens who might be hassled over their lack of cards. Why isn't Keller concerned about that? Remember all the fuss about ID-checking back in 2010 when Arizona adopted a new immigration policy?
UPDATE: Wow! Less than an hour after I posted this, the Supreme Court announced it was taking a case about the Arizona immigration law mentioned above! (I'll put up a new post about that.)