Apparently, our taxes alone aren’t enough to satisfy the greedy hand of government. State government’s have been selling the confidential information you provide to the DMV when you apply for a drivers license, including your photograph, for many years. The Direct Marketing Association (i.e., junk mailers and telemarketers) says ‘‘DMV records have always been public information and should remain so.’’ I guess I’m the last to know, because it’s news to me. The only reason I happened to find out was that I ran across a Wired Magazine story about it while I was looking for something else. Even so, the story wasn’t actually about the selling of DMV records, instead it was about a senate bill proposed by Senator Richard Shelby (R-Alabama), that would outlaw the sale of drivers license information by the various states. According to the Wired Magazine story, ‘‘The bill’s backers took action following recent reports that Image Data, a New Hampshire-based company, was assembling a national database of drivers license and picture information. The U.S. Secret Service contributed money to the development of the firm’s data bank.’’
For more details, see: http://www.wired.com/news/news/story/20435.html For complete text of the proposed Senate Bill 1143 that would have prohibited the sale of DMV info (it has been stalled in the Senate since 6/28/99, or as the Senate says ‘‘Motion to Invoke Cloture on Motion to Proceed to Consider S. 1143 passed by Yea-Nay Vote. 49-40’’), see: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d106:s.01143: Look near the end of the bill for ‘‘SEC. 339. (a) PROHIBITION- Except as provided in subsection (c), no recipient of funds made available under this Act may sell, or otherwise provide to another person or entity, personal information (as defined in 18 U.S.C. Section 2725(3)) contained in a driver's license, or in any motor vehicle record (as defined in 18 U.S.C. Section 2725(1)) without the express written consent of the individual to whom the information pertains.’’
In upholding another 1994 law whose title (the ‘‘Driver's Privacy Protection Act’’) is phrased in the new speak of government bureaucrats (i.e., the name implies the exact opposite of what it actually does), on 1/12/2000 the Supreme Court unanimously ruled that drivers’ personal, identifying information is an article of commerce, and that states may disclose drivers' personal information for fourteen various and sundry reasons including ‘‘For bulk distribution for surveys, marketing or solicitations...’’ and that the information can be ‘‘used, rented, or sold.’’ For details of the law, see DPPA. The only positive thing that can be said about this law is that although it doesn't require the states to obtain a persons permission before selling his/her personal information, it does require that the states provide a means by which individuals can prohibit the sale of their personal drivers license information by requesting that it be withheld. However, in spite of the unanimous vote by the Supreme Court and what might be viewed as good intentions, this law is clearly in violation of the Tenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution which states ‘‘The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.’’ Clearly, the power to sell confidential information about its citizens was never delegated to the Federal Government in the Constitution. It is of course dastardly for any state to do such a thing, but that is an issue between the citizens of each state and their state government. Once the Federal Government has totally usurped the powers that rightfully belong to the states, we will no longer be living in a free republic, and the United States of America (USA) may as well change it's name to the United Socialist States of America (USSA).
| Late one night a mugger wearing a ski mask jumped into the path of a well-dressed man and stuck a gun in his ribs. "Give me your money," he demanded.
Indignant, the affluent man replied, "You can't do this! I'm a U.S. congressman." "In that case," replied the robber, "give me my money." |
|
|