Bill Clinton suggests it might be a good idea to put photos
on Social Security cards, which would make photo-ID more acceptable to insure
fraud-free voting.
Several people leaped to his support. Some, however, noted
that such a change could lead to a national identification card, which is
questioned by concerned people up and down the political spectrum.
Did anyone, however, point out the obvious reason not to
mess SS cards?
Many of them are issued to infants. What good would
photographs do when the little one grows old enough to exercise the franchise?
Social Security cards were intended to last for life. They
were meant only for a hand-up for retirement. And, by the way, no one was ever
to know your SSN for any reason other than employers – as an example – for assuring
credit was made to the holder’s account.
When I got my card at age 15 in 1942, a bare six years after
the law became effective in 1936, I was told to hold my number in strictest
confidence. Now, every merchant granting
credit has it, among many others.
So, were photos now to be added to that card – now worn and
nearly tattered (oh yes, by law a holder may not enfold his card in plastic for
preservation) – it would have to be a new card. For younger people, cards would
need to be reissued with new photos many times to keep them useful.
Something simple practicality such as the need for many
updates of cards is just overlooked, or it would seem from press reports.
Nonetheless, it is good that needed safeguards for
restricting voting to citizens is recognized in some unexpected quarters.
Eh? Yeah, I guess Clinton’s suggestion implied citizenship.
