1.13.00
Orwellian 'Driver Privacy Act' Upheld By Supreme Ct. Is Anything BUT



And just HOW bad, exactly, IS this completely deceptively-named "Driver's
Privacy Protection Act?" You may not believe how bad it really is, but I
do. Let's just say that the impact of the implementation of this bill, which
the U.S. Supreme Court has now given the green light to, is literally in
effect the EXACT OPPOSITE of what the title of this law implies AND in
fact clearly STATES: and to a MASSIVE DEGREE.

The fascistic, totalitarian nightmare envisioned for the human race by
author George Orwell is beyond the merest iota of doubt rapidly
manifesting itself to a greater and greater extent -- at least here in
the United States in the year 2000.

PLEASE do read the articles and commentary we've forwarded below to get a
true picture of what is going on with this horrifying legislation.


Time, perhaps, to cash in American citizenship for that of some other,
hopefully less diseased and rotten land???????



NewsHawk® Inc.
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
Subject: 
         Fwd: [FP] Alert: Big Brother on the way


======================================================================
SCAN THIS NEWS
1.13.2000

Alert: Big Brother on the way

---
Please forward this message to everyone you know who is concerned about
privacy and rights.

I called this message an "ALERT" primarily because there is misinformation
beginning to circulate about the recent Supreme Court decision which
overturned three lower court rulings in the matter of the falsely named
Driver' Privacy Protection Act of 1994 (DPPA).

It is very important that people understand that this Act was intentionally
misnamed to get it through Congress and to fool uninformed Americans into
believing that it would "protect their privacy" when in fact it does just
the opposite. (After all, what self-respecting representatives would want
known for having voted against a "privacy" bill?) This was a trick -- a
ruse. This is a horrible law. But worse still, some privacy groups are
heralding the decision which will work against privacy.

The bill contains one, single-sentence paragraph ostensibly limiting the
release of information, (and even this provision effectively only prohibits
release of information to citizens). However, the Act has fifteen
"exception" clauses authorizing release to every "Big Brother" type entity
imaginable for a multitude of authorized uses.

The Court's decision will result in the establishment of a multitude of
centralized databases, all authorized by the DPPA.

This ruling will have a devastating, long-range impact on the battle for
"privacy," but an even more devastating impact on the battle to regain lost
rights. Anyone who contends otherwise does not understand, or simply has not
read, the law.

I do not normally urge readers to forward ScanThisNews Alerts, but due to
the importance of this issue, and the potential for misunderstanding because
of the Act's name, and the misinformation that is beginning to
circulate, I
encourage you to forward this message to others.

Scott
---

Supreme Court gives ok to centralized databases
(with support by some misinformed "privacy groups")

The ruling on Wednesday by the US Supreme Court reversing three lower court
decisions (where it was held that the Driver's Privacy Protection Act of
1994 was unconstitutional), paves the way for Big Brother to establish
centralized databases on every citizen.

The Act (DPPA) authorizes disclosure of personal information from motor
vehicle and driver license records "for use by a business to verify the
accuracy of personal information submitted to that business and to prevent
fraud." It also permits disclosure for use by any government agency,
including any court or law enforcement agency, in carrying out its
functions.

Under the authority of the DPPA, a New Hampshire company, Image Data, began
purchasing driver's records from states for the development of a central
database to be used to "prevent fraud." The company intended to market to
private retailers access to their central database so that customer identity
could be instantly verified during checking and credit card transactions.

In his January, 1999 State of the Union Address, President Clinton announced
a new, federally run "digital mug shot" database program. While details as
to how this database would be developed were not revealed in the Address,
some clues are provided in other federal publications.

An official booklet published by the US Department of Transportation with
help of the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators for the
benefit of law enforcement, The Highway Safety Deskbook, states:

: With a central image database of every driver in a state, the
: public safety community has a ready-made storehouse of photos to
: be used in criminal investigations. Due to the electronic nature
: of these images, they can be obtained in seconds via a computer
: retrieval unit in the department or even faxed or thermal printed
: directly to the patrol car. These same images can also be brought
: into a photo array for suspect identification.
:
: The uses for these images are limited only by the wants and needs
: of the public safety community.

Clearly the "mug shot" database envisioned by President Clinton is the same
one descried in the DoT report which states that it will be developed using
driver license photos. The DPPA will facilitate the development or such a
database.

This DPPA law is the worst thing that could have happened to anyone who
regards their personal information as "theirs" and "private." This Act
wrests control over private information held by the states away from the
states and citizens, and places it instead in the hands of a centralized
federal government which has expressed its intentions of developing a
central database of drivers' photos and identifying data.

Sadly, some groups who do not fully understand the implications of the
DPPA -- and the true anti-privacy, big government motives behind its
implementation -- are praising the Court's DPPA ruling. This is a huge
mistake which will be proven out over the coming years as more and more
centralized databases are established using drivers license and motor
vehicle records collected under the authority of the DPPA.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

[another report]

Supremes put license date on auction block

The US Supreme Court ruled on Wednesday that states must release private
driver records as required under a falsely named, pretentious law
enacted in
1994.

The federal Drivers Privacy Protection Act requires (DPPA) requires states
to release private records to a multitude of federal agencies under numerous
federal programs. It also allows departments of motor vehicles to sell
drivers information such as names, addressees, social security numbers, and
photos to private third party entities. This fact is often missed by the
trusting public, and even by many so-called "privacy groups," because of the
deceptive name given to the bill, "drivers privacy protection act."

A few "privacy groups" are even singing the praises of this "privacy
destroying" ruling, having also been tricked by the name which includes the
phrase "privacy protection."

In ruling that the DPPA was "constitutional," the Court reversed three lower
court rulings from South Carolina, Alabama, and Colorado -- all three of
which had ruled the DPPA was violated the Tenth Amendment (among other
things).

Under the DPPA, the federal government will take full control over all
state-held driver and motor vehicle records. The sole purpose of the Act was
in fact to wrench away authority over these records from the states.

One provision in the DPPA permits states to disclose personal information
from motor vehicle records for use in verifying information submitted to a
business, to prevent fraud, or to pursue legal remedies where it is believed
that inaccurate information was submitted to a business or agency.

Based upon this permissive clause, almost immediately after the misnamed
"DPPA" was adopted, a company formed specifically to develop a huge database
of driver records for use by retail outlets in verifying the identity of
customers. The company, Image Data LLC of Nashua, NH, began purchasing
records from several states, including South Carolina, based solely upon the
authority under the DPPA. The company intended to install small "image
monitors" at retail outlets (who purchased their service) which would
display a customer's driver's license photo during transactions where
identity needed to be confirmed. The equipment would have allowed stores to
"swipe" bar-coded licenses or magnetic-strip credit cards through a reader
which would then retrieve the "verifying" photos and other data through
phone wire connections to Image Data's database.

It was later learned that among the drivers information sold to Image Data
included children's photos taken from state-issued identity cards.

In September of '99, the Washington Post reported that the Secret Service
provided funding for the Image Data operation. As a consequence of public
objections, and the fact that the provisional Act (the DPPA) which
authorized the sale had been ruled unconstitutional by three courts, Image
Data very reluctantly announced that it would suspend its purchase of
license data.

As a result of the Supreme Court ruling on Wednesday upholding the DPPA,
businesses can now begin to develop such databases as the one first
undertaken by Image Data.

The DPPA requires disclosure of personal information "for use in connection
with matters of motor vehicle or driver safety and theft, motor vehicle
emissions, motor vehicle product alterations, recalls, or advisories,
performance monitoring of motor vehicles and dealers by motor vehicle
manufacturers, and removal of non-owner records from the original owner
records of motor vehicle manufacturers to carry out the purposes of
titles I
and IV of the Anti Car Theft Act of 1992, the Automobile Information
Disclosure Act, the Clean Air Act, and chapters 301, 305, and 321-331 of
title 49." 18 U S C 2721(b).

The DPPA also permits DMVs to disclose personal information from motor
vehicle records for use "by any government agency" or by "any private person
or entity acting on behalf of a Federal, State or local agency in carrying
out its functions." 18 USC 2721(b)(1) (1994 ed. and Supp. III). The Act also
allows States to divulge drivers' personal information for any
state-authorized purpose relating to the operation of a motor vehicle or
public safety, 2721(b)(14); for use in connection with car safety,
prevention of car theft, and promotion of driver safety, 2721(b)(2); for use
by a business to verify the accuracy of personal information submitted to
that business and to prevent fraud or pursue legal remedies if the
information that the individual submitted to the business is revealed to
have been inaccurate, 2721(b)(3); in connection with court, agency, or
self-regulatory body proceedings, 2721(b)(4); for research purposes so long
as the information is not further disclosed or used to contact the
individuals to whom the data pertain, 2721(b)(5); for use by insurers in
connection with claims investigations, antifraud activities, rating or
underwriting, 2721(b)(6); to notify vehicle owners that their vehicle has
been towed or impounded, 2721(b)(7); for use by licensed private
investigative agencies or security services for any purpose permitted by the
DPPA, 18 U. S. C. 2721(b)(8); and in connection with private toll
transportation services, 2721(b)(10).

---

Clinton announces "mug shot" database
http://www.networkusa.org/fingerprint/page1/fp-digital-mug-shot-photos.html

DoT Highway Safety Deskbook
http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/people/injury/enforce/deskbk.html

Secret Service aided license photo database
http://www.cnn.com/US/9902/18/license.photos/

U.S. Helped Fund License Photo Database
http://washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/business/daily/feb99/privacy18.htm

Driver's Privacy Protection Act of 1994 as codified
http://www.networkusa.org/fingerprint/page1b/fp-dmv-records-18-usc-123.html

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Social security is the bane of individual liberty. - SAM
======================================================================
======================================================================
Reply to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
======================================================================

----------------------------------------------------------------------
             "Scan This News" is Sponsored by S.C.A.N.
           Host of the "FIGHT THE FINGERPRINT!" web page:
                www.networkusa.org/fingerprint.shtml
----------------------------------------------------------------------
             "Scan This News" is Sponsored by S.C.A.N.


Reply via email to