Bill banning forced identity-chip implants clears House
That's why the Philadelphia Democrat introduced a bill, passed unanimously last week by the House, that would ban the forced implantation of computer chips in humans.
Conjuring Orwellian images, Josephs worries the identification devices - the size of a grain of rice - could lead to a real-life Big Brother nightmare.
"I'm doing, I think, what the legislature does too little of," she said. "This is a problem on the horizon, and I want to address it before it becomes a societal disgrace."
Though the technology hasn't debuted in Pennsylvania, VeriChip, a company in Florida, received federal Food and Drug Administration clearance in 2004 to market the implanted microchips, which were tested on 200 Alzheimer's patients.
Injected into the triceps, the chips have unique 16-digit codes and GPS capabilities that allow nursing homes to find wandering patients.
"I think it's really horrible that we want to chip them like barcoded packages of meat," said Kim Sultzbaugh, a research specialist who helped Josephs write the bill.
California, North Dakota, and Wisconsin have enacted laws similar to the ban Josephs is proposing.
The technology can also be used for security, as in a widely reported case in Mexico. There, the implants were required for some government employees to enter restricted buildings.
A bar in Scotland even offers to implant patrons with chips that allow them to purchase pints without a credit card, according to news accounts.
Despite the technology's potential usefulness, Sultzbaugh said, some Christian groups liken the identification devices to the "mark of the beast," a Satanic mark described in the Book of Revelation and represented by the number 666.
Josephs said electronic ankle bracelets could keep track of someone in a less-invasive manner.
But for some "murderers, killers, and rapists," ankle bracelets won't do the trick, said State Rep. Dan Moul (R., Adams).
Moul amended Josephs' bill to allow chips to be implanted by court order. The bill also would allow the chips to be implanted in Guantanamo Bay detainees who end up in Pennsylvania.
"Terrorists could take that ankle bracelet off with a saw and strap it to a dog and let them run around," Moul said. "We need to know if these people are returning to the war to fight against America."
Josephs called Moul's changes "inflammatory" and "sensational" and hopes the Senate throws them out when it considers the measure.
1 comment:
This is great news, BUT everyone should remember that Josephs sold Pennsylvanians out last year on Real ID.
She was an original co-sponsor of HB 1351, which was introduced by State Rep. Sam Rohrer, which would block Real ID AND stop the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (PennDOT) from converting PA residents’ images into biometric faceprints, which had been going on behind the scenes since 2006.
HB 1351 was killed in Committee by her fellow Democrat Curtis Thomas. Despite the fact that every single person who came out to the hearings he held on the bill throughout the state in early 2008 was vehemently against Real ID and adamantly in favor of 1351, he refused to let it out of committee. Thomas instead introduced HR 2537, which was a gutted version of 1351 which would NOT stop the biometric faceprints.
When that bill got to the floor Rohrer introduced an amendment to essential take the language back to that of 1351 and give the bill teeth again. Josephs voted against it even though she was an original co-sponsor of 1351. The amendment lost by a narrow margin (about 108-92 I think).
Thomas screwed PA residents by killing 1351 at the behest of the Democratic governor, Ed Rendell, who had authorized the multi-million-dollar contract extension with L-1/Viisage which started the use of the "FaceEXPLORER". Joseph and other Democrats then dropped their support for 1351 and voted against the Rohrer amendment to 2537 to seal the deal and protect Rendell from having to sign the bill (and thus admit that he had done wrong in the first place) or veto it, which would not score him points with the electorate.
And that’s not to say that Democrats are bad and Republicans are good though. If it were Republicans in power they probably would have done the same thing if it was politically expedient. The fact is you either obey your oath and stand for liberty and the Constitution or you are a shameful criminal. Most politicians fall into the latter category, regardless of what letter is next to their name.
Post a Comment