By Mark Hyman on 11.20.09 @ 6:08AM
Government rules and their enforcers give new meaning to the
practice of identify theft.
Montana's Conrad Burns tells a sad, but revealing story
about government bureaucrats and their rules. Shortly after the
Transportation Security Administration assumed control of airport
security and Burns was still serving in Congress he was at
Washington's National Airport for a flight home. National is the
airport used almost exclusively by members of Congress to fly in
and out of the nation's capital.
Burns showed his U.S. Senate identification to a TSA agent
who refused to accept it, telling him she was not familiar with
the government-issued photo ID. He had to produce another form of
picture ID she demanded. In an attempt to be funny, Burns offered
his Sam's Club shopping card. The agent accepted it and sent
Burns on his way.
There is no shortage of shameful exploits by TSA agents and
other airport security personnel in the post 9/11 era. An
octogenarian World War II hero was delayed and repeatedly
searched when he attempted to board a plan carrying his
Congressional Medal of Honor. A planeload of soldiers were forced
to remain in their jetliner during a four-hour layover. TSA
officials ruled the servicemen posed a security threat because
they had weapons stored in the belly of the aircraft. The
soldiers were en route home after a tour of duty in Afghanistan.
Another soldier, who had his jaw wired shut following surgery for
a bullet wound, was prohibited from boarding his aircraft because
he possessed a small pair of wire cutters required to cut open
his jaw in a medical emergency.
These embarrassing episodes are not surprising to anyone
familiar with government bureaucrats armed with "rules, policies
and procedures" and employing no commonsense. Unfortunately,
crafting and issuing rules and regulations and then mindlessly
enforcing them without considering the implications is a longtime
government pastime.
I have witnessed countless examples of bureaucrats in
action with their rules while serving as a commissioned officer
with nearly 30 years of total service on active duty and in the
reserves in the Navy.
Five years ago, a Navy lawyer issued a new decree that
military personnel were no longer permitted to possess cellular
telephones with built-in cameras while on Navy facilities.
Sailors armed with such consumer electronics posed a national
security risk, he reasoned, because they could take photographs
on base that could potentially be exploited by terrorist sleeper
cells. Seriously.
In a series of back and forth discussions I pointed out
that Navy Exchanges on base often sell these same cell phones as
well as significantly higher resolution cameras (which he did not
consider banning). Besides, I asked him, why is it we can trust
sailors with access to classified information, high performance
aircraft, missiles and other weaponry and we issue them handguns,
but we can't trust them with cell phone cameras? He grudgingly
rescinded his ban.
Six months ago, I had a similar run-in with bureaucratic
rules and logic. I needed to renew my military identification.
Unlike the old, familiar green ID card, the new identification
card has an embedded computer chip that allows the ID card to
double as a smart card. Called a "common access card," the Navy
CAC is used as both identification and to access the Navy's
intranet computer system via a smart card reader.
My CAC had expired days earlier so I contacted an issuing
office to get a replacement. A clerk in the ID card office
informed me that all appointments had to be made online using the
intranet. Yet, my expired CAC prevented me from using the
intranet system. In spite of my predicament the clerk told me,
"Our policy requires all appointments to be scheduled online. If
you are unable to use the intranet, then there is nothing more I
can do." It sounded like the beginning of an Abbott and Costello
routine.
Rather than fight this particular battle, I decided to
renew my CAC at another issuing office. While there, I was asked
to produce a picture ID. I showed my state driver's license. I
was then asked for a second form of ID and was told the CAC was
not acceptable since it expired five days earlier. A week earlier
it would have been valid, but on this day it was deemed
worthless. So I showed the clerk my company-issued ID card that
looked as though it was made on an office computer and laminated
at the local Kinko's. As a matter of fact, that was exactly how
that ID was manufactured. But it was good enough. The clerk
accepted the flimsy company ID over the just-expired military
CAC.
It was déjà vu all over again when I recently accompanied
my wife to get a replacement for her military dependent ID card,
which she had lost. The clerk accepted her driver's license as
valid proof of identification, but ruled her county
government-issued photo ID was not acceptable. However, she was
informed her county government-issued voter registration ID,
which does not have a photograph, was acceptable. She could also
use a Social Security card (without a photo) but, the clerk
warned, she could not use her U.S. passport because it had
expired a few years earlier. ("Hey, Abbott!")
The irony is that I was in my wife's presence, I had
multiple picture identifications (including my military CAC) to
prove my identification, she had her driver's license, I vouched
for her, and she is registered in the Defense Department
database. Yet, the rules allowed no flexibility. A county
government-issued picture ID was deemed invalid, but a county
government-issued voter registration without a picture was
acceptable.
On principle, I pursued this matter through the next four
higher levels of supervisors with each one telling me the same
thing. They agreed the rules were absurd but none of them wanted
to take the bold step of making an exception.
We were eventually forced to leave and return with a second
form of acceptable identification. My wife dug through her files
and offered an old voter registration card issued in 1980 and
31-year old high school identification. Both were deemed
acceptable forms of ID and she was immediately issued a new
military dependent ID card.
Just think of it. Her recently expired passport was ruled
unacceptable but her three-decade old high school ID that was so
crudely fashioned that it made my company-manufactured ID appear
to be high-tech was deemed valid. You cannot make up this stuff.
Yet, it all fell nicely within the rules: student IDs (regardless
how old) are acceptable forms of identification. Same thing held
for her nearly 30-year old voter registration card.
What makes this episode even sadder is that the military
CAC is generally not accepted as a valid form of identification
for use by visitors to the Pentagon. Visitors must also have a
Pentagon-issued ID or another form of identification such as a
state driver's license. The reason, according to a security
officer, is that at least one machine that manufactures CACs and
several hundred blank CACs are missing and presumed to have been
stolen. Security officials do not know which CAC is valid and
which is a forgery.
In the meantime, bureaucrats with badges will ensure that
only legitimate military wives, husbands, and children use the
on-base commissary, auto hobby shop, and McDonald's
restaurant.