Proposed Bill Would Require IDs for Prepaid Cell Phones

Finally a balanced view on this. Most people go straight to Big Brother analogy without really thinking this through. Most of us already have bank cards, or any number of ways of being tracked down. While there is a need for anonymous communication (for the reasons you pointed out), the larger benefits of a prepaid option to cell phones is at stake. In the US we had the wool over our eyes for too long, in a protected, contract-based market. I switched to prepaid on Net10 and would never give that up to go back on contract like before. I switched because I value my freedom and right to choose or change as I please. I would provide my ID happily to keep my prepaid phone and maintain that right.

Anyone who is up to no good knows how to get fake id. Sheesh.

If you would like a new cell phone for FREE up front with no rebate involved, I have found the place where you can get it. The company offers service from all of the major wireless providers and also ships phones that are ordered out FedEx next day air for FREE. Stop paying too much in the stores and get the best deal you will find at CELLULARPLUSSALES.com and you will find the BEST deals around.

Silk is right. Anyone can get a fake ID. I used to do credit checks for cell phone customers. WE could catch some, but there were hundreds that got processed. In Southern California, sales agents would fight me over the phone on phoney IDs and SS numbers. I would tell them they are not valid and they would get angry, hang up on me and call immediately into another processor.
So the govt bill may be good, but people will always find a way around it.

Last I checked the President doesn't make laws. That's Congress' job. The President signs laws into effect proposed to him or he can veto them but President Obama doesn't make the laws himself.

all a person has to do is get any prepaid calling card and use a pay phone to make threats. they dont require ID for them.

This isn't about criminals using cell phones to conduct their business anonymously. It's about the bigger picture. It's about Congress and the rest of our elected officials passing laws every day that put more and more power into the hands of the Government. It's about abuse of power. Slipping laws into budget bills that must be signed, back-door deals for votes. If nothing else, recent events should have opened the eyes of the American Public about the lack of integrity in Government and the sleazy way in which they go about their business every day. By the people for the people. Not by the Politicians for the Government to do as they wish. Time for the American Public to demand oversight and the means to correct runaway Government.

Well He SHOULD make our laws. This man's smartness is underplayed, He is much smarter than anyone else alive. He should make all our laws and then we wouldn't have to worry about all the racists being elected in Nov. 2010. Which is what the tea bag people want.

The reason congress can sneak unwanted laws into bills, is because the President does not have the LINE-ITEM veto. President Reagan wanted this, but congress refused to allow it. We need more conservatives in congress, and we will probably get them in November.

Gerdawg, I would like to point something out to you. In the thirties, a country tried just what you are saying. They allowed one man to make the laws. He led his people straight to hell in a bucket. His laws resulted in the deaths of six million innocent jews, millions of civilians and soldiers worldwide, and half of his country communist for forty years. His name was Adolph Hitler. He did the world a favor by shooting himself. Do you want to have another fuerer? In Arabic countries, they sometimes have one man making the laws, but their parliaments hold them in check. (I don't know about Iran.)

Besides, what if the American people DID elect a racist? Lots of minorities would be in trouble then. And what if they elected a faith-healer to make the laws? That would be the end of Medicare.

Sure, you need my ID for a prepaid cell, but you can't ask for it to vote. I think it's infinitely more important to have it for voting than to purchase a product. Stupid so stupid.

The last time I checked, John Cornyn--he's one of the Senators from the state I live in--was a rather conservative Republican. I rather doubt that President Obama has anything to do with this.

The major problem with is this simply increases the hassle/paranoia of the innocent consumer to provide a warm fuzzy feeling of doing something while truly accomplishing nothing.

Prepaid phones were developed for those consumers whom either couldnt afford or didnt want a long-term contract. However it didnt take long for criminals to discover the negligible cost and inability to track/track make them ideal disposables once the crime was done -- however usage leaves traceable fingerprints. Apparently the criminals solved that little problem so now the authorities want to require ids recorded upon purchase so somebody can trace the phone back to whomever purchased it in the event of a terrorist act -- but what is the chance that id was legit? (or if was, wasnt itself stolen?)

Regardless, it still remains a problem of determining ownership AFTER the event; which in the case of terrorism is likely the little Martyred pieces at the center of the explosion.