Archive for July, 2008

GT VERSES GRT DO YOU KNOW THE DIFFERENCE?

Friday, July 18th, 2008

Good day to you,

I have been asked some very pointed and interesting questions concerning GT (formerly referred to as ITC (International Tonnage Convention) and now meaning GT)) verses GRT (Gross Register Tons) which used to be called Gross Ton (GT). 

Are you confused yet?  Boy howdy, I can tell you I was and for a very long time, until I finally got my mind wrapped around the concept that I had to work with two (2) sets of regulations.  The Domestic U. S. regulations primarily in the 46 CFR parts 1-40, and the International (STCW) regulations.

For years and years, in our domestic regulations we, in the CG REC’s, referred to tonnage only as gross tons and that had absolutely NOTHING to do with STCW.   We had been working with the International Tonnage Convention (ITC) for years and were familiar with that.  So, with the advent of the STCW convention, we had a whole lot of re-learning to do.  ITC became GT and GT became GRT.  Whew, how confusing is that?  Oh yes, when do we apply GT/GRT and to where?  This to me, was far more confusing than when the major regulation change took place in 1987.

Keep in mind that there are only two (2) licenses issued by the USCG that have duel tonnages listed, and they are licenses of not more than 200 GRT (formerly know as gross tons) with 500 GT (formerly known as ITC tons); licenses of 150 GRT or less do not get duel tonnage on their license, and licenses of not more than 1600 GRT gets 3000 GT.  Licenses of 500 GRT do not get duel tonnages.  All the rest of the domestic licenses are strictly GRT, Except for the Exceptions of course.  Oh yes, one of these exceptions is Towing and I forgot Fishing too.  Ain’t this fun?

Do I still get confused?  You can bet your booties I do.  So keep in mind, if I still get confused (and I work with this stuff all of the time), how the heck would you know?  You don’t work with the technical (regulation) side of your licenses, you just work and do the jobs you were trained to do, and you rely on folks like me and the CG to guide you.

Maybe someday the regulations won’t be so confusing but, after 22 years in the REC, I am not going to hold my breath.

 Touch Keys with you later,

N.

Home Land Security?

Friday, July 18th, 2008

Since Home Land Security is extremely important to the Maritime Industry, this article, though not directed at the Maritime Industry per say, should be read carefully.  NMC is a perfect example of “Contract” personnel with no background in the industry.  Mr. Avant is, I am sure, using sources that are readily available to him in the “belt way”.  There is a reason for the term “Belt Way Bandits”.  Lets hope he has more since that to assume that he is nothing more than a convient “Scape Goat” to those higher up the food chain.

Touch Keys with you later.

N.

House Homeland Security Committee’s staff said to be in turmoil

Democratic and Republican congressional aides say there is turmoil within the the House Homeland Security Committee’s majority staff and that oversight work is being eclipsed by a focus on promoting contracting opportunities for small and minority-owned businesses.

Sources who spoke only if they could remain anonymous said they are particularly concerned that the committee’s new staff director, I. Lanier Avant, does not have the qualifications to lead the committee and faces a conflict of interest because he continues to serve as chief of staff in the congressional office of House Homeland Security Committee Chairman Bennie Thompson, D-Miss.

They expressed concern that Avant must balance his duties on Thompson’s personal staff, which includes attention to politics and fundraising, and managing the heavy responsibilities of running the committee, which he began doing last month.

Avant does not have a security clearance. Sources said that raises questions about his ability to make decisions on issues involving classified information.

Speaking candidly with CongressDaily, Avant said he does “the bulk of [Thompson’s] political work.”

But the 30-year-old aide said he knows the line between his jobs.

The morning before the interview, for example, Avant said he attended a fundraiser for Thompson. But he said he took off his fundraising hat when he came into the committee’s office.

He said no fundraising activity takes place inside the committee’s office. “I know the firewall and I just told you what the firewall was as evidence of the fact that I know it,” Avant said.

“I don’t claim to be some genius but I’m smart enough to figure that out,” he added. “For other people there may be a hazier line; they should probably just stick with the one hat.”

Thompson, he added, has promoted a new deputy chief of staff in his personal office who will be assuming more responsibilities.

Thompson rebuffed the concerns Monday. “It’s not a conflict of interest for me,” Thompson said. About Avant’s credentials, he said: “He fits the qualifications of the chairman.”

But Thompson refused to answer additional questions because CongressDaily would not disclose the names of sources who came forward with concerns.

It is not a violation of House rules for one aide to serve as chief of staff and committee staff director for a lawmaker. The majority staff director of the House Small Business Committee, for example, heads Small Business Chairwoman Nydia Velazquez’s personal office.

But sources said the arrangement with Avant has made Thompson’s agenda of reaching out and helping small, minority-owned and disadvantaged businesses secure homeland security contracts the overriding focus of the committee staff. Not enough attention has been paid to broader national security matters, the sources said.

Thompson created an electronic newsletter, Business Opportunities at DHS, which includes an e-mail address — DHSBizOps@mail.house.gov — that small and disadvantaged businesses can use to tell the committee if they feel they are being treated unfairly by the department.

“Their Web site is selling themselves as people who give out contracts at DHS,” one source said. “This is all misusing resources as far as I’m concerned.”

The Democratic staff has been holding a series of nonpublic morning meetings in the committee’s office with top executives from several companies. The staff also has organized public technology fairs and held its first so-called diversity roundtable last month.

Thompson also sent a letter to large Homeland Security Department contractors last year and again in January asking them to explain the percentage of their work they subcontract to small and disadvantaged businesses.

Avant makes no excuses for the focus on helping those businesses.

“We don’t shy away from that,” he said. “I haven’t been in a meeting with the chairman where that [promoting minority small businesses] did not come out of his mouth. I don’t meet with people where it doesn’t come out of my mouth.”

A handful of senior aides have left the committee in recent weeks, including the staff director and directors for the panel’s Transportation Security Subcommittee, Emergency Communications Subcommittee and Management Subcommittee. The turnover comes at a time when the Democratic staff is investigating the preparations the Homeland Security Department is making to handle the upcoming transition to a new administration.

Avant said he “unequivocally” disputes claims that the committee staff is in turmoil. He said senior aides have left to take what they perceived as better jobs.

He said the committee has produced several homeland security bills in recent weeks, including seven that were approved by the House last month, and is trying to advance a chemical security bill.

When asked what his priorities are going forward, Avant said the committee will do a report on the threat that al Qaeda and other terrorist groups pose to the United States and on the nation’s preparedness for a pandemic influenza outbreak. Those reports might lead to legislation, he said.

Avant has worked only for Thompson, beginning as an intern and working his way up to chief of staff while earning his law degree from Howard University. He has also served as deputy staff director of the committee.

“I don’t come from an intel background. I don’t come from a military background. I don’t come from an executive agency. All of those are absolutely true,” Avant said. “But I know Capitol Hill. I know Washington. More importantly, I know the chairman.”

He added: “At the end of the day, as long as his goals get met, that’s all that matters.”

COMMENTS

  • As far as symptoms go, this is just the tip of the iceberg. Homeland Security has become a pork barrel, for building empires and getting contracts. All while the Department has a primary focus on undocumented workers rather than homeland safety, and is dabbling with burdensome and unproductive security measures. Seems like Mr. Avant is eminently qualified for the role.
  • This is scary. A 30-year old with no operational experience relevant to homeland security, splitting time with another full-time job?? It is impossible to imagine effective oversight in the constitutional sense of checks and balances coming from this assignment. Bad idea Bennie, bad idea. And in your face stubborn, “because he suits the Chairman,” does not become the Chairman at all.
  • The House Homeland Security Committee should be reserved for serious deliberation of very serious homeland security issues - not SBA work. Avant is not competent to be its staff director. If the Executive Branch proposed a comparable appointment within DHS with a frivolous unqualified candidate, House Homeland Security Committee Chairman Bennie Thompson would be all over the press criticizing the appointment as outrageously irresponsible. Thompson has now taken hypocrisy to a new level and seriously jeopardized the oversight of the security of our nation in doing so.

Has TSA bitten off more than it can chew?

Friday, July 18th, 2008

This article does not specifically address the “Water” side of things, but you can bet your boots it should.

Touch Keys with you later.

N.

House Democrats, TSA at odds over cargo screening mandate

A dispute surfaced Tuesday between House Democrats and Homeland Security officials over whether a 2007 congressional mandate requires the government to ensure that all U.S.-bound cargo carried by commercial airliners has been screened for weapons of mass destruction.

During a hearing, House Homeland Security Transportation Security Subcommittee Chairwoman Sheila Jackson Lee, D-Texas, called for GAO to do an assessment to clarify the reach of the mandate, which was included as part of a major bill that was enacted to implement unfulfilled recommendations of the 9/11 Commission.

The Transportation Security Administration has interpreted the mandate to mean that only air cargo being shipped from an airport inside the United States must be screened, John Sammon, an assistant administrator at the agency, told the subcommittee.

Democrats disputed that interpretation. “The interpretation would seem quite contrary to the intention of the Congress,” Jackson Lee said.

Rep. Edward Markey, D-Mass., read the language of the mandate to the officials.

According to the bill, the department “shall establish a system to screen 100 percent of cargo transported on passenger aircraft operated by an air carrier or foreign air carrier in air transportation or intrastate air transportation to ensure the security of all such passenger aircraft carrying cargo.”

“The system applies to foreign air carriers,” Markey said.

GAO will do an assessment of TSA’s interpretation compared to the language in the law, said Cathleen Berrick, the agency’s director of homeland security and justice issues.

Jackson Lee said the House Homeland Security Committee might need to draft “immediate” legislation if the TSA interpretation stands.

House Democrats have been waged in a pitched battle with the Bush administration and some congressional Republicans for several years over requiring all air cargo to be screened.

The mandate in the 2007 law requires that 50 percent of all air cargo is screened by February 2009 and 100 percent is screened by August 2010.

Sammon said TSA expects to meet that mandate for air cargo being shipped from a U.S. airport.

He said the agency is seeking $104 million in fiscal 2009 for the certified cargo screening program, which will use dogs, technology and inspectors to screen cargo.

The program will allow cargo screening facilities around the country to volunteer to screen cargo before it is transferred to aircraft operators and put aboard commercial aircraft.

Sammon said TSA plans to certify up to 80 shipping sites by February and 15,000 locations by August 2010.

He added that his agency intends to issue an interim final rule for the program by the end of the year.

“This program, which we anticipate deploying in fiscal 2009 will establish full supply chain security of air cargo and play a major role in overcoming the hurdles inherent in a 100 percent screening requirement,” Sammon said in written testimony to the subcommittee.

Berrick said TSA still needs to complete vulnerability assessments at airports and develop more specific plans for the program.

“The devil’s in the details,” she said.

SOME INFORMATION IS BETTER THAN NONE.

Wednesday, July 16th, 2008

Good day to you all.  Here is a question for you to ponder.

IS SOME INFORMATION IS BETTER THAN NONE? 

Here are a few of my thoughts on that.

1.  Yes, some is better than none if you are talking about a piece of cake to fill your empty belly.

2.  No, Half A**ed information leads to complications for you and the person giving you half of the information you really needed.

3.  No, I don’t like working harder, but I do like working smarter.  It is better to answer the question in total one time (much less work).  However, dot, dot, dot, if the question that is asked is not really the question needed to be asked, that is a horse of a different color. 

This comment is hard to explain, but for instance, if the mariner were to ask “how do I qualify for an Ocean license”, the answer would be “you need sea service on ocean or near coastal waters”, that is the correct answer, but for what license?  So the mariner should have asked “I hold a near coastal master 200, how do I get an ocean endorsement?”  This gives the person answering the question specifics and then they can go to the appropriate regulation which by the way is 46 CFR 10.424 and, for what it is worth, if I were telling this person the answer I would tell them to go for a master 500, it is MUCH easier to get.  Any way, you can see how easy it is go give the correct answer BUT to the wrong question.

Believe me when I say, I KNOW!  I have answered hundreds of thousands of these types of questions over my career.  I would give the correct answer to the question asked HOWEVER, the mariner really wanted something totally different, so we had to go back and forth until the real question came out.  SO my friends, when asking a question of me in particular, be very specific in your needs and don’t be offended if I ask you questions right back trying to dig out the real question, both of us will be much happier with the outcome.  If I give you an answer that is correct, but may lead you down a different path than you really needed or wanted, this could be VERY costly to you in time and money.

Here is a hint, never assume that my Crystal Ball is working, I’ll tell you right now it ain’t, and the Great Karnak I am not.  Short and sweet, I DON’T READ MINDS.

So, do you really think that SOME INFORMATION IS BETTER THAN NONE?

Touch Keys with you later,

N.

BI-ANNUAL EVALUATION

Tuesday, July 15th, 2008

Hello everyone,

It is time for you to do my EVALUATION.  Yup, I cannot set here thinking I am doing a good job without some feed back from you, ALL OF YOU.

I need to know what I can do to better improve the things I am doing for you.  To be perfectly honest, I get tunnel vision and can only see a very short distance, so I need your help to guide me in more beneficial directions for you the mariner.

 Tell me how you think I can improve my services.

Send your responses to nschumer@maritimelicensing.com  Be nice now BUT,above all, be honest.  If you don’t think I am doing a good job working with and for the mariners then let me know.  Give me ideas on how I can do a better job for you.  If you think I should broaden my blog to include other things of interest to the mariner, then let me know.  If I am doing a good job let me know, if I Stink, let me know.

 I can’t promise I will change everything, but I will at least have a better idea of what you would like to see me do. 

 Touch Keys with you later,

N.

Implementation of Vessel Security Officer Training & Certification

Wednesday, July 9th, 2008

I confess, I give up, I surrender!  I have been lax in getting this good stuff to you.  You need to get and read a copy of the;

 FEDERAL REGISTER / VOL. 73, NO. 98 / TUESDAY, MAY 20, 2008. 

There is 12 pages of really FINEEEEEEE reading there. 

 Be sure to get down to your local REC or TREC and make application for your Vessel Security Officer (VSO) endorsement on your STCW, be sure to take the appropriate course certificate with you. 

Also check out the Q & A on the CG website http://www.uscg.mil/STCW/ lots of interesting questions and answers there including a few that I asked.

 Remember, that you have to work through your local TREC or REC because NMC does not deal directly with the public.

Hummmmmm, makes one wonder just who NMC is working for now doesn’t it?

Touch Keys with you later,

N. 

CHANTIX MEDICAL ADVISORY FOR MERCHANT MARINERS

Tuesday, July 8th, 2008

Hello everyone,

There is a new Medical Alert sent out by the Coast Guard pertaining to the drug CHANTIX (varenicline).  For those of you who don’t know what that is, it is a drug to help people to stop smoking. 

 Reading the information pertaining to the side effects of this drug, it is a real HUM DINGER, so BEWARE AND TAKE HEED as this is truly serious stuff!  If you are using this drug or know someone who is please pass this information along to them.

Touch Keys with you later.

N.

June 26, 2008 Alert 2-08
Washington, DC

CHANTIX MEDICAL ADVISORY FOR MERCHANT MARINERS

On May 21, 2008, the Institute for Safe Medication Practices released a report on side effects and concerns associated with the use of Chantix (varenicline). Chantix is a medication used to help patients quit smoking.   To date, over four million prescriptions have been written in the United States.

The Institute for Safe Medication Practices report states the following: There are immediate safety concerns about the use of Chantix among persons operating aircraft, trains, buses, and other vehicles, or in other settings where a lapse in alertness or motor control could lead to massive, serious injury. Other examples include persons operating nuclear power reactors, high-rise construction cranes or life-sustaining medical
devices. Based on reports of sudden loss of consciousness, seizures, muscle spasms, vision disturbances, hallucinations, paranoia and psychosis, Chantix may not be safe to use in these settings. The extent to which Chantix has already contributed to accidental death and injury has not been fully investigated and reported.
For additional information access - http://www.ismp.org/docs/vareniclineStudy.asp .

Although not specifically mentioned in the report, the maritime domain is one setting where lapses in alertness or motor control can have catastrophic results. The safety of the maritime community and the public, and the protection of the environment are paramount. Ensuring that medications prescribed do not put mariners and others at increased risk of injury or death is essential.

The Coast Guard reminds all maritime industry personnel that mariners should not perform a safety-sensitive function on any vessel while under the influence of any substance that may negatively impact their performance. To that end, mariners are strongly warned that some prescription medications, over-the-counter medications, vitamins and dietary supplements, alone or in combination with other substances, may adversely affect an individual’s ability to perform critical functions and place the individual at risk of sudden incapacitation.   Mariners should seek the advice of their healthcare provider before taking any medications, vitamins or dietary
supplements.

If you are currently taking or have recently discontinued the use of Chantix, we strongly recommend that you consult with your healthcare provider to discuss potential side effects and your job performance requirements.   You and your healthcare provider should be alert to and monitor for all physical and psychological changes that may affect your performance, both while taking this medication as well as during the withdrawal period. If you are experiencing any of the psychiatric, cardiologic, musculoskeletal or visual side effects associated with Chantix, you should immediately cease performance of all duties related to your mariner credentials and contact your healthcare provider.

Questions regarding this notice may be addressed to Lieutenant Junior Grade Elizabeth Braker, Medical Evaluation Branch, Coast Guard National Maritime Center at (304) 433-3656 or Elizabeth.L.Braker@uscg.mil.

This safety alert is provided for informational purpose only and does not relieve any domestic or international safety, operational or material requirement.

*******

Office of Investigations and Analysis – http://marineinvestigations.us
To subscribe – Kenneth.W.Olsen@uscg.mil

Federal identity programs boost biometrics market

Monday, July 7th, 2008

Hello everyone, sorry I have not posted anything lately.  What can I say?  Life just up and got in the way.

 Here is something that I found that I thought would be of interest to all.  In my next post, I will be giving you my thoughts on the way things will be going in the future.  Who knows, it might be the next best seller on the SiFi channel.

I hope you all had a wonderful and Safe 4th.

Touch Keys with you Later,

N.

Federal identity programs boost biometrics market
By Chris Strohm, National Journal   07/03/08
 

In announcing major new regulations in January that set national standards for driver’s licenses under the 2005 Real ID Act, Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff declared, “This is a great teaching moment on the challenges of really reconfiguring a society.”Comment on this article in The Forum.Chertoff’s announcement was music to the ears of private companies and lobbyists who see major national security benefits, as well as the potential for big bucks, in helping agencies verify individuals’ identity. Federal programs like the one created by Real ID are being promoted by, and helping to boost, an industry that specializes in producing identity documents and collecting biometrics such as fingerprints and iris scans. Real ID does not have a biometrics requirement, but some industry officials think that it eventually will.

READ MORE ABOUT THE PLAYERS: These five companies are leading identity-solutions contractors for various programs by federal, state, and local governments.

The estimated value of potential contracts to implement so-called federal identity-solutions programs has more than doubled since 2006, rising from $890 million to $2 billion this year, according to Jeremy Grant, a senior vice president for the Stanford Group, which advises investors. Not surprisingly, several companies vying for a share of the market have plowed money into their lobbying activities — some by hiring former administration officials — according to interviews with industry insiders and a review of federal lobbying records.

But the industry faces a backlash from critics who argue that the government is recklessly weaving requirements for biometrics and identity verification into the fabric of the nation’s homeland security without adequate public debate.

“There is a little glass dome over the Washington, D.C., Beltway community,” says Jim Harper, director of information policy studies at the Cato Institute, “where these contractors and security folks … are absolutely convinced of a growing and mutating and metastasizing terrorist threat–and Congress, meanwhile, has granted them tremendous amounts of money to use any way they can.”

Harper says he is particularly worried about how much influence L-1 Identity Solutions would have if it were successful in its bid to acquire Digimarc’s ID Systems business, which is most of Digimarc. The two companies together control more than 90 percent of the driver’s license market nationwide. “That combination will be the premier lobbyist for Real ID, for a national ID law,” Harper says.

On June 30, Digimarc’s board approved a $310 million offer from L-1 Identity Solutions, but the government must approve any final sale. L-1 has kept a relatively low lobbying profile but has heavy hitters on its board, including former CIA Director George Tenet and retired Coast Guard Adm. James Loy, who was the Homeland Security Department’s first deputy secretary. Digimarc won contracts from Washington state and Vermont to produce new driver’s licenses with radio frequency identification chips, and is poised for more work under the Real ID law.

Bruce Davis, Digimarc’s chief executive officer and board chairman, said that the vision behind the sale is to provide the government with both a systems integrator and expertise in identity documents. “I think we’re in the merging market phase of global identity management,” he says. “As the industry continues to mature, I believe that the kind of consolidation that we are doing with L-1 is essential to meeting customer needs.”

Last year, Digimarc’s lobbying activity spiked to $1 million, up from $350,000 in 2006, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. The company spent $180,000 on lobbying for the first quarter of 2008.

Defense giant Lockheed Martin solidified its foothold in the identity-solutions market in February by winning the contract for the Justice Department’s billion-dollar next-generation identification system. The program is intended to transform the department’s fingerprint-based system for identifying criminals and suspected terrorists into a multimodal biometrics system that includes facial scans, iris imaging, and palm prints. Lockheed Martin also is Homeland Security’s prime contractor for issuing new biometric identification cards to seaport workers under the Transportation Worker Identification Credential program. The corporation spent $4 million on lobbying in the first quarter of this year, putting it on pace to exceed the $10.6 million it spent in 2007, according to the center.

Multimodal biometrics is viewed as a growth field for government programs, says Elaine Dezenski, who most recently was a senior vice president for Cross Match Technologies, which specializes in biometrics applications. On June 5, President Bush issued a directive requiring administration officials to come up with policy and legal recommendations for increasing the collection and sharing of biometrics for identifying not just known or suspected terrorists but also other “categories of individuals.”

Dezenski joined Cross Match after serving as acting assistant secretary for policy at Homeland Security. And the company’s president, James Ziglar, is a former commissioner of the Immigration and Naturalization Service. The company is positioned to provide mobile biometrics systems, particularly to the Transportation Security Administration for airport security and to the U.S. Border Patrol and Immigration and Customs Enforcement for enforcing federal immigration laws, Dezenski said.

Cross Match’s lobbying activity soared last year to $860,000, up from $260,000 in 2006, the center reported. The company spent $150,000 in the first quarter of this year. The Monument Policy Group is a top lobbying firm for Cross Match and Digimarc. The shop was founded by Stewart Verdery, who was Homeland Security’s first assistant secretary for policy, and recently brought in a new partner, Jessica Herrera-Flanigan, who served as Democratic staff director and general counsel for the House Homeland Security Committee. Victor Cerda, formerly chief of staff and counsel for Immigration and Customs Enforcement, was a contract lobbyist for Cross Match in 2006 and 2007 but is not lobbying for the company now.

Companies that specialize in biometrics also are using trade and lobbying associations to try to keep federal procurement dollars flowing. “The industry is pulling itself together to be involved in the policy process more than it ever has in the past,” says Tovah LaDier, managing director of the International Biometric Industry Association.

LaDier says that the association most recently lobbied Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, in favor of a bill that would require the Transportation Security Administration to form a working group with private companies to evaluate existing and proposed industry biometric programs that could be used in airports. The House passed the bill in mid-June.

LaDier works as a lobbyist for the IBIA and for the clients of the Williams Mullen Strategies law firm in Washington. One of her biggest clients, according to federal lobbying records, is Cogent Systems, which is a subcontractor for the government’s US-VISIT foreigner-tracking program. According to Grant of the Stanford Group, Cogent could be the prime beneficiary as the government expands the US-VISIT program from collecting two fingerprints per person to collecting all 10.

The most closely watched event in biometrics this year, Grant says, will occur when Lockheed Martin selects subcontractors for the Justice Department’s next-generation identification system. Cogent is in the running to support the fingerprint and palm portion of the program, according to Grant. The company spent $120,000 on lobbying in 2007, and about $30,000 in the first quarter of this year.

Industry officials are divided, however, over how much the identity-solutions market will grow in the next several years. Grant predicts that the market will stay flat, especially as a new administration takes over the White House in 2009 and analyzes the existing programs. He projects that spending on federal identity programs will grow to $2.2 billion through 2012.

Comparative estimates are difficult to find. The International Biometric Group, for example, projects that the market for biometrics alone will reach $3.7 billion in 2012 for law enforcement, military and other federal government programs. “In my opinion, it seems like the federal government is really driving the technology development in this industry and investment in this industry,” said Peter Cheesman, marketing director for the IBG.

He says that major spending programs include Justice’s new identification system, US-VISIT, and the Defense Department’s biometrics operations and support services program. The Pentagon is now accepting bids for its biometrics program, and has hired Cogent to help evaluate them. “It seems, based on recent contracts,” Cheesman said, “this technology is only going to continue to grow, as well as the market.”

Industry officials also are closely watching whether the Real ID program will include a biometric component. Chertoff said that states are free to require fingerprints for the new licenses. “If biometrics does in fact become a part of that program, you’re going to see that become a huge driver for the industry,” Cheesman said.

Moreover, if Congress passes comprehensive immigration reform legislation, industry and company officials expect the government to use biometrics to verify the identity of temporary migrant workers. “Without a biometrics component, I think you could make the argument that these [guest-worker] programs wouldn’t work,” Dezenski said.

The industry’s optimism is countered, however, by critics who believe that the government and the industry are rushing to implement security programs without enough public debate over policies and spending. And the push-back has created strange bedfellows, aligning the Cato Institute’s Harper with such groups as the Center for American Progress, a liberal think tank, and the American Civil Liberties Union. The Center for American Progress issued a report in early June on an emerging “ID divide” that leaves those without proper identification unable to participate in the most basic functions of U.S. society.

“Although Americans of all backgrounds may find themselves on the wrong side of the ID divide, there are disproportionate effects on the poor, the young, the disabled, the less-educated, communities of color, and citizens born outside of the United States,” the report concluded.

For the foreseeable future, at least, the odd bedfellows will work together. Says Harper, “You’ll know your privacy and liberties are relatively secure when I get back to fighting with the ACLU.”