ICE to Pay Thomson Reuters $125 Million to Hunt for Voter Fraud
ICE to Pay Thomson Reuters $125M to Find Voter Fraud
New procurement documents reveal that ICE is set to pay Thomson Reuters $125 million for access to vast personal data, including Social Security numbers and geolocation. The agency plans to use this information to investigate alleged voter fraud and immigration violations, raising serious privacy concerns amidst recent political tensions.
It looks for all the world like Trump is trying to skirt the law and a court order to fuel his mass-deportation campaign.
- Varelion
This process has been carried out, publicly, a few times. Every time the results not only fail to support the current regime's narrative, they actively goes against it. So, the question becomes: "Who is getting kickbacks for this 'deal'?"
More importantly, how in the hell it this under the purview of ICE? Agencies and units have strictly outlined mission statements they are not supposed to go outside of. What kind of secret police nonsense it this?
EDIT: Word choice & spelling
- njovin
If you're a California resident, under the CCPA you can submit a request for Thomson Reuters to both provide you with and then delete any information they have collected about you.
The state's even setup a nice portal to automate these requests across 600+ data brokers.
- solfox
I reckon that if you replace "find" with "make", you might be closer to the truth about what this data will be used for.
- sanex
Pretty sure you're supposed to get a warrant to access private information. I don't know how we ended up in this place where somehow paying for info precludes the necessity to get a warrant a la flock, cell tower data, etc.
- legitster
The product we're talking about here is CLEAR.
And one of the deep ironies is that CLEAR is already highly deployed at the state level, among other things, to verify voter identity and prevent voter fraud!
DHS and ICE also ostensibly already use CLEAR for a variety of other purposes - what's novel here isn't that they are getting access to new data, it's that they want to backseat drive on investigations the states are already conducting, using only a subset of the data the states already use.