The idea of a national id is about the attempt to reduce the fear in voters who are very afraid. Unfortunately, like all politically driven projects, it won't do what the voters want. It is a proxy project for national conformity.
Fear is reduced when we have conformity. Thus, subdivisions where the houses all look the same seem safer to some people. Towns where we drive out anyone who stands out or is different seem safer than mixed communities.
The fact is that such safety is an illusion - much like putting money in a safe deposit box in the bank seems to be safer than investing in stocks. Such safety reduces the easily managed risks but makes the systemic risks more likely.
I read about a town in Texas that decided to clean up its balance sheet back in either the 30s or 40s. They made a systemic effort to pay off all debt. That means that they did not take on any more debt to build roads or other infrastructure. Today, the town has no debt, but the town has not grown in any way since they started that process. We see towns in Europe that haven't grown since the 1400's. They look nice. But what wealth has been there?
The same thing is true of national conformity. There are many people who feel that they would be safer if we had national conformity. However, that conformity ignores that almost all economic growth happens first in the non-conforming parts of the population. Take personal computers for example. When Bill Gates started MicroSoft, he was part of the non-conforming part of the population. (Just look at his arrest mug shot!)
What has made our economy strong is how we have allowed the non-conforming parts of our population thrive. We have rewarded people for breaking the rules. We have rewarded those who would go into new areas and find the riches there. Yes, it has been scary. Yes, it means that we have allowed people with wealth to lose their wealth. By any politician's standard, we operate in a crazy way: allowing wealthy, well connected voters to lose their money and have to compete with the rest of the homeless. Of course, that makes the wealthy women scared. But, stopping that will make the country weaker.
We see that in other countries. The countries that have tried to protect the moneyed classes from economic competition have stagnated at best or have sunk quickly. Take a nearby country where the people who "own" the land are protected from the masses who would benefit from being able to purchase the land under their houses. Part of the economic problems they have in that country are because people with ideas can not get the startup capital to try them. In this country, people borrow against their houses to start their companies. There, I hear that they can't. Thus, their economy does not get the number of small businesses that we have here.
National id is a proxy for trying to keep us safe. As such it will both cause subtle economic harm and won't do a thing for true safety.
