Letters to Texas Senators on Omnibus Bill with AI governance, Address of Digital Identity

Sent with special attention to U.S. Senators John Cornyn and Ted Cruz under Trump's deadline and SCOTUS pressure campaign to increase ID mandates.

Dear Senators Ted Cruz and John Cornyn,

This is a letter given special attention to matters regarding AI, technology, commerce, finance and Trump’s increased disposal for identity mandates in the digital manifests for everything.

This issue of identity articles isn’t especially difficult, but the way it is spun in D.C. places the burden of proof onto the citizen and not this government to prove which citizens it represents. If this government doesn’t know who its own citizens are after 30 years of protracted surveillance, overbilling for identity mandates, REAL ID, TSA body scans and the like, I want to know why. I will tell what I know towards this answer.

Republicans, and many Democrat partisan also beholden insurance and tech PACs, argue in favor of placement of consecutive transactional burden of proofs onto U.S. citizens. This is a form of control and tax to compel consumers to pay for public-private insurance data infrastructures and of course, more mass surveillance. That information is then traded into the ad revenue marketplace. Then it becomes some kind of tertiary entitlement game for banks and real estate brokers who want to covertly control the consumer without any direct government hand, using the governments mandate for identity articles intelligence.

Government identity is manufactured, traded and used as currency by this government and other adversary governments like China, India, Iran, Russia. The US government now fails as an identity information protectorate. They prefer illegal trade license shunts, using private contracts, over the 4th Amendment. If they did seek to protect, the TikTok ban would be enforced to protect the weakest in our nation: those with medical issues and minor aged children.

Intel contractors and law enforcement buy and sell automated records without a warrant. They seek to hold us accountable when they don’t get enough clandestinely derived and unconstitutionally searched information from the Internet. So they use our tax dollars to hire Palantir to probe us in ways the banks aren’t even able to do without a warrant.

I invoke the Privacy Act of 1974 every opportunity I get to stop commerce minders from thinking this I am an easy trade to make because they trade with the US government, when I have committed no crime. At least get a warrant. I urge you strongly to endorse Tulsi Gabbard’s battery of intelligence reforms to stop this avid pursuit of online platformer commerce speaking as the government for all Texans, giving proxy consent because they want more money.

This government has already attacked most domestic civilians with an involuntary personal spreadsheet searches. In many cases, they are given instruction that if I don’t comply to warrantless search, there is criminal insinuation on my reputation. If there was a real crime, you could get a warrant.

It doesn’t matter they already know I am a citizen. It doesn’t matter how many times I performed adequately towards that demand. The insurance minders, the ad surveillance information marketers and the banking interests who pay to install these demeaning measures demand the poor, the regular and the unhealthy all continuously, exhaustively shall be burdened with transactions to prove who Americans are as a license of their personal information.

So it is about power. Don’t you watch this public-private formation enterprise, a parallel government with zero public representation or accountability, be given cull and tax powers? Don’t you have a personal dissent when they sell you, your wife and children as a spreadsheet? You can’t call it freedom. We, The People, have never been paid towards the license of our name, image or likeness in this third party market for our data or identity. We absorb all the risk when it goes bad. It’s larceny.

Only the FTC has martialed any type of commerce based defense of the public’s ownership of themselves, as persons, and the commerce around their identity means. The citizen’s interactions, and everything about them, is traded on the open ad intelligence markets, with no civil intellectual property defense from this government.

Would you please sponsor a useful legislation to remunerate the citizen on these types of trades, so they can at least control the price of this game of their citizenship? It’s still price fixing. No one has ‘fixed’ or placed a demand on data brokerages to pay the consumer royalties, insisting this is a private market. The consumer has been shut out.

Donald Trump seeks to play with U.S. citizenship. He has taken the advisory on birthright citizenship from Ron Paul, who is mostly right on policy. However, I think this approach is mostly ideological, pre-dating a completely boosted AI market mechanism. The demand for government, in personal trades ID without proper compensation would impact a citizens freedom to move, commute, communicate online and participate in society more as a serf than citizen.

Andreesen Horowitz are the same legal minds who brought us demeaned AI regulation checks to ignore the 10th Amendment, would also chew through employment markets. Take one look at Tokyo’s birthrate for being ALL-IN tech and you can see America’s future in annulment of the young man’s job market. Digital ID would be an unlimited feeding fest for those want to monetize government ID, medical ID and consolidate all transactions into one perfect UN enabled social credit system. What else would it be for?

While you govern, as you have the opportunity and consent of the People of Texas to make decisions, please remove sections of the ‘One Big Beautiful bill’ that create a national regulatory shelter for AI rom US State governments. AI needs to suffer supply and demand of US markets in the wild. They need to live and die by consumer demand, like every other American industry. I am asking you for no special treatment. It doesn’t impact the way they code. Just their insane delusions for AI applications power. We need to admit the dissent of Americans who want to kick AI in our society, if and when United States locals decide they are not having it. AI enterprise are not a government we elected.

These remarks go towards a marketplace that increasingly denies the role of any consumer consent towards personal information uses and license of personal works, as Intellectual Property. Intellectual property is under attack. So as you produce your final votes and work towards the Senate recission bill package (?)

I hope you will make provision for the People, to urge this body to vote in favor of US States rights to option regulate AI, limited government and less burden onto the governed to do what the government can do with due process streamlining.

Sincerely,

Sheila Dean