Dennis, happy to help. As far as I can tell, there is ONLY one single "pro" argument that the government is putting forward:

"No longer should individuals have to remember an ever-expanding and potentially insecure list of usernames and passwords to login into various online services,"

...which is a silly argument because many, many inter-operable ID systems exist (MS, yahoo, google, apple, paypal, every major bank, zillions more) as do "key-chain" systems that cost about $2.00 (some are free) that put all your passwords, credentials, certificates and what have you in a single "safe" with a single "combination". So the one "pro" isn't even a pro. Do you have $2? Do you have zero dollars? Ok, you're already FULLY covered.

Is it even necessary to outline the "con" arguments, given that there are no convincing "pro" ones? It's a total scam...track, trace and database. There really aren't any technical "con" arguments. Everything they propose already exists in the private sector. So there are no technical problems. It's just that right now everything is voluntary, whereas their system would become mandatory to even get online. The moment this is in place, the parameters of your ID will be based on your body's biometric measurements (i.e. one of the other pending bits of legislation). This site would be TOAST.

The full story, like similar government proposals, is quite lengthly with a large amount of information. Most of us just want the bottom line. Can we be directed to a critique of pro and con.