http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/08/16/real.id/index.html

Quote :

" (CNN) -- Americans may need passports to board domestic flights or to picnic in a national park next year if they live in one of the states defying the federal Real ID Act. art.chertoff.realid.gi.jpg Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff says there are no plans for a federal database of drivers' information. The act, signed in 2005 as part of an emergency military spending and tsunami relief bill, aims to weave driver's licenses and state ID cards into a sort of national identification system by May 2008. The law sets baseline criteria for how driver's licenses will be issued and what information they must contain. The Department of Homeland Security insists Real ID is an essential weapon in the war on terror, but privacy and civil liberties watchdogs are calling the initiative an overly intrusive measure that smacks of Big Brother. More than half the nation's state legislatures have passed symbolic legislation denouncing the plan, and some have penned bills expressly forbidding compliance. Several states have begun making arrangements for the new requirements -- four have passed legislation applauding the measure -- but even they may have trouble meeting the act's deadline. The cards would be mandatory for all "federal purposes," which include boarding an airplane or walking into a federal building, nuclear facility or national park, Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff told the National Conference of State Legislatures last week. Citizens in states that don't comply with the new rules will have to use passports for federal purposes. "For terrorists, travel documents are like weapons," Chertoff said. "We do have a right and an obligation to see that those licenses reflect the identity of the person who's presenting it." Chertoff said the Real ID program is essential to national security because there are presently 8,000 types of identification accepted to enter the United States. "It is simply unreasonable to expect our border inspectors to be able to detect forgeries on documents that range from baptismal certificates from small towns in Texas to cards that purport to reflect citizenship privileges in a province somewhere in Canada," he said. Chertoff attended the conference in Boston, Massachusetts, in part to allay states' concerns, but he had few concrete answers on funding. The Department of Homeland Security, which estimates state and federal costs could reach $23.1 billion over 10 years, is looking for ways to lessen the burden on states, he said. On the recent congressional front, however, Chertoff could point only to an amendment killed in the Senate last month that would've provided $300 million for the program. "There's going to be an irreducible expense that falls on you, and that's part of the shared responsibility," Chertoff told the state legislators. Bill Walsh, senior legal fellow for the Heritage Foundation, a Washington-based conservative think tank that supports the Real ID Act, said states shouldn't be pushing for more federal dollars because, ultimately, that will mean more federal oversight -- and many complaints about cost coincide with complaints about the federal government overstepping its bounds. "They are only being asked to do what they should've already done to protect their citizens," Walsh said, blaming arcane software and policies at state motor vehicle departments for what he called "a tremendous trafficking in state driver's licenses." The NCSL is calling Real ID an "unfunded mandate" that could cost states up to $14 billion over the next decade, but for which only $40 million has been federally approved. The group is demanding Congress pony up $1 billion for startup costs by year's end or scrap the proposal altogether. Everyone must visit DMV by 2013 The Real ID Act repealed a provision in the 9/11 Commission Implementation Act calling for state and federal officials to examine security standards for driver's licenses. It called instead for states to begin issuing new federal licenses, lasting no longer than eight years, by May 11, 2008, unless they are granted an extension. It also requires all 245 million license and state ID holders to visit their local departments of motor vehicles and apply for a Real ID by 2013. Applicants must bring a photo ID, birth certificate, proof of Social Security number and proof of residence, and states must maintain and protect massive databases housing the information. NCSL spokesman Bill Wyatt said the requirements are "almost physically impossible." States will have to build new facilities, secure those facilities and shell out for additional equipment and personnel. Those costs are going to fall back on the American taxpayer, he said. It might be in the form of a new transportation, motor vehicle or gasoline tax. Or you might find it tacked on to your next state tax bill. In Texas, Wyatt said, one official told him that without federal funding, the Longhorn State might have to charge its citizens more than $100 for a license. "We kind of feel like the way they went about this is backwards," Wyatt said, explaining that states would have appreciated more input into the process. "Each state has its own unique challenges and these are best addressed at state levels. A one-size-fits-all approach to driver's licenses doesn't necessarily work." Many states have revolted. The governors of Idaho, Maine, Montana, New Hampshire, Oklahoma, South Carolina and Washington have signed bills refusing to comply with the act. Six others have passed bills and/or resolutions expressing opposition, and 15 have similar legislation pending. Though the NCSL says most states' opposition stems from the lack of funding, some states cited other reasons for resisting the initiative. New Hampshire passed a House bill opposing the program and calling Real ID "contrary and repugnant" to the state and federal constitutions. A Colorado House resolution dismissed Real ID by expressing support for the war on terror but "not at the expense of essential civil rights and liberties of citizens of this country." Privacy concerns raised Colorado and New Hampshire lawmakers are not alone. Groups like the American Civil Liberties Union and Electronic Frontier Foundation say the IDs and supporting databases -- which Chertoff said would eventually be federally interconnected -- will infringe on privacy. EFF says on its Web site that the information in the databases will lay the groundwork for "a wide range of surveillance activities" by government and businesses that "will be able to easily read your private information" because of the bar code required on each card. The databases will provide a one-stop shop for identity thieves, adds the ACLU on its Web site, and the U.S. "surveillance society" and private sector will have access to the system "for the routine tracking, monitoring and regulation of individuals' movements and activities." The civil liberties watchdog dubs the IDs "internal passports" and claims it wouldn't be long before office buildings, gas stations, toll booths, subways and buses begin accessing the system. But Chertoff told legislators last week that DHS has no intention of creating a federal database, and Walsh, of the Heritage Foundation, said the ACLU's allegations are disingenuous. States will be permitted to share data only when validating someone's identity, Walsh said. "The federal government wouldn't have any greater access to driver's license information than it does today," Walsh said. States have the right to refuse to comply with the program, he said, and they also have the right to continue issuing IDs and driver's licenses that don't meet Real ID requirements. But, Walsh said, "any state that's refusing to implement this key recommendation by the 9/11 Commission, and whose state driver's licenses are as a result used in another terrorist attack, should be held responsible." State reaction to Real ID has not been all negative. Four states have passed bills or resolutions expressing approval for the program, and 13 states have similar legislation pending (Several states have pending pieces of legislation both applauding and opposing Real ID). advertisement Chertoff said there would be repercussions for states choosing not to comply. "This is not a mandate," Chertoff said. "A state doesn't have to do this, but if the state doesn't have -- at the end of the day, at the end of the deadline -- Real ID-compliant licenses then the state cannot expect that those licenses will be accepted for federal purposes.""

8/16/2007 4:40:20 PM

I can understand a lot of the fervor that comes about from privacy issues, but I've never understood how ID cards were one of them. You already need some sort of ID to do many of the things mentioned; why does it matter that they want to standardize them?

8/16/2007 4:42:39 PM

Awesome post, maybe you should.. I dunno.. commit or make a point about the article..

8/16/2007 4:44:23 PM

it's sort of the principle of free travel within our own country. i mean to show id to get into a federal park? why?

8/16/2007 4:44:34 PM

Wouldnt this be a good idea?

They could put it on a key chain and make it a debit card too, so they know its really you because of the ID and you could use it for vending machines, and at stores then you wouldnt have to carry a wallet

8/16/2007 4:46:13 PM

and then the database with all your shit gets stolen or hacked and you have no identity and go bankrupt

8/16/2007 4:49:02 PM

um it would be on government computers they could put it in the pentagon

8/16/2007 4:55:42 PM

in related news, I read where the feds want to start using the top of the line spy satellites in local law enforcement in the US.


closer and closer to a police state.

^right, b/c government computers have never been hacked before.

[Edited on August 16, 2007 at 4:56 PM. Reason : .]

8/16/2007 4:56:05 PM

Quote :

"closer and closer to a police state. ^right, b/c government computers have never been hacked before."

bingo

8/16/2007 5:06:49 PM

Quote :

"it's sort of the principle of free travel within our own country."

so, you're saying that having to show ID at an airport would violate the principle of free travel within our own country?

because I don't know if you've been to an airport any time recently, but i haven't been able to board a plane without showing some kind of gov't issued ID for 6 years or so...

i would hope that the vast majority of americans already carry a government issued ID card everywhere they go...

8/16/2007 5:08:37 PM

I've never understood what the problem was.

The information that would be tied to the real ID is already stored and accessable by the government.
The bigger concern with real ID is the cost to state governments to reissue IDs and create/move to new infrastructure.


Now the requirement of an ID to go to national parks, board planes, etc... is another issue.

8/16/2007 5:15:38 PM

Six years? I can't remember any time that I could check in without some proof of identity.

While I'm unsure about the network of databases and bar codes/RF tags on ID's, I have no problem with Federally established minimum requirements for states to issue identifications, especially given how reliant our society already is on drivers licenses for a variety of identification activities. I also don't have any problems with the Federal government punishing states that refuse to comply with those minimum standards, say for example, not accepting a driver's license from a particular state at airports. That kind of security is needed to help ensure identity protection and reduce the chances of some yahoo out there creating fake ids; I lost faith in the entire driver's license system when states started issuing them to illegals.

8/16/2007 5:21:24 PM

next thing you know they'll be asking for some type of government identification when i want to buy beer or rent a car!

8/16/2007 5:22:56 PM

Don't forget lottery tickets and rated R movies! What an absurd notion...

8/16/2007 5:25:33 PM

Quote :

"next thing you know they'll be asking for some type of government identification when i want to buy beer or rent a car!"

Yeah, but those are state ID's are they not?

Having a federal ID with all your info in a database irks me. Those fucking things are going to have RFID tags in them too, with any luck.

8/16/2007 5:48:24 PM

Still don't need an ID to vote!

8/16/2007 5:51:18 PM

remind me again where it says in the Constitution that Congress can regulate things like identification? 10th ammendment, anyone?

8/16/2007 10:31:48 PM

But ID's can fall under interstate commerce because out-of-state licenses are commonly used to verify a person's identity in another state, at times crossing national borders, and for things like flights that cross state lines.

8/16/2007 10:58:19 PM

On the one hand I can understand that the government wants standard identification simply to make it easier to confirm that you are who you say you are when, for example, you're coming to/leaving the country. On the other hand, requiring this ID card to go just about anywhere (and by extension, to have it on your person at all times) can potentially lead to massive privacy invasions.

Government buildings are one thing, but what if you're required to flash your ID at a place as mundane as the local supermarket? What if you're not even allowed to make purchases without this ID? Yes I know that nobody has actually suggested anything like that and admittedly it's a slippery slope fallacy, but this would effectively make a log of where you've been and when you were there. The government can then form an entire database about your day-to-day activities. Some jack-off sitting in some air-conditioned federal building somewhere will be able to browse your file and see that you went to Food Lion and bought some condoms along with your deli sandwich. While that particular information isn't exactly damning or embarrassing, why is that level of information anybody's business but your own? What possible justification can the government give to allow itself constant, real time access to your whereabouts?

So yeah, my main concern with this is that it will potentially open up a whole new level of surveillance and intrusion. And as somebody else pointed out, what happens if you lose your ID or it gets stolen? You're pretty much going to be SOL since that card will contain a lot of vital information about you such as your SS#. And good luck proving to anybody that you are who you say you are, though hopefully they have procedures planned for that sort of incident.

I don't know. I can certainly appreciate the need for identity verification, but to centralize it all onto one card reeks too much of Big Brother for me.

8/16/2007 10:59:43 PM

Now, I don't like the provisions of the program as they are presented in the OP, which may or may not be exaggerating things. Needing a card to get into a national park is silly, of course, but I have a sneaking suspicion that nobody involved in promoting a national ID actually has any desire to do that. The article seems to interpret it as a possibility based on the suggestion that it be used for Federally-related purposes.


Aside from having the usual drivers' licence info and some characteristics that identify the card as legitimate (water marks, holograms, the shit we put on dollar bills, whatever), I don't see the need for anything else. The barcode worries me, to be sure. We don't need people to be tracked, we need people to be identified.

8/17/2007 12:18:19 AM

Quote :

"I have a sneaking suspicion that nobody involved in promoting a national ID actually has any desire to do that."

It's called function creep. If you have any doubt that function creep doesn't exist, take a look at all the things you need a SSN for. How many of those things actually have anything to do with Social Security? How many those things are strictly federal activities?

[Edited on August 17, 2007 at 7:16 AM. Reason : ]

8/17/2007 7:15:25 AM

Took me awhile to find this again...HR 4633 was proposed in 2002 as the Driver's License Modernization Act. Granted, it never found its way into law, but it does give a view into what the government has in mind. The bill didn't propose a national ID per se, but it would have required a numbering system such that all drivers in the US would have a unique DL number, regardless of what state issued the license. The bill would have also mandated the collection of 'biometric data', the creation of nationally accessable databases containing the biometric data, and the ID cards would have to be readable by non-government third parties. My favorite part would have been the 'Innovative Uses Pilot Program' that authorized the NSF to give grants "for the implementation of programs that utilize computer chips embedded in drivers' licenses and identification cards [...] for innovative uses." In other words, the bill would have legislated function creep of the driver's licenses.

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h107-4633

8/17/2007 8:20:33 AM

Quote :

"The act, signed in 2005 as part of an emergency military spending and tsunami relief bill"

8/17/2007 11:42:26 AM

it seems to me like the people who seriously have a problem with some type of national ID card almost view it as a microchip implanted in their arm or something...isnt it basically like a passport? if we (we meaning us in this thread, etc...not meaning illegal aliens) are already in the system from having a drivers license or having utility bills in our names, etc...doesnt seem like it would have any drastic effect on us, at least as i understand it

[Edited on August 17, 2007 at 12:30 PM. Reason : .]

8/17/2007 12:28:56 PM

Quote :

"The Department of Homeland Security insists Real ID is an essential weapon in the war on terror"

anytime I hear this as a justification for government (especially the current admin) to do something i cringe.

8/17/2007 1:09:33 PM

did you cringe when they said the creation of a department of homeland security was essential to fighting the war on terror? again i just dont see the huge deal...we're not talking about microchips being implanted inside you...we're basically talking about a drivers license/passport

the cliche argument "if you didnt do anything wrong you dont have to worry about anything" is often wrong....but in this case its "if you are an american citizen who is not a terrorist you dont have to worry about anything" and thats correct

maybe i'm wrong this just doesnt seem like a huge deal to me

8/17/2007 1:23:28 PM

Quote :

"did you cringe when they said the creation of a department of homeland security was essential to fighting the war on terror?"

as a matter of fact I did....what have they done except create unconstitutional programs.

Quote :

"The U.S.'s top intelligence official has greatly expanded the range of federal and local authorities who can get access to information from the nation's vast network of spy satellites in the U.S. The decision, made three months ago by Director of National Intelligence Michael McConnell, places for the first time some of the U.S.'s most powerful intelligence-gathering tools at the disposal of domestic security officials. The move was authorized in a May 25 memo sent to Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff asking his department to facilitate access to the spy network on behalf of civilian agencies and law enforcement. How well does the U.S. balance security and liberty?Until now, only a handful of federal civilian agencies, such as the National Aeronautics and Space Administration and the U.S. Geological Survey, have had access to the most basic spy-satellite imagery, and only for the purpose of scientific and environmental study. Unlike electronic eavesdropping, which is subject to legislative and some judicial control, this use of spy satellites is largely uncharted territory. Although the courts have permitted warrantless aerial searches of private property by law-enforcement aircraft, there are no cases involving the use of satellite technology. In recent years, some military experts have questioned whether domestic use of such satellites would violate the Posse Comitatus Act. The act bars the military from engaging in law-enforcement activity inside the U.S., and the satellites were predominantly built for and owned by the Defense Department . "

where does it end?

8/17/2007 1:54:55 PM

Quote :

"Posse Comitatus Act"

thats gotta be my all-time favorite Act.

8/17/2007 4:32:55 PM

The inability for the government to easily data mine the myriad state IDs and disparate state databases achieves a level of privacy that a federal id with a microchip does not. A social security number is bad enough, but you at least don't have to flash your social security card everywhere, even at the airport. And yes, if it is necessary, there should be a law against government efforts to create a universal database through data mining.

Don't pretend that the current system and the proposed federal system are the same. If they weren't any, they wouldn't be doing it.

8/18/2007 12:59:00 AM

i'm confused...

everything I can find indicates that the DHS has gone with a 2D data storage method for the cards (barcodes). that RFID has already been shot down...

but that's what i keep hearing people complain about...

i suspect that it's mainly because of that alarmist video that floats around (http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=c7pHb7bPfMc)

could someone find something concrete saying that the DHS has decided to go with RFIDs?

8/18/2007 10:44:41 PM

Quote :

"The cards would be mandatory for all "federal purposes," "

Sounds like it's designed with the priority to protect federal employees above everything else.

Quote :

"Chertoff said the Real ID program is essential to national security because there are presently 8,000 types of identification accepted to enter the United States."

In his term, Bush has done nothing to keep people from streaming across our southern border, why is he all worried about them entering the U.S. now?

Quote :

"It also requires all 245 million license and state ID holders to visit their local departments of motor vehicles and apply for a Real ID by 2013. Applicants must bring a photo ID, birth certificate, proof of Social Security number and proof of residence, and states must maintain and protect massive databases housing the information."

Look how much fun it is now to visit the DMV to get your license renewed. Now imagine standing in line with even more people waiting to get a Real ID.

Quote :

"But Chertoff told legislators last week that DHS has no intention of creating a federal database, and Walsh, of the Heritage Foundation, said the ACLU's allegations are disingenuous. "

And the federal gov't also told us that our Social Security Cards would never be used for non-SS identification purposes.

Quote :

"maybe i'm wrong this just doesnt seem like a huge deal to me"

Perhaps the saddest statement of all. Our liberty slowly being eeked away, while generations of gov't schooling and propaganda have produced Americans who don't even get very upset about it.

8/20/2007 10:11:14 AM

Quote :

"Look how much fun it is now to visit the DMV to get your license renewed."

i don't know, it only took me twenty minutes two months ago when i had to get it done.

8/20/2007 11:36:48 AM