Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Privacy Government United States Politics

NH Signs Bill That Rejects Federal Real ID 231

Posted by Zonk
from the i'm-thinking-we-scrap-the-country-and-start-over dept.
jcatcw writes "New Hampshire is part of a trend to oppose the federal Real ID act. The governor this week signed a bill that forbids state agencies from complying with the controversial federal regulation. The Real ID law, first passed by Congress in 2005, currently requires that all state driver's licenses and other identification cards include a digital photograph and a bar code that can be scanned by electronic readers. Such a federally approved ID card or document would be required for people entering a federal building, nuclear power plant and commercial airplane. The New Hampshire bill, which labeled the Real ID Act as "contrary and repugnant" to the New Hampshire and U.S. Constitutions, was passed in the state Senate by a 24-0 vote in late May."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

NH Signs Bill That Rejects Federal Real ID

Comments Filter:
  • Frist Post... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by LVSlushdat (854194) on Saturday July 07, 2007 @06:35PM (#19783517)
    YAY New Hampshire!!!! You ROCK!!!!!! Now to get the 40-some states to do the same....
    • YAY New Hampshire!!!! You ROCK!!!!!! Now to get the 40-some states to do the same....

      Agreed!!!

      ..I love my country, but fear its 'government'.. FAR more than I fear an Islamic terrorist...

      Same here. It's government that's the real terrorists.

      Falcon
  • Live Free or Die. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by The_Steel_General (196801) on Saturday July 07, 2007 @06:38PM (#19783543)
    What else can you say but that.

    TSG
  • by Frosty Piss (770223) on Saturday July 07, 2007 @06:38PM (#19783547)
    If so many states now oppose Real ID, how is it that it passed into law in the first place?
    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      If so many states now oppose Real ID, how is it that it passed into law in the first place?

      Indeed, a sensible question about how this country is run. I think it's fair to assume you're not American right?
    • by sangreal66 (740295) on Saturday July 07, 2007 @07:09PM (#19783815)

      If so many states now oppose Real ID, how is it that it passed into law in the first place?
      The house passed it 261-161 and in the Senate was attached to a war funding and tsunami relief bill which of course passed 100-0.
    • by Kadin2048 (468275) *
      If so many states now oppose Real ID, how is it that it passed into law in the first place?

      Your question makes me believe that you still are under the impression that there is a direct connection between what the public desires and what laws get passed in Washington. I can assure you this is not the case.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by sadler121 (735320)
      Because we fucked up royally when we let senators be elected directly by the people and not by the states. This took away power from the state and gave it to the Fed's. What we need to do is stop electing senators directly and let the states appoint them. The people already have their house, it's called the House of Representatives. Now, more then ever, the states need their voice back.
  • [...] other identification cards include a digital photograph and a bar code that can be scanned by electronic readers.

    Wow! a *barcode* and a *digital photo*? these have *got* to be the most unfalsifiable digital features. This is scary secure!

    Seriously though, even if NH legislators were pro Real-ID (which apparently they aren't on moral grounds, thankfully), they had to oppose it just because it's so technologically retarded that it would bring exactly no added security whatsoever.
    • by Servo (9177)
      More to the point, its so technologically retarded that it won't add any security AND will cost millions of State money to implement because its not just an incremental upgrade. I'm a NH resident and am very happy to see this signed into law.
      • by dkleinsc (563838)
        As someone born and raised in NH, I'm giving 3 cheers to the NH legislature on this one: NH isn't a state that can afford to spend money on such silly ventures as this one (not because everyone's poor, but because the state actually has something close to the Libertarian ideals).
        • Yup... I'm a NH native as well. Despite the fact that I loath the cold winters time and time again I'm very pleased with the way our state is run. Catching bits and pieces on the radio of local politics in Maine I would say they're run similarly as well. As for MA... well they're pretty much our polar opposite.

          While not Libertarian we do keep closer to those ideals than any other state government I know of, and that pleases me greatly.
    • by megaditto (982598)
      You are right, but you miss the real point of REAL ID:

      A single Federal database aggregating all the personal info they could ever want. Hence the barcode is a database key to the record here and does not need to be secure (since you get a record with a picture pulled up and can compare to the person (also gets the weight, eye color, hair color, age and height, and probably fingerprint and DNA samples at some point in the future).

      In fact, the plastic ID here is really not even needed. If you had a barcode ta
      • by fyngyrz (762201) * on Saturday July 07, 2007 @09:03PM (#19784641) Homepage Journal
        If you had a barcode tattooed on your wrist or even tell them your name and number, this would work just as well.

        The optimum locations for physically carried ID were worked out some time ago. Either the forehead (see The NT's "Revelations" section, Hindu "caste" marks, etc), or the left chest (see Germany, ca. 1940's, and the "ID" the Jews had to carry.)

        However, the RealID legislation has murky verbiage that allows for unspecified technology to be used to carry the ID electronically. Odds strongly favor this being RFID or something similar. So no need for it to be on your body, per se; it could be in your body just as easily as it could be on it, or on a card or similar external carrier. And of course, this negates the need to "present" your ID; it'll be read when you're within X distance of any client that wants to know anything in particular about you.

        • by paganizer (566360)
          Sometimes, when I look around at the "Your papers, Citizen" culture we have become, I hope that this sort of thing actually becomes a law; that the legislature, or the Prez by Executive Decree, will try to push something that will trip every fundy christians "end times" buttons, and we get a new constitutional convention going. our government is corrupted, time to hit the reset switch and reinstall.
  • by TubeSteak (669689) on Saturday July 07, 2007 @06:49PM (#19783639) Journal
    But at what point will the Federal Government try to link federal funds & REAL ID complaince?

    I wonder if that's something that can be done administratively, or has to be legislated into existence.
    • by pi_rules (123171)

      I wonder if that's something that can be done administratively, or has to be legislated into existence.


      The legislature controls taxes and spending. I believe this topic is usually covered in most grade schools.
    • by SuperBanana (662181) on Saturday July 07, 2007 @07:42PM (#19784057)

      But at what point will the Federal Government try to link federal funds & REAL ID compliance?

      New England pays far more federal taxes than it receives in federal aid. Leaving the union would be a welcome move, as we could stop paying for all the federal welfare to the southern and mid-western states. If you want to read a very amusing (and profanity-laced) rant about this, go see FucktheSouth.com [fuckthesouth.com]. The last few winters, Bush has slashed the federal home heating assistance programs; we've got people old people freezing to death because they can't afford to heat their homes. Meanwhile, you'll note that programs for midwestern corn and livestock farmers are doing quite well...

      You don't understand how pissed off New England has been since 2000. New Hampshire is full of people who *really* don't like anyone telling them what they can/can't do, and they're pretty well armed. Maine's geographically IN Canada anyway, Vermont's voted to impeach Bush more times than I can count. In Massachusetts, residents run the political spectrum, but we're also the ones who started [wikipedia.org] the War of Independence, bitches.

      • Just about every point in that rant is correct in my opinion.

        Obviously, not everyone in the South is a leeching hypocritical moralizing douchebag...but right on...
      • We not only vote on impeachment issues, but secession as well. The Second Vermont Republic information found here: http://www.vermontrepublic.org/ [vermontrepublic.org]

        I was all for NE continuing to assist poorer parts of the country until the NE Dairy compact BS. Like they can't subsidize small dairy farms in NE while pumping all those subsidies into the Midwest so grain can rot in the silos? WTF?

        Then again, farming in general is a pretty big deal for my family and I.

        As for N.H., I generally prefer they stay on their side of
      • by ivan256 (17499)

        Meanwhile, you'll note that programs for midwestern corn and livestock farmers are doing quite well...


        We're soon to be paying them twice. We're so gung-ho about switching to ethanol from gasoline that we forgot to stop and think about what New England dairy farmers feed their livestock.

        Everybody who lives in the city should be forced to live in a rural area for at least one year of their adult life.
    • Considering that the Federal funds originate in the states, that is not much of an issue. A state can declare that it will collect all taxes itself and will pass it on to the Federal government, then take its sweet time to do so - passing it on I mean. Many states that appear to be net receivers of Federal subsidies aren't really, they only appear to be so, since goods that flow through are not accounted for. The few states that really are net receivers of dole are of course in a weak position, but could
      • States can declare anything they want to, but do you think that many companies -- particularly those with federal contracts or a presence in multiple states -- will actually stop sending tax money directly to the feds? I wish they would, but in my opinion few corporate executives have both the proper political inclination and the spine to stand up to threats from the feds.
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by bender647 (705126)

      But at what point will the Federal Government try to link federal funds & REAL ID complaince?

      Like they link seat belt law compliance and federal highway funding?

      New Hampshire doesn't care. Apparently they are the only state that has refused to pass a law telling adults they have to buckle up so that they can get their share of the federal money.

    • by Agripa (139780)
      I do not have a reference to the court case but I remember reading that federal funds may only be linked to state laws insofar as they have a direct connection with the regulated activity. Federal highway funds for instance may be linked to drunk driving laws, seatbelt laws, and speed limits but may not be linked to activities that do not involve driving.

      Like many others in this discussion, I agree that the federal government has misused the interstate commerce clause and the tenth amendment.
  • The Real ID law...requires that all state driver's licenses and other identification cards include a digital photograph and a bar code that can be scanned by electronic readers. Such a federally approved ID card or document would be required for people entering a federal building, nuclear power plant and commercial airplane.

    These are the complaints I see coming:

    "Dad needs help in applying for Social Security and Medicare. My wife has plans to visit her mother in New York. I have contracts to service feder

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by flyingfsck (986395)
      The fact of the matter is that the Feds will have to accept the state ID - whatever it is - the way it always has. A Federal ID simply drives up costs, duplicates computer facilities, creates even more unnecessary Federal jobs and erodes the constitutional powers of the states further. A standardized ID doesn't improve anything, since the present system is already working.
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        You miss grandparents point. The Feds will not issue a Federal ID, your alternative. Rather, they will refuse to accept NH ID's until they comply with the Real ID act. So, they just screw over NH citizens while they elect a government that refuses to comply.

        I do wish New Hampshire luck. If anyone is stubborn enough, it's them.

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by westlake (615356)
          You miss grandparents point. The Feds will not issue a Federal ID, your alternative.

          The feds may issue an ID --- which will immediately become the standard for proof of age, ID and citizenship. The next best thing to carrying a U.S. Passport.

          Open your wallet. How many cards and badges are you carrying now? How many could you shred if you were carrying a single card meeting the federal standard? All this legislation does is lower the value of any ID issued by New Hampshire.

  • It seems that the state fear of the federal government is finally subsiding. I am surprised that it took more than 150 years for the states to start taking back the constitutional powers that were theirs all along. One small step for an Amercan, one big leap for Statekind...
  • by BlueParrot (965239) on Saturday July 07, 2007 @09:06PM (#19784659)
    The entire debate aside, why on earth is Nuclear Power plants on that list? I mean, seriously. Isn't that a bit like making a law which requires car companies to put at least one steering wheel on each car? Or to require that all commercial air planes have at least one wing... I mean without this legislation nuclear plant operators would probably just let anyone walk in carrying an explosive belt or whatnot, right ? Seriously, I'd be a lot more worried about a terror attack against a train company than a nuclear power station.
  • by nurb432 (527695) on Saturday July 07, 2007 @09:36PM (#19784885) Homepage Journal
    While they deserve points for telling the feds to take a leap, what does that do for federal employees that live in their state, or citizens that want to fly ( once you have to have the realID to fly )?

Nothing is impossible for the man who doesn't have to do it himself. -- A.H. Weiler

Working...