Dr. Eggman points us to Ars Technica for an article on the ACLU's view of the latest loosening and deadline extensions for REAL ID act compliance by the Department of Homeland Security. The rights organization believes that REAL ID is doomed. "The ACLU, which opposes the plan on civil liberties grounds, says that the many changes made since the Act was passed [in 2005] nearly 'negate the original intent of the program.' 'DHS is essentially whittling Real ID down to nothing... all in the name of denying Real ID is a failure,' said ACLU senior legislative counsel Tim Sparapani. 'Real ID is in its death throes, and any signs of life are just last gasps.'"
DHS is at pains to point out that REAL ID is not a national identity card program but a set of regulations that direct states how to create their drivers' licenses and state ID cards. The program mandates digital photos, bar-coded information, and more stringent document checks, and it directs all states to link their databases with one another.
So with the bar-coded information we can't wipe the readability of the card with a magnet to stop the assholes at bars, liquors stores, etc from scanning us unnecessarily. Digital photos means that everyone's picture will be merged into the database of information shared with everyone else and "more stringent document checks" means that even more information will be in that same database. When all this information is linked how is it not a national ID database again?
I'm proud of the states that didn't crumble under the pressure of the Federal Government. At least someone out there is willing to tell them to fuck off -- regardless if it was over funding and not privacy implications.
The states that complained were the ones who's driver's licenses look like monopoly money. It's these states that make getting a fake ID so easy and contribute to under-age drinking.
Why should government be stopping anyone from drinking? That's a job for the parents in my book. It also takes away the "I want to drink because I'm not supposed to" attitude.
They need to make sure that you are not wandering around the maintenance areas.
They can then require ID for those areas and have security request IDs to make sure anyone there is authorized. They don't need to know who a person is in public spaces. For instance they don't need to know who someone going to the game room is, I specifically mention this because my sister used to go the airport where we lived to play video games and occasionally she'd take me. If I wait in line at the ticket counter and b
Real ID isn't dying because of privacy concerns. I think (at least in Michigan), it's about the cost for the states. States were ok with the plan until it hit them that it cost them money. Also let's consider the fact the states were asked to basically implement Real ID after they spent tons of money on homeland security.
There are things that I think that the ACLU should fight. This isn't one of them though. RealID will never really go away. What it'll become is a federal requirement for the next incarnation of state DLs having to match a federal data standard. This is generally a good thing. What the really big up roar with the current RealID is that many states have gone their own way with having bar codes or digital information on their DLs, but only that state's systems can read the info off the card, and no one is willing to spend additional money just to conform to a federal standard. The main idea behind RealID is that you could have any of the 50 state's DL and they'd all "just work" in each other's and the federal computer system. Making "just work" would require lots of effort and money though.
Let's be honest there is no additional privacy problems with RealID. If you are in a position to be stopped and asked for State or Federal ID by a state or federal government official for government services, then you are either going to provide that information in a verbal or written form to those federal, state, or city officials or you won't be receiving that government service that you wanted. If you wanted to access a "controlled access area", then you could be "detained" while those government officials make sure that you aren't on any most wanted list, have outstanding warrants or on any special watch for lists.
If the government is hunting for you, they know your name and last known address. RealID was supposed to make it trivial to swipe a DL through a reader so all that DL info could be auto populated rather than manually entered. This is supposed to be a the huge privacy concern needing ACLU attention?
No, that's not what its for. Clearly you have been mislead.
"Under REAL ID, the government would have easy access to an incredible amount of personal data stored in one national database (or, according to the DHS description, 56 State and Territory databases, each of which can access all of the others)."
The senator from New Mexico (I believe it was New Mexico anyway) said that the ultimate goal is to track everything. Every time you buy something, even with cash, it will be entered into the national database. 7Eleven will require you to swipe your card for purchasing gas, a snickers bar, or explosives from their terrorist discount bin.
Real ID IS bad news. It has severe privacy implications. Please research before commenting. The quote above is from here [epic.org].
The purpose of a driver's license is to show and prove proficiency in driving, not anything else. It is not meant as a defacto identification card or anything else. It is a license to drive, period.
The fourth amendment guarantees us security of papers. How can we have security of papers if all of our information is stored in every government database across the entire union? That sounds like the opposite of security of papers. We can refuse to show our papers, but it won't matter because the government will already have them.
The purpose of a driver's license is to show and prove proficiency in driving, not anything else. It is not meant as a defacto identification card or anything else. It is a license to drive, period.
Do you write checks or use credit cards? Usually, you are required to show your DL at the same time. That state government issued DL is the only ID that businesses have of verifying who you actually are. I'm sure that folks don't want the DL or the SSN used as a form of ID other than just between the individual a
Credit Cards? Are you kidding? Unless I'm making a big ticket purchase, I am never asked to show an ID when using my credit card. My girlfriend even has "Ask For ID" written in the signature panel, and its rare that someone even checks.
Not really. When I can get a note from a non-governmental agency that tells the state ID bureau "Nevermind your rules, give this person an ID." it means there are no requirements and any fake ID is just as good as the state-issued one. What is happening in Illinois is the local Mexican embassy/consulate office can give you a little card that says you don't have to present any other proof of who you are because there isn't any other proof. The Secretary of State's office has decided to accept this and issue
The purpose of a driver's license is to show and prove proficiency in driving, not anything else. It is not meant as a defacto identification card or anything else. It is a license to drive, period.
in most cases, it's a 2-in-1 card. it serves are both a license to drive and as government-issued identifacation. you can get a non-license "state ID card".
here in Saskatchewan, we have our ID card and our actual driver's license is a small sheet of cardstock-like paper that we get a new one of every year and a
RealID did nothing beneficial, but made it real easy for the feds to watch your movements.
How?
Make it a federal requirement for everything.
Alcohol? Scan. Cigarettes? Scan. Bank transactions? Scan. Anything they want a scan done on, they just ram through a federal law to require a scan of your RealID.
What purpose does this serve? Security? Gimme a freaking break. It does nothing but needlessly invade the privacy of every citizen of this country while providing ZERO security whatsoever.
It's a program that needs to die and STAY DEAD. Lest you be required to present your RealID any time a cop asks or risk arrest (federal requirements for travel between states you know, commerce clause and whatnot...)
"Let's be honest there is no additional privacy problems with RealID."
The government wants to share data with Mexico, Europe and Canada and you don't consider that a privacy problem?
The government want to eventually get RFID into DLs and you don't consider that a privacy problem?
Let me guess, you are from North Korea or the former East Germany?
"Let's be honest there is no additional privacy problems with RealID."
The government wants to share data with Mexico, Europe and Canada and you don't consider that a privacy problem?
The government want to eventually get RFID into DLs and you don't consider that a privacy problem?
Let me guess, you are from North Korea or the former East Germany?
Excuse me, but Europe actually has data privacy laws, unlike the USA. If your data DID get over here, at least the law prevents it being used for any purpose other than the one for which it was legitemately obtained. Whereas when MY data was given ILLEGALY to the American government because I got on a plane to the US, it had no protection at all.
I did read. I was merely pointing out that at least when his data comes over here, it's protected, whereas when the US government illegaly takes mine, it's not. Quite an important difference.
Identification is only as good as the people screening it. You can standardize driver's license standards all over the place, but in the end, if the guy who is supposed to be scrutinizing the id isn't paying attention or is typically lackadaisical, the id is worthless. It's a mechanism in any formulaic Hollywood movie, but it happens to be true. When was the last time a sales clerk bothered to look on the back of your credit card for a signature, or compare it to the one written on the slip/screen?
Credit signatures aren't for identification; you're saying you agree to the contract of the card (when you sign the card) and that you won't charge back the purchase (when you sign the receipt). That's a very general view, but you can do more research.
It's sometimes easy to forget about the work that organizations such as the ACLU do. I doubt most citizens are even aware of the kind of things that the ACLU actively fights for.
Organizations like these should be applauded for their work. We need more people willing to do this kind of thing.
Real ID will not be stopped and it is yet another infringement on our rights by the gov't. Add it to the ever-growing list of violations: They violate the 1st Amendment by opening mail, caging demonstrators and banning books like America Deceived (book) [iuniverse.com] from Amazon. They violate the 2nd Amendment by confiscating guns during Katrina. They violate the 4th Amendment by conducting warrant-less wiretaps. They violate the 5th and 6th Amendment by suspending habeas corpus. They violate the 8th Amendment by torturing
Jose Padilla [wikipedia.org] wasn't captured in Afghanistan, but he was arrested in Chicago, IL. Nor was he sent to Gitmo, but he was held incommunicado in the USA. As were others. Oh, I see you mention him. There's also Hamdi [wikipedia.org] who though captured in Afghanistan is a US citizen. And the USSC ruled he could not be deprived of Habeas Corpus.
If given the chance next year I'll vote for Ron Paul again, I first voted for him for President in 1988.
I probably will as well, though as I said I'm not as sanguine about all his policy positions. For me, he is more like the Federal "Reset Button", which I think this government could use (and is overdue for). If it turns out I have to pick as usual between a democratic statist and a republican statist in the final election, I will take the liberal statism in a heartbeat; at least they don't want to te
Granted, there might be some benefits to a unified ID across the 50 states, but combating terrorism isn't one of them. Instead, we should be asking if the other so-called benefits are worth the privacy invation and expansion of the Federal government that this program would entail.
Exactly why are my Federal tax dollars being used for this sort of thing, when it seems perfectly clear that my state government is already perfectly capable of issuing ID? The implications that someone is a terrorist if they can't produce the "satisfactory" identification document is a Constitutional problem, not a law enforcement issue.
Besides, what would an elderly father in law - who can't legally drive - do? Should he really be denied seeing his daughter married because he can't produce the ID to board a plane? This bill assumes (incorrectly) that everyone has an ID. That's not the way it's supposed to work.
1. States issue photo IDs already to people that do not drive.
2. The problem is exactly that the states are issuing VALID ID to anyone. In Chicago, for example, you can get a driver's license or state ID with a birth certificate or passport. Or, if you happen to not have either one of those, you can get a note from the Mexican embassy saying in effect to give this person an ID with no further verificattion. Yes indeed, Illinois does recognize the authority of the Mexican embassy to determine ID requirements for the state.
Please tell me the difference between my drawing a driver's license with a crayon and using it and what Illinois is doing. I don't see any difference at all.
If the states are going to issue an ID in any name with no proof this pretty much means the ID has no value. Of course people are going to abuse the system. Why can't I have three driver's licenses in different names under this sort of system? Why should teens pay for fake ID when they can get a "real" one from the state?
The reason behind the Federal rules is to put a stop to the states that are issuing ID with no rules whatsoever.
More anarchy, crime, terrorism, fear... or stronger government. There's probably a third way around this that involves smaller nations with fewer rules, but that's for political theorists, not technical writers.
More anarchy, crime, terrorism, fear... or stronger government.
Our government perpetrates more anarchy, crime, terrorism, and fear than any "enemy combatants."
...but that's for political theorists, not technical writers.
No, its not for political theorists. It is for the governed to decide how they will be governed. You don't need a degree in Political Science to know the difference between right and wrong.
It is official; ACLU now confirms: RealID is dying
One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered RealID community when DOJ confirmed that RealID market share has dropped yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of all state government ID programs. Coming close on the heels of a recent Homeland Security survey which plainly states that RealID has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. RealID is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last in the recent Immigration and Customs comprehensive identification test.
You don't need to be a Brownie to predict RealID's future. The hand writing is on the wall: RealID faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for RealID because RealID is dying. Things are looking very bad for RealID. As many of us are already aware, RealID continues to lose market share. Fake passports and imitations flow like a river of blood.
The Department of Justice is the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of its DC managing political stooges. The sudden and unpleasant departures of long time DOJ water-carriers Monica Goodling and Alberto Gonzales only serve to underscore the point more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: RealID is dying.
Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.
RealID leader Mike Chertoff states that there are 100 states which plan to use RealID. How many users of RealID are there? Let's see. The number of RealID versus other ID posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 100/5 = 20 RealID users. RealID posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of other ID posts. Therefore there are about 10 users of RealID. A recent article put RealID at about 80 percent of the overall ID market. Therefore there is only one actual RealID user. This is consistent with the number of RealID Usenet posts.
All major surveys show that RealID proponents have steadily declined in market share. RealID is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If RealID is to survive at all it will be among National Security Theatre dilettante dabblers. RealID continues to decay. Nothing short of a cockeyed miracle could save RealID from its fate at this point in time. For all practical purposes, RealID is dead.
Good - We shouldn't be using SSNs for identification (not even what they are intended for).
That being said, it probably is overkill. It would be better to have a method of central access to state id information as that the Real ID would provide. Phase in standardizations of State IDs, and viola, same effect, but probably cheaper and would make people happier.
Good - We shouldn't be using SSNs for identification (not even what they are intended for).
Maybe the ACLU could start claiming that Social Security is a civil liberty violation.
I don't think we'll ever get the US populace off that crack, but we could at least be honest, labeling the tax "a tax", and stop the crappy accounting sophistries.
One purported benefit of Real ID was uniform standards for state identification. Constitutionally states are obligated to recognize others' state IDs, so it would be nice to have a standard in place so that if my state's ID is good, people don't just go next door where the license is printed on card stock or something. I read part of Real ID was a minimum standard for preventing forgery, and I don't think this is a bad idea.
Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof.
This is the reason that your state-issued marriage license is recognized in the entire country (and incidentally, why the DOMA [wikipedia.org] Act banning a state's obligation to recognise other states' gay marriages is a crock of crap.)
Well, I can't speak for the GP, but assuming you reside in the United States, have you ever been in an auto accident with an individual who is not a legal resident?
Because the driver's license has been a de-facto state ID since forever, and changing that would upset a lot of social convenience. It seems like a lot of anguish so that some politicians can passive-aggressively avoid dealing with the immigration debate. The logical and correct solution is to stop avoiding the immigration debate. It's stupid on its face to everyone who doesn't have an agenda to give state IDs to people who are not here legally.
Coincidentally, about a month ago my cousin was hit by an uninsured illegal while driving. Due to quick thinking she avoided a direct hit that would have killed her. However, I have no idea how that should influence my decision. I would prefer:
a) Illegals not drive.
If that's not viable, I'd prefer
b) illegals be insured
although considering how much they charge teenage drivers, I can't imagine how anyone could afford an actuarially accurate number. That would still be better than the current situation of:
In British Columbia, the government runs the auto insurance. You can't register a vehicle (i.e. get a license plate) without insurance. Driving without insurance is illegal. Thus, almost everybody has insurance. This also makes "underinsured motorist" coverage dirt cheap, around $25/year, which gives you full coverage whether or not "the other guy" has any insurance or not.
I'm not saying our system is perfect, but it certainly would eliminate the problem you have described.
I'm sure that, on paper, that's exactly how it works here (Texas). It's just a matter of apathetic enforcement of the law. If you really wanted to be sure that no one can get on the road uninsured unless they steal a car, then police would have to show up the moment I pass the renewal deadline for my insurance policy without replacing it or transferring ownership of the car. Needless to say, this doesn't happen. I've seen ads where the police offer temporary "warrant amnesty", giving you a chance to tur
Better still, when the illegals show up to claim their latest 'benefit' of being in this country (their shiny new driver's license) grab 'em and ship 'em home. For Pete's sake, why call them illegals if we're not going to treat them as such?
I'd rather they go home so we can export the jobs that are exportable to them in their country rather than taking over the non-exportable jobs here at lower wages.
Farmhand.
Toilet cleaner.
laborer for a construction sub-contractor.
Exactly how many Americans do you know that either really want to work in one of those three jobs, or would be willing to pay $100/day for them?
Unlimited migration (NOT immigration -- these people don't want to be citizens!) is a fundamental part of a free market. If the entire population of Mexico wants to come and do low-level service jobs in the United States, they should just need to tell the Departments of State & Homeland Security
A report [ncsl.org] commissioned the National Governor's Association, the National Conference of State Legislatures and the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators puts the cost to the states at around $11 billion. The DHS puts the total cost at $23 billion over the next 10 years, of which $14 billion will be picked up by the states.
i hate to sound like a pessimist... (Score:5, Insightful)
Yeah, but they'll just do what they did with CARNIVORE. Wait a few months, change the name, and go about their plans as usual.
Re: (Score:2)
So how isn't this a national ID again? (Score:5, Insightful)
So with the bar-coded information we can't wipe the readability of the card with a magnet to stop the assholes at bars, liquors stores, etc from scanning us unnecessarily. Digital photos means that everyone's picture will be merged into the database of information shared with everyone else and "more stringent document checks" means that even more information will be in that same database. When all this information is linked how is it not a national ID database again?
I'm proud of the states that didn't crumble under the pressure of the Federal Government. At least someone out there is willing to tell them to fuck off -- regardless if it was over funding and not privacy implications.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:So how isn't this a national ID again? (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:So how isn't this a national ID again? (Score:4, Informative)
drinking age here is 19, which makes more sense to me.
Parent
Re:So how isn't this a national ID again? (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
They need to make sure that you are not wandering around the maintenance areas.
They can then require ID for those areas and have security request IDs to make sure anyone there is authorized. They don't need to know who a person is in public spaces. For instance they don't need to know who someone going to the game room is, I specifically mention this because my sister used to go the airport where we lived to play video games and occasionally she'd take me. If I wait in line at the ticket counter and b
It's all about the money (Score:5, Informative)
This sounds familiar. (Score:2, Interesting)
Real ID is in its death throes, and any signs of life are just last gasps.
Didn't Cheney say the same thing about the insurgency in Iraq a couple years ago?
It's a shame. (Score:5, Insightful)
Let's be honest there is no additional privacy problems with RealID. If you are in a position to be stopped and asked for State or Federal ID by a state or federal government official for government services, then you are either going to provide that information in a verbal or written form to those federal, state, or city officials or you won't be receiving that government service that you wanted. If you wanted to access a "controlled access area", then you could be "detained" while those government officials make sure that you aren't on any most wanted list, have outstanding warrants or on any special watch for lists.
If the government is hunting for you, they know your name and last known address. RealID was supposed to make it trivial to swipe a DL through a reader so all that DL info could be auto populated rather than manually entered. This is supposed to be a the huge privacy concern needing ACLU attention?
Re:It's a shame. (Score:5, Informative)
"Under REAL ID, the government would have easy access to an incredible amount of personal data stored in one national database (or, according to the DHS description, 56 State and Territory databases, each of which can access all of the others)."
The senator from New Mexico (I believe it was New Mexico anyway) said that the ultimate goal is to track everything. Every time you buy something, even with cash, it will be entered into the national database. 7Eleven will require you to swipe your card for purchasing gas, a snickers bar, or explosives from their terrorist discount bin.
Real ID IS bad news. It has severe privacy implications. Please research before commenting. The quote above is from here [epic.org].
The purpose of a driver's license is to show and prove proficiency in driving, not anything else. It is not meant as a defacto identification card or anything else. It is a license to drive, period.
The fourth amendment guarantees us security of papers. How can we have security of papers if all of our information is stored in every government database across the entire union? That sounds like the opposite of security of papers. We can refuse to show our papers, but it won't matter because the government will already have them.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Do you write checks or use credit cards? Usually, you are required to show your DL at the same time. That state government issued DL is the only ID that businesses have of verifying who you actually are. I'm sure that folks don't want the DL or the SSN used as a form of ID other than just between the individual a
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That doesn't make it a good thing.
Re: (Score:2)
What is happening in Illinois is the local Mexican embassy/consulate office can give you a little card that says you don't have to present any other proof of who you are because there isn't any other proof. The Secretary of State's office has decided to accept this and issue
Re: (Score:2)
in most cases, it's a 2-in-1 card. it serves are both a license to drive and as government-issued identifacation. you can get a non-license "state ID card".
here in Saskatchewan, we have our ID card and our actual driver's license is a small sheet of cardstock-like paper that we get a new one of every year and a
Re:It's a shame. (Score:5, Insightful)
How?
Make it a federal requirement for everything.
Alcohol? Scan.
Cigarettes? Scan.
Bank transactions? Scan.
Anything they want a scan done on, they just ram through a federal law to require a scan of your RealID.
What purpose does this serve? Security? Gimme a freaking break. It does nothing but needlessly invade the privacy of every citizen of this country while providing ZERO security whatsoever.
It's a program that needs to die and STAY DEAD. Lest you be required to present your RealID any time a cop asks or risk arrest (federal requirements for travel between states you know, commerce clause and whatnot...)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
"Let's be honest there is no additional privacy problems with RealID." The government wants to share data with Mexico, Europe and Canada and you don't consider that a privacy problem? The government want to eventually get RFID into DLs and you don't consider that a privacy problem? Let me guess, you are from North Korea or the former East Germany?
Excuse me, but Europe actually has data privacy laws, unlike the USA. If your data DID get over here, at least the law prevents it being used for any purpose other than the one for which it was legitemately obtained. Whereas when MY data was given ILLEGALY to the American government because I got on a plane to the US, it had no protection at all.
Re: (Score:2)
You don't need to see his identification (Score:2)
Identification is only as good as the people screening it. You can standardize driver's license standards all over the place, but in the end, if the guy who is supposed to be scrutinizing the id isn't paying attention or is typically lackadaisical, the id is worthless. It's a mechanism in any formulaic Hollywood movie, but it happens to be true. When was the last time a sales clerk bothered to look on the back of your credit card for a signature, or compare it to the one written on the slip/screen?
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Cheers to the ACLU (Score:3, Insightful)
Organizations like these should be applauded for their work. We need more people willing to do this kind of thing.
So... (Score:2)
Wish that'd happened 20 years ago when I could really use one.
Real ID will not be stopped. (Score:2, Informative)
They violate the 1st Amendment by opening mail, caging demonstrators and banning books like America Deceived (book) [iuniverse.com] from Amazon.
They violate the 2nd Amendment by confiscating guns during Katrina.
They violate the 4th Amendment by conducting warrant-less wiretaps.
They violate the 5th and 6th Amendment by suspending habeas corpus.
They violate the 8th Amendment by torturing
violating the Constitution of the USA (Score:3, Insightful)
Habeus doesn't apply to Gitmo. Period.
Jose Padilla [wikipedia.org] wasn't captured in Afghanistan, but he was arrested in Chicago, IL. Nor was he sent to Gitmo, but he was held incommunicado in the USA. As were others. Oh, I see you mention him. There's also Hamdi [wikipedia.org] who though captured in Afghanistan is a US citizen. And the USSC ruled he could not be deprived of Habeas Corpus.
Falcon
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
If given the chance next year I'll vote for Ron Paul again, I first voted for him for President in 1988.
I probably will as well, though as I said I'm not as sanguine about all his policy positions. For me, he is more like the Federal "Reset Button", which I think this government could use (and is overdue for). If it turns out I have to pick as usual between a democratic statist and a republican statist in the final election, I will take the liberal statism in a heartbeat; at least they don't want to te
Let's not forget... (Score:5, Insightful)
That all of the 9/11 terrorists had valid ID's
Granted, there might be some benefits to a unified ID across the 50 states, but combating terrorism isn't one of them. Instead, we should be asking if the other so-called benefits are worth the privacy invation and expansion of the Federal government that this program would entail.
Exactly why are my Federal tax dollars being used for this sort of thing, when it seems perfectly clear that my state government is already perfectly capable of issuing ID? The implications that someone is a terrorist if they can't produce the "satisfactory" identification document is a Constitutional problem, not a law enforcement issue.
Besides, what would an elderly father in law - who can't legally drive - do? Should he really be denied seeing his daughter married because he can't produce the ID to board a plane? This bill assumes (incorrectly) that everyone has an ID. That's not the way it's supposed to work.
Re:Let's not forget... (Score:4, Interesting)
2. The problem is exactly that the states are issuing VALID ID to anyone. In Chicago, for example, you can get a driver's license or state ID with a birth certificate or passport. Or, if you happen to not have either one of those, you can get a note from the Mexican embassy saying in effect to give this person an ID with no further verificattion. Yes indeed, Illinois does recognize the authority of the Mexican embassy to determine ID requirements for the state.
Please tell me the difference between my drawing a driver's license with a crayon and using it and what Illinois is doing. I don't see any difference at all.
If the states are going to issue an ID in any name with no proof this pretty much means the ID has no value. Of course people are going to abuse the system. Why can't I have three driver's licenses in different names under this sort of system? Why should teens pay for fake ID when they can get a "real" one from the state?
The reason behind the Federal rules is to put a stop to the states that are issuing ID with no rules whatsoever.
Parent
Pick your poison (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Our government perpetrates more anarchy, crime, terrorism, and fear than any "enemy combatants."
No, its not for political theorists. It is for the governed to decide how they will be governed. You don't need a degree in Political Science to know the difference between right and wrong.
Fascinating inversion. (Score:3, Interesting)
The states are refusing to comply on the ID card, and are enforcing border controls.
This is a fascinating inversion of control.
Netcraft confirms it (Score:3, Funny)
One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered RealID community when DOJ confirmed that RealID market share has dropped yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of all state government ID programs. Coming close on the heels of a recent Homeland Security survey which plainly states that RealID has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. RealID is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last in the recent Immigration and Customs comprehensive identification test.
You don't need to be a Brownie to predict RealID's future. The hand writing is on the wall: RealID faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for RealID because RealID is dying. Things are looking very bad for RealID. As many of us are already aware, RealID continues to lose market share. Fake passports and imitations flow like a river of blood.
The Department of Justice is the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of its DC managing political stooges. The sudden and unpleasant departures of long time DOJ water-carriers Monica Goodling and Alberto Gonzales only serve to underscore the point more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: RealID is dying.
Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.
RealID leader Mike Chertoff states that there are 100 states which plan to use RealID. How many users of RealID are there? Let's see. The number of RealID versus other ID posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 100/5 = 20 RealID users. RealID posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of other ID posts. Therefore there are about 10 users of RealID. A recent article put RealID at about 80 percent of the overall ID market. Therefore there is only one actual RealID user. This is consistent with the number of RealID Usenet posts.
All major surveys show that RealID proponents have steadily declined in market share. RealID is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If RealID is to survive at all it will be among National Security Theatre dilettante dabblers. RealID continues to decay. Nothing short of a cockeyed miracle could save RealID from its fate at this point in time. For all practical purposes, RealID is dead.
Fact: RealID is dying
Re: (Score:2)
That being said, it probably is overkill. It would be better to have a method of central access to state id information as that the Real ID would provide. Phase in standardizations of State IDs, and viola, same effect, but probably cheaper and would make people happier.
Hasn't much of this been done already anyway?
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think we'll ever get the US populace off that crack, but we could at least be honest, labeling the tax "a tax", and stop the crappy accounting sophistries.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Real ID (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
However, I have no idea how that should influence my decision. I would prefer:
a) Illegals not drive.
If that's not viable, I'd prefer
b) illegals be insured
although considering how much they charge teenage drivers, I can't imagine how anyone could afford an actuarially accurate number. That would still be better than the current situation of:
c)
Re:Real ID (Score:4, Informative)
I'm not saying our system is perfect, but it certainly would eliminate the problem you have described.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
It strikes me that it would be easier, cheaper, and fairer to simply stop giving IDs to people here illegally. I mean they are here illegally.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I'd rather they go home so we can export the jobs that are exportable to them in their country rather than taking over the non-exportable jobs here at lower wages.
Farmhand.
Toilet cleaner.
laborer for a construction sub-contractor.
Exactly how many Americans do you know that either really want to work in one of those three jobs, or would be willing to pay $100/day for them?
Unlimited migration (NOT immigration -- these people don't want to be citizens!) is a fundamental part of a free market. If the entire population of Mexico wants to come and do low-level service jobs in the United States, they should just need to tell the Departments of State & Homeland Security
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)