Re Real ID Act, see today's Cato Daily Dispatch Podcast(www.cato.org)


PDA






alan
August 10, 2007, 07:40 PM
The above mentioned discusses the Real ID Act of 2005, some aspects of it's down side, there are several, and the fact that some states have enacted legislation that sort of tells the feds to "go stick it".

Unfortunately, what seems to have aroused the ire of state legislatures is money, as opposed to principle. Were The Congress to Fund The Mandates, did they suddenly acquire a printing press, or other magical powers, one wonders as to how much steel there would be in the spines of those state legislatures.

One of these days, we might find out, to our dismay at that. Meantime, getting on to your state legislators and or federal elected things just might prove worth the effort. Legislation has, in the past, been enacted, later to be amended and sometimes repealed.

If you enjoyed reading about "Re Real ID Act, see today's Cato Daily Dispatch Podcast(www.cato.org)" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
pdowg881
August 10, 2007, 07:54 PM
I know New Hmpshire siad they refuse to comply. We'll see what happens.

gridman
August 17, 2007, 10:51 AM
I have read that 19 states are currently opposing the Real ID act. I live in Washington state, and we are one of them.

What I think will happen is that the Feds will say, fine, you can oppose this. Then they'll wait till people start crying because you won't be able to enter a federal building, board an airplane, and other things.

MD_Willington
August 17, 2007, 12:13 PM
gridman, our local .gov has their own idea regarding an ID like that, such an ID if the deal goes through will be accepted in both WA State and at the Canadian border... Local .gov wants their own pork, not national pork.

Correia
August 17, 2007, 01:05 PM
This is Activism. Not L&P. L&P is currently closed.

Use this forum to come up with a plan of action. If you don't like Real ID, I don't want to know that you don't like it. I want to know what you're going to DO ABOUT IT.

Toss around some ideas. Make a plan. Take action. That's what this forum is for.

WeedWhacker
August 19, 2007, 06:32 AM
Le Plan:

At the moment, I'm planning to move to a state with more freedom, less laws, and also planning to refuse any sort of RealID (http://realnightmare.org/)-type card, which as I understand, essentially means I'm going to forgo any gov't identification, to include a driver's license.

Meanwhile, I'm reading up on the DHS mandated-by-fiat implementation of the EEVS system (http://www.cfbf.com/agalert/AgAlertStory.cfm?ID=877&ck=352407221AFB776E3143E8A1A0577885) (which failed to pass in congress), informing others about the dangers of an ID which requires a SSAN (along with a huge pile of other information) which in turn is required to hold/open a bank account, and now, get/keep a job.

Without a job, it's rather difficult to buy things, or even keep things to sell - it's a good thing this isn't being implemented as a chip to be inserted into one's right hand, else they'd really hear some screaming. Even without the apocalyptical overtones, giving the federal gov't a central repository of detailed information on its citizen-subjects *and* requiring the same for a host of non-criminal purposes should send shivers down the spine of any liberty-lover.

My primary goal is to have all my things in order so that if/when I'm fined for not having papers and refuse to pay, I'll be able to keep all or most of my assets and livelihood intact for the time when I'm released from being kidnapped and placed in ye ol' crossbar hotel. :(

-edit
I'm late to the game, but it would also help, or have helped, if I were to become a resident of the target state even before the move so that I could bring these issues up to the state and local gov'ts before there is a problem with civilians refusing their papers. Buying some property in the target state is one way to go about this.

coyote_jr
August 19, 2007, 01:07 PM
Ok here's the plan:
1. Move to NH.
2. Bring your guns.
3. Dig in and get ready.

Autolycus
August 20, 2007, 02:48 AM
Why not get the ID and then try to destroy the magnetic strip or something? Just try to get enough people to do it and maybe they will give up.

I am trying to keep the thread on topic for this forum.

WeedWhacker
August 20, 2007, 07:31 AM
Why not get the ID and then try to destroy the magnetic strip or something? Just try to get enough people to do it and maybe they will give up.

I'd thought about doing as much with the passport (and probably will, if I decide that having one is better than not having one), but that's not much of a solution.

1. ALL your personal information will still be stored in a big federal database, a tempting target for crackers especially when the caretakers don't have a good track record with security.

2. They may claim the card belongs to them, such as driver's licenses or military IDs, and if they suspect you've damaged them, they may fine or otherwise punish you.

3. If everyone goes along with this crap, what will we all do when they try to make the NEXT big power grab?


The facts of the matter are, RealID is a federal program, forcibly implemented through the states, which is unconsitutional, and the gov't's abuses of power in this regard are well documented (e.g. census abuse during WW2), and in the case of RealID, we've already been given a partial list of abuses:

1. Can't freely travel without your federal papers

2. Can't open a bank account, greatly hindering your ability to buy and/or sell

... and if you count the new DHS ruling

3. Can't get (or perhaps even hold) a job without a SSAN

mons meg
August 21, 2007, 01:10 AM
Well, my plan already sort of worked...I emailed my state legislator that the proposed legislation against REALID was too weak, and he agreed and told me he would bring it up to the committee. Several months later, the new Oklahoma REALID legislation had way more teeth and said Oklahoma would not comply due to Tenth Amendment issues. I think it becomes law Nov. 1st.

So, you see...sometimes plans work. I'm not taking credit, I just helped stoke the fire a bit.

Autolycus
August 21, 2007, 06:03 PM
Perhaps trying to create other alternative IDs that are acceptable. I know some places use credit cards as proof of identity. While not government IDs they are from a private group or business which may help our cause.

Perhaps trying to create a private company that would issue IDs. I would rather not have the government give me any more of its good ideas. :rolleyes:

brighamr
November 13, 2007, 12:10 PM
Montana was the origional state that wrote a "declaration of independence" from the Real ID act... part of the reason I moved here. for people living in other states, write your officials, explain why the real id act serves no purpose, and encourage them to sign on with the other states that refuse to enforce it.

If you need some political firepower, copy and paste the text from this in your letter:

http://www.aclu.org/safefree/general/29401prs20070417.html
Montana Enacts 'Declaration of Independence' From Real ID (4/17/2007)

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT: media@dcaclu.org

Governor Signs Nation's First Statutory Rejection Of Act

WASHINGTON - The American Civil Liberties Union today applauded the Montana legislature and Governor Brian Schweitzer for enacting the nation's first flat-out statutory rejection of the Real ID Act, which seeks to create a backdoor national identity card system by federalizing state driver's licenses. Montana's action was the latest and strongest step in an ongoing rebellion against the act in states across the nation.

"In January, the state of Maine held a 'Boston Tea Party' when they became the first to declare their opposition to Real ID by passing a resolution," said Tim Sparapani, an ACLU Legislative Counsel. "Today Montana has taken that rebellion to an entirely new level by issuing what amounts to a 'Declaration of Independence' from the act."

The Montana law declares that the state "will not participate in the implementation" of Real ID, bans the state's Motor Vehicle Division from implementing it, and directs the agency to report to the governor any attempts by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to "secure the implementation" of the act.

"Governor Schweitzer and Montana have taken a bold and admirable step by rejecting this misguided law," said Scott Crichton, Executive Director of the ACLU of Montana. "In the face of supposed threats that our citizens' right to travel would be curbed, we stand firm and declare loudly that this legislation is not good for the people of our state and we refuse to participate in it. I am very proud of our state and the legislators who reached across the partisan divide to pass this bill without one dissenting voice."

The Montana legislation is a decisive escalation of a growing state rebellion against Real ID:

Maine and Idaho have both passed resolutions rejecting participation in Real ID, and Arkansas recently passed two similar anti-Real ID measures.
Binding legislation similar to Montana's is awaiting the governor's signature in Washington.
Thirteen more states have passed anti-Real ID legislation through at least one legislative chamber, and bills have been introduced in 12 additional states.
In Congress, several bills to fix Real ID have been introduced, including strong proposals by Senators Akaka and Sununu and Congressman Tom Allen.
"Montana's decisive stand adds further momentum to the Great Real ID Rebellion of 2007," said Barry Steinhardt, Director of the ACLU's Technology and Liberty Project. "The whole scheme is premised on creating uniform national identity papers; when a state like Montana tells the federal government to take a hike, it brings down the whole house of cards. If there was ever any question that Congress would be forced to revisit this misguided law, there is no more."

A map showing the status of anti-Real ID legislation in the states is available at: www.realnightmare.org/news/105/

Comprehensive information about Real ID, including links to the Montana legislation, is available at: www.RealNightmare.org

ilbob
November 13, 2007, 01:33 PM
Since the ACLU is actually opposed to personal liberty for individuals in most cases, I have to wonder if maybe the REAL ID is a good idea.

I am guessing their true opposition is based on how much this would reduce the influx of illegals and the number of said illegals voting democratic.

Autolycus
November 26, 2007, 06:47 PM
ilbob your logic does not make sense at all. The ACLU is a civil liberties organization that helps out everyone. Just because they disagree with you on the 2nd amendment does not mean they are against all amendments.

Texas feels that homosexuality should be a crime. Not to mention that they feel that anything other than "normal" sexual contact is a crime and worthy of jailtime does not mean all Texans are bad.

Ed Ames
November 28, 2007, 09:17 PM
I noticed the ACLU was out warning people in Boston against submitting to warrantless searches (http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/awelcomematforgunsearches) for guns. Those searches must be a good idea too, right? :banghead:

If you think the ACLU works against you, you have been duped.

ServiceSoon
November 28, 2007, 11:07 PM
Real ID alive and well in Indiana. (http://www.in.gov/bmv/3382.htm)
and the fact that some states have enacted legislation that sort of tells the feds to "go stick it".How did that strategy workout with the federal 55 mph speed limit & federal 21 year old drinking age.

Zedicus
November 30, 2007, 06:24 PM
Idaho was the second state to completely reject the Real ID Act.

http://www.aclu.org/safefree/general/28942prs20070308.html

Nobody's_Hero
January 29, 2008, 07:48 AM
Maine makes the claim to be the first state to pass legislation blocking the implementation of the DHS's REAL I.D. Act. But that's beside the point. The point is that this act is extemely unpopular among freedom-loving states.

You can find out about the Real I.D. act for yourself at:
http://www.no2realid.com/

I just bought my second firearm a few weeks ago: a S&W .32 Magnum snub-nose. I'm thinking I should have bought another rifle to replace my .22 instead. At this point, I think my chances of being attacked by my own government are higher than being mugged in an alley.

New Jersey is supporting and already implementing some of the changes required by the Real I.D. act. Wimps. ;)

ExSoldier
January 29, 2008, 09:05 AM
Welcome to the new world order. Soon your tv will be looking back at you. This has always been inevitable.

Btw, the FOUNDER of the ACLU was a card carrying member of the Communist Party. I'm fairly certain that the communists hold the restraints on government ennumerated in the Bill of Rights with equal contempt. Ya think? Did you know that prior to becoming a USSC Justice, Ruth Bader Ginsburg had never been a judge. Her credability to intrepret the Constitution comes from having been Lead Counsel for the ACLU. Hmmmmmmmmmmm.

ServiceSoon
January 29, 2008, 12:26 PM
Welcome to the new world order. Soon your tv will be looking back at you. This has always been inevitable.

Btw, the FOUNDER of the ACLU was a card carrying member of the Communist Party. I'm fairly certain that the communists hold the restraints on government ennumerated in the Bill of Rights with equal contempt. Ya think? Did you know that prior to becoming a USSC Justice, Ruth Bader Ginsburg had never been a judge. Her credability to intrepret the Constitution comes from having been Lead Counsel for the ACLU. Hmmmmmmmmmmm.

You should probably add to that statement that later in life the founder of the ACLU, Roger Baldwin denounced communism. (http://www.harvardsquarelibrary.org/unitarians/baldwin.html)

Groovski
February 7, 2008, 05:56 PM
What to do about RealID:

Move to a state that will not comply with the RealID act such as Montana or New Hampshire so you can drive.

Get a passport so you can fly without having a RealID. Anyone can get a passport under a fake name, and passports are universally accepted as ID for boarding planes:

http://www.governing.com/articles/6real.htm

Most people view the U.S. passport as the gold standard for security, but the passport office is not required to verify all state birth certificates. Even if a person applying for a passport can’t provide proper identity documents, such as a previous passport or government ID, that person can appear with a witness to corroborate identification. Moreover, passports can be issued in any name as long as someone submits public records to establish the exclusive use of an assumed name for a long period of time. As one DMV expert put it, “If you’ve been living as Minnie Mouse for the past five years, you can get a passport in the name of Minnie Mouse.”

Share condolences with the law-abiding passengers on your plane who in the name of RealID and post-9/11 airline security exposed their whole identity in a nationwide database accessible to any unscrupulous DMV clerk in any state in order to feel safe, but be aware and vigilant that some passengers could have fake RealIDs provided by same unscrupulous DMV clerks (just as some of the 9/11 hijackers obtained driver's licenses from corrupt DMV clerks):

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9404E1D61E38F936A35751C0A9659C8B63

Plan your life around not entering any Federal Government buildings that will require a RealID. The Federal Government will presumably shut down in non-RealID states anyway, because state residents will no longer be able to enter them.

Convert to a religion, such as Muslim for example, that objects to pictures of your whole face or identity cards in general in the event that your government forces you to get RealID - and hope it's upheld in court on grounds of religious freedom:

http://www.news.com/Religious-minorities-face-Real-ID-crackdown/2009-1028_3-6229258.html?tag=nefd.pulse

or, just write your congressman, governor, president, etc. and tell them you really, really don't want it.

Jdude
February 10, 2008, 02:42 PM
Should we petition our respective states for a constitutional convention, and have them add an amendment which basically says:

Amendment the 28th
No identification shall be required for interstate travel, excluding aircraft; no identification shall be required for purchase or sale of common commodities, services, or goods; and no remotely readable technology shall be incorporated into any identification device.

I am particularly interested in the opinion of El Tejon here.
What do you all think?

Jdude
February 10, 2008, 02:44 PM
Double

If you enjoyed reading about "Re Real ID Act, see today's Cato Daily Dispatch Podcast(www.cato.org)" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!