SC Rejects Real ID

Status
Not open for further replies.

rdalrymple

Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2008
Messages
32
Location
Upstate SC
That is awesome, Maine is also not liking REAL ID at all either, we've said we can't make it on time and that it isn't a good program, but unfortunately our state government hasn't come right out and opposed it like Sanford.
 
I love the fact that I live in SC. There's a law change making its way through the legislature here to drop the age of handgun ownership from 21 to 18. Don't know if it will pass the Senate, but Sanford is likely to sign it if it does. He's a true representative of the constitution and the people- trying to restrain the state government and stop the federal government's intrusions and bullying.

I am proud to say I was able to vote for him last election, the first election I was of age to vote in.
 
I am not really opposed to tightening up standards for issuance of government ID cards, but as best I can tell, the so called "Real ID" does not do that.

It just imposes a bunch of expensive requirements on states that serve no real purpose.

I would like to see states crack down on issuing DLs to illegals though.
 
Real ID forces states to share data with the federal government and creates a de facto national ID system. Remember, come May you are supposed to have a Real ID to clear TSA security at airports, otherwise you have to go to secondary screening (DHS is granting states wavers left and right though).


I'd like to see Virginia dump Real ID. I'll be contacting my state reps. and the gov. and reminding them about Maine, SC, Montana, and all the other states that are just saying "No." Somehow I doubt they will listen.:fire:
 
What is wrong with this bill?

The REAL ID Act establishes a national ID card by mandating that states include certain minimum identification standards on driver’s licenses. It contains no limits on the government’s power to impose additional standards. Indeed, it gives authority to the Secretary of Homeland Security to unilaterally add requirements as he sees fit.

Supporters claim it is not a national ID because it is voluntary. However, any state that opts out will automatically make non-persons out of its citizens. The citizens of that state will be unable to have any dealings with the federal government because their ID will not be accepted. They will not be able to fly or to take a train. In essence, in the eyes of the federal government they will cease to exist. It is absurd to call this voluntary.

Republican Party talking points on this bill, which claim that this is not a national ID card, nevertheless endorse the idea that “the federal government should set standards for the issuance of birth certificates and sources of identification such as driver’s licenses.” So they admit that they want a national ID but at the same time pretend that this is not a national ID.

This bill establishes a massive, centrally-coordinated database of highly personal information about American citizens: at a minimum their name, date of birth, place of residence, Social Security number, and physical and possibly other characteristics. What is even more disturbing is that, by mandating that states participate in the “Drivers License Agreement,” this bill creates a massive database of sensitive information on American citizens that will be shared with Canada and Mexico!

This bill could have a chilling effect on the exercise of our constitutionally guaranteed rights. It re-defines "terrorism" in broad new terms that could well include members of firearms rights and anti-abortion groups, or other such groups as determined by whoever is in power at the time. There are no prohibitions against including such information in the database as information about a person’s exercise of First Amendment rights or about a person’s appearance on a registry of firearms owners.

This legislation gives authority to the Secretary of Homeland Security to expand required information on driver’s licenses, potentially including such biometric information as retina scans, finger prints, DNA information, and even Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) radio tracking technology. Including such technology as RFID would mean that the federal government, as well as the governments of Canada and Mexico, would know where Americans are at all time of the day and night.

There are no limits on what happens to the database of sensitive information on Americans once it leaves the United States for Canada and Mexico - or perhaps other countries. Who is to stop a corrupt foreign government official from selling or giving this information to human traffickers or even terrorists? Will this uncertainty make us feel safer?

What will all of this mean for us? When this new program is implemented, every time we are required to show our driver’s license we will, in fact, be showing a national identification card. We will be handing over a card that includes our personal and likely biometric information, information which is connected to a national and international database.

H.R. 418 does nothing to solve the growing threat to national security posed by people who are already in the U.S. illegally. Instead, H.R. 418 states what we already know: that certain people here illegally are "deportable." But it does nothing to mandate deportation.

Although Congress funded an additional 2,000 border guards last year, the administration has announced that it will only ask for an additional 210 guards. Why are we not pursuing these avenues as a way of safeguarding our country? Why are we punishing Americans by taking away their freedoms instead of making life more difficult for those who would enter our country illegally?

H.R. 418 does what legislation restricting firearm ownership does. It punishes law-abiding citizens. Criminals will ignore it. H.R. 418 offers us a false sense of greater security at the cost of taking a gigantic step toward making America a police state.
 
Unfortunately Florida seems to have capitulated, but…


The Real ID Act becomes effective nationwide on May 11, 2008. Florida intends to file for a compliance extension that will push the date to January 1, 2010.

It may be wishful thinking on my part but reading between the lines many in Florida hope the program fails if enough states like SC refuse to participate. Too bad Tallahassee does not have the backbone to stand up to this.


Your current Florida license or ID card will continue to be valid as identification for federal purposes until December 1, 2014 for individuals born after December 1, 1964 and December 1, 2017 for everyone else.

I would be everyone else. :) Again a delaying tactic should the program fail.


After the 2014 and 2017 dates, Federal agencies will no longer accept a driver license or ID card unless it is Real ID compliant. This means you will not be allowed to board commercial flights or enter federal facilities unless you have a Real ID compliant document.

I don’t fly and I have no plans on going into a federal facility.

H.R. 418 does what legislation restricting firearm ownership does. It punishes law-abiding citizens. Criminals will ignore it. H.R. 418 offers us a false sense of greater security at the cost of taking a gigantic step toward making America a police state.

Those wishing to commit a terrorist act will ignore it as well. I don’t know if it will necessarily make the US a ‘police state’ but the fact that the program will do nothing to address terrorism or illegal immigration is reason enough to advocate the program be halted.
 
Maybe not now, but the day will come soon when we will have a real national ID. You can bet your life on this.
 
With any luck, enough states will band together to make it impossible for the fed to carry out the threat to block access citizens from non-compliant states from entering federal property without a passport.
 
Sanford, a true Constitutionalist...

South Carolina has had a rich history of true 'statesmen', (L. Mendel Rivers, Strom Thurmond, John C. Calhoun, Andrew Jackson, etc.) and many more who have championed issues involving state's rights in spite of opposition from the status quo. As another proud SC resident (born n' bred), I applaud Governor Sanford's stance on the "REAL ID" legislation.

rdalrympl: Kudos for sharing this info...

And a 'howdy' to all my fellow "sandlappers"....:D

Ron
 
Good for SC. I enjoyed my time there and wouldn't mind moving back sometime.

Your current Florida license or ID card will continue to be valid as identification for federal purposes until December 1, 2014 for individuals born after December 1, 1964 and December 1, 2017 for everyone else.

Hmmm. . . . I wonder if a non-resident FL CCL would work for people who live in states that HAVE succumbed to Federal blackmail on the so-called "RealID"? :evil:
 
I am not really opposed to tightening up standards for issuance of government ID cards, but as best I can tell, the so called "Real ID" does not do that.

It just imposes a bunch of expensive requirements on states that serve no real purpose.

I would like to see states crack down on issuing DLs to illegals though.
Agreed.I too have NO problem with making it a hard as possible for illegal aliens, terrorists, identity theives, etc to get an ID (or beable to copy/fake one).The problem is, It doesnt seem to me like "real ID" is really doing that very well, if at all, and at the same time, I think it exposes a lot of people, and a lot of information, to the possibily of being lost, stole, misused, etc. The government doesnt really have a very good track record at safe guarding information, and this just seems to collect a lot of it together at once, into one central place (the ID itself, or the computer system used to issue/verify them), where it can be easily stolen/misused. Add all that to the fact that it's implimenttation is VERY expensive, and the feds are making the states foot the bill, when the whole thing is the feds idea/order in the first place, isnt right, IMHO.If the feds want it, they should have to pay for it.Thats how it should work IMHO.Also REALLY dont like the way the feds are using what are effectively threats and blackmail to force the issue. If the majority of the states say "no" to something (and I dont think this shoud apply to just the "real ID" issue either), the feds shouldnt be able to FORCE the states to do or not do something (except in certain extreme, limited circumstances where the contituition CLEARLY grants the feds the power over something, and I dont see where they have that with "real ID")
 
Well, the ACLU hates the Real I.D. The NRA hates it. Nearly every state from the uber-liberal California to the southern conservative state of South Carolina is either holding protests or outrightly passing legislature to block its implementation.

There are a few federal lap dog states, like New Jersey, which already have it in effect and then some.

But overall, the opposition to this comprises of many broadly different kinds of people which normally couldn't gather in the same room without choking each other to death. I think that means: Bad Idea, big brother. Bad idea. ;)
 
I wish James Sensenbrenner (R-WI) and his allies in the House would get publicly called out for pushing Real ID in the first place. Remember, he forced it through by attaching it to a defense spending bill. DHS by all accounts didn't want it at the time, and now is getting all the public criticism for trying to implement it. The whole mess makes me wonder if Chertoff and his people are trying to force a confrontation with the states in order to kill Real ID implementation. Maybe I'm just reading too much into it.:D
 
Status
Not open for further replies.