Calif. plan to ban radio tags in IDs clears hurdle

Status
Not open for further replies.

rick_reno

member
Joined
Dec 25, 2002
Messages
3,027
http://news.com.com/Calif.+plan+to+...hurdle/2110-1029_3-5767072.html?tag=sas.email

Calif. plan to ban radio tags in IDs clears hurdle
Published: June 28, 2005, 3:34 PM PDT
By Alorie Gilbert
Staff Writer, CNET News.com

TrackBack Print E-mail TalkBack

A California bill that would temporarily prohibit the use of tiny radio devices in driver's licenses and other state-issued forms of identification won approval on Tuesday from the the State Assembly's Judiciary Committee in a 6-3 vote along party lines. The bill, SB 682, moves next to a floor vote in the Assembly, which last year derailed a proposal for restrictions on the conmmercial use of such devices, also known as radio frequency identification, or RFID, chips.

California Sen. Joe Simitian, a Democrat from Palo Alto, introduced the bill, called the Identity Information Protection Act of 2005, in February following public outcry over a Sutter County school's plan to outfit elementary students with ID badges containing RFID chips. The Senate approved the bill in May. It has since been signficantly amended, replacing the permanent ban with a 3-year "time-out" and allowing immediate use of the technology in certain cases.
 
Since REAL ID was signed, if the fed.gov decides it wants RFID and CA still wants federal money, they will have no choice. Feds have already shown that their laws trump states' rights, just like with medical marijuana.
 
Since REAL ID was signed, if the fed.gov decides it wants RFID and CA still wants federal money, they will have no choice.
While CA might want the money badly enough to roll over, other states might not be so bribable. What are the Feds going to do when, say, Montana says "screw you, and your chequebook too?"

What will happen when the people of that state hear what the state has done, and realize that their Federal taxes are leaving the state, not to return?
 
I would welcome the halt of federalist expansionism, but I'm afraid the states are addicted to the money now.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top