Maine Says "No Thanks" to Federal Real ID Act

[ptmmatssc]

A) Fed gov is SUPPOSE to be there for defense of country etc. How does national ID do that? Anything can be forged and having just one thing to try and forge( national ID ) makes it EASIER for criminals/terrorists/BGs to concemtrate on defeating just one thing rather than many .

B) Does anyone really want ALL states to have to adhere to the exact same guidelines for ANYTHING or would you rather be able to have the ability to shape your state as to how YOU think it should be .

I think it's a waste of time and money . We would be better off just securing our borders properly and maybe having the gov actually pay attention and work together rather than c**k block eack other . Really , if I can get approved or denied for a credit card in 30 seconds , why can't the gov get a little info on someone in the same amount of time without the need for a national ID .Besides , just think , if there is wrong info associated with your national id , how easy do you think it would be to fix it? Just think DMV multiplied ten fold or a hundred . :banghead:

 

[ArfinGreebly]

The Bright Side

Well, at least a forged ID will cost more now.

You have to wonder what problem they're trying to solve.

The .gov has shown little inclination to eject intruders and likewise to keep them from working. In fact, .gov has said it's necessary that they stay and that they work.

So, that's not the target problem.

Please don't ever get the idea the .gov can devise a system of identification that can't be hacked.

I suppose if I were smart, I'd get in on the ground floor of black market forged IDs. A guy in that racket will make a killing.

What was the problem this solves, again?

Hello?

 

[dasmi]

Fantastic. Go Maine!

 

[Jeff White]

The national ID genie was let out of the bottle decades ago.

I'm still waiting for one of you guys to explain to me exactly what this changes.

ArfinGreebly said;

Well, at least a forged ID will cost more now.

And exactly what can you do with a forged ID? Buy beer underage, get into a casino or an "R" rated movie?

When someone hands me a drivers license, he's just handing me a card. He's not the person who the license says he is and I don't believe the license is valid until the computer database tells me so. Anyone forging an ID to pass scrutiny with law enforcement will have to be able to access the database to input the information on the false ID.

Your drivers license and/or state issued photo ID card has been the defacto national ID card that all of you are so worried about having for decades.

How does it feel to have worn the mark of the beast for years and not even realized it?

No one is requiring you to get a drivers license or state issued photo ID. No where in the Real ID act does it require every citizen to have one. The solution is quite simple, if you don't want to wear the mark of the beast by carrying a national ID card, don't drive and don't get a state issued photo ID. You can accomplish everything you need to do in our society with a passport.

You guys are getting all upset over nothing. What year did the IRS begin requiring social security numbers of children on tax returns? That's when the national ID started. That system requires everyone to register.

Ya'll are a day late and a dollar short on this issue...it's already been done....

Jeff

 

[Lew]

Ya'll are a day late and a dollar short on this issue...it's already been done....

That doesn't mean we should roll over and not fight further infringement of rights does it? I mean, yes, I agree that we missed some battles in the past (I don't think there should be a ssn card at all) but I disagree with adopting a defeatist attitude. When you're in law enforcement, it's a great facility to have centralized information on anyone you like, but isn't it a bit scary to think about when the day's over?

 

[Jeff White]

Lew,
Tell me what Real ID does that isn't already being done. The drivers license as the defacto national ID started as soon as all the states and territories required drivers licenses. The information may not have been computerized but it was there and it was shared.

Where is the new infringment of anyone's rights? What does Real ID do, that isn't already being done? Can anyone tell me?

Jeff

 

[RealGun]

Implementing REAL ID is a setup for future federal laws making reference to or relying upon its existence. There has to be a national standard for that to mean anything and satisfy all the attorneys.

Thinking in terms of concealed handgun licenses, not all States issue them, and the requirements vary. If the Feds had a purpose, they would push for uniformity. They leverage it with the income tax law, so if you don't like it, attack the income tax and how the feds game that power. Without a funding provision, States could say "buzz off" with impunity.

Note that there needs to be, and I believe is, a provision for Real ID not being an unfunded mandate, else States could ignore it. So I think this Maine type of reaction will never be more than a nonbinding resolution without losing federal highway funds.

To me, Real ID serves a worthwhile purpose. I don't believe concern about rights and liberty should be a suicide pact. I also demand that voters be able to prove their eligibility in a practical way. The notion of illegal immigrants voting bothers me greatly.

I think much of the opposition is disingenuous, the real concern being Democrats losing bogus votes.

 

[geronimotwo]

I prefer LOCAL control over national

+1

i prefer county control to state, much easier to have a voice, and make change.

States can no longer function without federal dollars.

it's to bad we don't remember where this money comes from.

 

[Manedwolf]

Where is the new infringment of anyone's rights? What does Real ID do, that isn't already being done? Can anyone tell me?

Well, you're in Illinois, which isn't a free state, so it might be a matter of perspective.

MY state, which is a free state, allows you the option to have your photo and social security number expunged entirely from your driver's license record. If you do that, you have to bring a birth certificate in person for renewals, but it's an option if you value privacy. Also, the CCW license is LOCAL, issued by the local chief of police, and is in no way linked to the DMV information.

So yes, it would infringe on my rights. Illinois, which has mandatory FOIDs and all sorts of other affronts to the Constitution, probably not so much so.

 

[ilbob]

Lew,
Tell me what Real ID does that isn't already being done. The drivers license as the defacto national ID started as soon as all the states and territories required drivers licenses. The information may not have been computerized but it was there and it was shared.

Where is the new infringment of anyone's rights? What does Real ID do, that isn't already being done? Can anyone tell me?

Jeff

There is a certain amount of truth to what Jeff says.

But in the end, you have to draw a line in the sand as to how much of your liberty you are willing to lose to the illusion of safety.

Personally, I think some way to weed out illegals and positively identify criminals and terrorists is a pretty good idea. I am becoming less sure that RealID is the answer. It seems more likely to become a tool used against those who are not criminals, illegals, and terrorists than against those who are.

OTOH, if we are going to issue state ID cards (which is really what a DL has become), it ought to meaningfully ID an individual, and in most states it just does not do that at present. If we are not going to make it a meaningful ID card, then we should give up all pretense that it is, and sell them to anyone that wants one.

 

[sigman4rt]

Finally something comes out of Augusta that makes me smile and say "Thank You."

 

[crazed_ss]

What I think is stupid however is that a state like California can decide to issue drivers licences to illegal aliens.

CA Hasnt decided to issue driver's licenses to illegals. Gil Cedillo, a State Senator, has introduced the bill 8 times. It has failed 8 times.

He recently introduced it for the ninth time. If history is any indication, it will die a ninth time.
http://www.contracostatimes.com/mld/cctimes/news/politics/16463746.htm

 

[mons meg]

Where is the new infringment of anyone's rights? What does Real ID do, that isn't already being done? Can anyone tell me?

I would think that would be enough reason to not have Real ID. It doesn't accomplish anything, and costs the States money to implement. I don't want my tax dollars used for window dressing.

 

[ArfinGreebly]

. . . new infringment . . .

Where is the new infringment of anyone's rights?

Two possibilities here:

1. The new ID accomplishes nothing new.
   Then why bother? It's another expensive boondoggle.
2. The new ID actually does accomplish something new.
   That worries me. If what we have already works, what new thing -- beneficial to the general population -- could this ID do for us?

Years ago, I suggested to a friend of mine that it would be cool to incorporate a barcode into license plates. That would make it easier for companies to know which cars are parked in their lots, would make it possible for cops with radar guns to know precisely which car in a cluster was being clocked. I figured removing the possibility for error was a good thing.

My friend patiently explained to me that the collateral damage from this would simply be too great an infringement on privacy. He cited a number of examples where a (constant) public record of your whereabouts would be a bad thing. I was miffed that he didn't like my cool idea.

In the years (nay, decades) that have transpired since, I have understood what he meant by "collateral damage to our rights" and have concluded that having government know more and more about our activities is a bad idea, ranging from "undesirable" to "really really really outrageously bad."

The day your Real ID contains an RFID chip that allows your movements to be tracked as a sequence of data points (. . . oh, he was at Starbucks at 07:37, work at 08:03, Wendy's at 12:10, Borders Books at 12:22, and . . . ahha! . . . here he is at Outrageous Guns from 12:32 to 12:51 -- flag this guy -- and back at work at 13:09 . . .) is the day you've been reclassified as wildlife, needing to be tracked for its own good. The idea that this is okay is basically a subscription to the "well, if you have nothing to hide" philosophy that assumes that government is our friend and guardian.

There's some legislator in Arizona (is it Arizona?) trying to pass some law that would, overnight, convert all the Minutemen on the border from patriots to "domestic terrorists." By definition. Simply by being an armed group.

And you want a government that behaves like this to know where you are at all times?

That's what RFID in the Real ID card gives you.

You been tagged, Dude!

 

[Sharps-shooter]

What does Real ID do, that isn't already being done? Can anyone tell me?

I'll say, "wasting billions of additional taxpayer dollars". I mean, if it isn't doing anything that isn't already being done, what do you say we spend the hundreds of millions of dollars per state on something else?

Either it's doing something new, with pros and cons that could be disagreed upon, or it's a complete waste of money and energy. I'll leave it to everyone else to decide which they think is the case.

 

[ctdonath]

Real ID pulls a LOT of data together for easy access. By standardizing what's on that card, and moving firmly beyond being (even ostensibly) merely a "driver's license", you now are compelled under threat of prosecution and imprisonment to, on demand, reveal all kinds of data about yourself - most of which will likely not be relevant to whatever the alleged investigation in question supposedly needs. Put simply: it's a massive 4th Amendment violation; there is basically no way to require a search warrant when it is demanded, and there is no way for me to censor the information which will be imparted.

These national IDs also tend to replace the person. "Paperien, bitte." No papers? you don't officially exist, and thus are presumed illegal, until papers can be generated. Jeff sez "No where in the Real ID act does it require every citizen to have one" - maybe not now, but once Real ID is in place, it's an awfully short step to compulsory possession. Even now, many jurisdictions allow/require detaining anyone who does not produce ID on demand - in violation of the 4th Amendment. No ID? you don't exist. You are not you; your card is you - no card, no you.

 

[Jeff White]

ctdonath,

What new data is Real Id requiring you to submit? I have heard nothing about that. From what I've read about real Id all it does is standardize the identification requirements between the states for the issuance of the license.

If you have a drivers license, you have a national ID card and you've had it since you first got the license.

My personal take is that real ID is another of those useless eyewash programs to convince the electorate that the politicians are doing something to protect them.

As for having to have one, or even having to have a license on your person while you are driving, yes there are laws about having you license in your possession while driving, but it's probably the most ignored traffic law I know of. The number of people I stop who don't have there license on them has amazed me since I was first sworn in as a reserve officer in 1985 while I was still in the Army. Yes, we can write a citation for not having the DL on the person, and if the person shows up in court around here with a license in their possession it's dismissed. I can't speak for other parts of Illinois or other states.

If you have or have had a license in any state or territory and the Canadian provinces, I can get all of your information if I know last name, first name, middile initial and date of birth. Give me false information so that I get a hit that comes up with someone who doesn't match your physical description or is not on file, then you're going to go to jail for obstructing. It's been this way since before I started on the job almost 22 years ago.

Details, I want details about all this new information you have to give the government under Real ID. Prove to me that it's a greater invasion of privacy then you originally voluntarily gave up when you got your drivers license.

Jeff

 

[thexrayboy]

The Real ID act is about power. Plain and simple. Yes it has some possible benefits such as standardization but those are ancillary. It is nothing new in
regards to the government having mountains of information about subjects....I mean citizens. In the grand scheme of things, compared to all the other burdens that big government foists off onto the states and people this is just one more pain in the posterior. The biggest complaint that the states have against it is not from a privacy issue. They, like the federal government, don't give a red rats backside about privacy for people. The big to do is over it being an expensive unfunded mandate. When the Feds break out the big fiscal guns and start withholding federal money from states that refuse to go along the tune being whistled at state houses will change in a hurry. From a privacy point of view it is just one more nail in the coffin, not the entire hardware store.

Nonbinding resolutions are the governments equivalent to this forum. A nice way to bitch and moan about something they don't like but know that they have no real power to alter at the moment.

 

[hoji]

What new data is Real Id requiring you to submit?

Jeff,

In Texas we can renew our DL online. After 2008, we will be required to bring a birth certificate, passport, SS card{which is NOT to be used as ID} and or other supporting documents to PROVE we are who we say we are. The cost of renewal is going to go from 26 dollars IIRC to over 150.


Keep in mind that illegals will still be able to drive on their home country's DL and use{in the case of Mexico} their Matricula Consular cards for ID.


I went to a bank to cash a check recently{the bank was Wells Fargo} and had to show 2 pieces of photo ID to cash a 125 dollar check.{it also cost me a $5 "handling fee} They gave me a REAL hard time about my CHL as an acceptable form of ID. Next to me in line was a Mexican National cashing a $600 check with a Matricula Consular card and nothing else.


The real ID act will not affect illegals at all.

 

[1911 guy]

Real I.D. isn't just another drivers license.

The National I.D. would consolidate data from currently unrelated data bases. My Ohio D.L. does not have my SSN on it and has no info not pertinant to my DMV record encoded into the mag. strip on the back. All states are set up differently, that's why you have to punch in the numbers manually to retrieve anything from an out of state license. The REAL ID act would force states to change their formats (no fed. control is needed or warranted) and also force the citzen to surrender info they are not currently required to give for a D.L. (invasion of privacy). Further, the REAL I.D. act calls for RFID chipping of the cards, which is a blantant misuse of technology when required by law.

The risks far outweight any percieved benefit of this. Other than a government keeping s big brother like thumb on its populace, what purpose would this reaslistically serve? None. In and of itself, it's not a terrible thing, but it is useless and paves the way a bit farther down the slippery slope. I cannot see any use in any government wanting to tag me for my own safety and well being when they cannot seem to get a handle on the real problem children in our society.

 

[ilbob]

Years ago, I suggested to a friend of mine that it would be cool to incorporate a barcode into license plates. That would make it easier for companies to know which cars are parked in their lots, would make it possible for cops with radar guns to know precisely which car in a cluster was being clocked. I figured removing the possibility for error was a good thing.

I would not worry about bar codes. Off the shelf technology exists to allow your license plate number to be read directly these days. The hardware and software to do so can be purchased by just about anyone for a few hundred bucks.

 

[ArfinGreebly]

Big Brother vs ID Theft

Wow.

I completely missed that.

Watch the magician's other hand.

Here I wuz, all worried that Big Brother would be watching me. I could even make a case for worrying that Big Business would be watching me.

And then, the duh! moment.

ID thieves are gonna have a friggin' FIELD DAY. It's Christmas all year long!

Where else could you steal EVERYTHING you need to fake someone's ID?

Oh, no, that could never happen. These are forgery-proof. You need special government-only equipment to read them. Only Big Brother has access. You are completely safe.

BWAAAHAAHAAHAHAHAHAHAhahahahahahahaha! OMG! Gasp! Choke! Snerk! Snuffle . . . heeheeheeheeheeheehee, hahahahahahahahahahaha! Oh, no! Uhm! Ha! Hurk! Buhua . . . humph! *Sigh* Oh, lord, don't DO that! Gahhua! Hand me a kleenex. Damn.

Okay. Back on topic. Yes. Completely safe. Your .gov is looking out for you.

So, . . . thirsty? Kool-aid?

 

[ripcurlksm]

This is the mark of the beast.

 

[justashooter]

i am all for requiring a national ID card that would be issued only to citizens.

the first step in throwing out illegals is easily identifying them.

no card? no current visa? no I94? you're outa here.

 

[1911 guy]

How about this?

No visa or birth certificate, you're outta here. There is no need for any new "Papers" for any reason but further control of an already mentally stagnant population.

The problem isn't the information that the proposed I.D. would contain, it's the fact that it is localized and will be forged and stolen. Remember the new "forgery proof" money? The fakes hit the street before the real stuff from the Fed. Res. did.

The problem is that this will be required of us, but not the illegals who are getting a handout at the border.

The problem is that it is NOT optional, as Jeff intimated. It will be compulsory. Don't take all our words for it, yakking on the net. Go read some of the proposal for yourself and get scared.