Action needed on the Real ID Act

[Pepsi]

Montana Governor Foments Real ID Rebellion

Montana governor Brian Schweitzer (D) declared independence Friday from federal identification rules and called on governors of 17 other states to join him in forcing a showdown with the federal government which says it will not accept the driver's licenses of rebel states' citizens starting May 11.

If that showdown comes to pass, a resident of a non-complying state could not use a driver's license to enter a federal courthouse or a Social Security Administration building nor could he board a plane without undergoing a pat-down search, possibly creating massive backlogs at the nation's airports and almost certainly leading to a flurry of federal lawsuits.

States have until May 11 to request extensions to the Real ID rules that were released last Friday. They require states to make all current identification holders under the age of 50 to apply again with certified birth and marriage certificates. The rules also standardize license formats, require states to interlink their DMV databases and require DMV employee to undergo background checks.

Extensions push back the 2008 deadline for compliance as far as out 2014 if states apply and promise to start work on making the necessary changes, which will cost cash-strapped states billions with only a pittance in federal funding to offset the costs.

Last year Montana passed a law saying it would not comply, citing privacy, states' rights and fiscal issues.

In his letter (.pdf) to other governors, Schweitzer makes clear he's not going to ask for an extension.

"Today, I am asking you to join with me in resisting the DHS coercion to comply with the provisions of REAL ID, " Schweitzer wrote. "If we stand together either DHS will blink or Congress will have to act to avoid havoc at our nation's airports and federal courthouses."

But Homeland Security spokeswoman Laura Keehner says DHS has no intention of blinking.

"That will mean real consequences for their citizens starting in may if their leadership chooses not to comply," Keehner said. "That includes getting on an airplane or entering a federal building, so they will need to get passports."

Keehner says DHS's policy won't change even if Georgia -- one of the 17 states that has signaled strong opposition to the rules -- declines to apply for an extension.

If that scenario came to pass, every Georgian who flies out through the nation's busiest airport -- Atlanta-Hartsfield International -- would have to be patted down by Homeland Security agents and have his carry-on bag hand-screened, likely resulting in massive delays.

Keehner also suggests that patted-down citizens will turn their wrath not on the feds but on their state government.

For his part, Schweitzer wants Congress to step up and pass alternative legislation that would stop Real ID and re-instate a commission that was working on driver's license rules before the REAL ID Act was slipped into must-pass defense legislation in 2005. That legislation assigned DHS the task of setting the rules single-handedly.

Keehner is adamant that the rules will make the country safer and that the price tag is not too high.

"The ability to get false identification must end, and Real ID is that step," Keehner said.

Privacy groups counter that the rules create a de-facto national identification card and won't stop terrorism or identity theft.

For his part, Schweitzer struck back at DHS statements he obviously considers arrogant.

"I take great offense at this notion we should all simply 'grow up'," Schweitzer wrote, referring to Thursday remarks from DHS Secretary Michael Chertoff about border rules regarding Canada. Schweitzer says those remarks "reflect DHS (sic) continued disrespect for the serious and legitimate concerns of our citizens."

A DHS policy maker suggested earlier this week that Real IDs could also be required to buy cold medicine and to prove employment eligibility.

Schweitzer's letter went out to the governors of Colorado, Georgia, Idaho, Maine, New Hampshire, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Arizona, Hawaii, Illinois, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, North Dakota, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, and Washington.

http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/01/montana-governo.html


IF you live in Colorado, Georgia, Idaho, Maine, New Hampshire, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Arizona, Hawaii, Illinois, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, North Dakota, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, and Washington, you NEED to get in touch with your State Rep's, Senators and Governor's.

Tell them they need to join Montana's governor Brian Schweitzer in this stance agianst the Real ID Act!

[jointhefightforfreedom]

bump!
Texans Need to Rise up as well ! if Gov perry wont join this fight then we need him removed!

[Pepsi]

http://governor.mt.gov/brian/RealID_080118.pdf

Bumb

[ItDoesNotStopWithRonPaul]

Wait, how is this going to PREVENT terrorism? Weren't most of the 911 hijackers supposedly hfre on expired visas? Meaning that a simple ENFORCEMENT of the existing law would have done the trick?

[werdd]

bump!
Texans Need to Rise up as well ! if Gov perry wont join this fight then we need him removed!

perry has wet dreams every night about the real id.

[S3eker]

This is an easy one to fight with with the evangelicals and religious. Just call it the mark of the devil.

[Bison]

What: Springfield Missouri Special Meeting

When: Thursday, February 7, 2008
7:00 to 9:00 p.m.

Where: El Chico's Cafe
2639 S. Glenstone ave
Springfield MO, 65804
417-886-4768

Guest Speaker: Representative Jim Guest

Rep. Jim Guest is the founder of LARI "Legislators Against Real ID" . He will be speaking to our local Constitution Party here in Springfield, as well as other Ron Paul supporters. If you live close by please come on out and join us.

To Contact us just follow the link below.
http://www.constitutionpartymo.org/events.html
.

[amy31416]

Any of you guys have a link that provides email addresses of Senators and various elected officials by state?

[bucfish]

Also mention that Chertoff's name in his native land means "son of the devil" Spread that one to the churches.

The truth shall set us free!!!

[Stoli]

bump

[Pepsi]

bumb

[Edu]

You will be owned! (bump)

[Bison]

Fight it.

[NeoRayden]

If you want to take action against the REAL ID go to: http://www.nitesquad.org

Click on Nuke Your ID. Sign up there for the forum and start a discussion in your state.

[Ronin]

WTG Montana. Virginia is in the works.

[Am3RiCaN_microcosm]

This is an easy one to fight with with the evangelicals and religious. Just call it the mark of the devil.

QFT

What scares me about this is the notion of combining the RealID with your bank account someday, which would inevitably happen. Plastic Money is already used more than cash...imagine how easy it would be to make the switchover to a unified ID card.

"And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads: And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name." (Rev. 13:16, 17)

Edit: Lol I just realized this is my post #66 :D :D ... ooooohh freaky!

[kyleAF]

If you want to take action against the REAL ID go to: http://www.nitesquad.org

Click on Nuke Your ID. Sign up there for the forum and start a discussion in your state.

Niiiiice!!! A lot of you ARE the internet in some ways, and this is an internet revolution. Those who have the knowledge should sign up. (I'm not that tech-savvy... ).

Our next big government fight will be them trying to never let an internet revolution take hold. Protect this medium of free speech at all costs!

[UtahApocalypse]

QFT

What scares me about this is the notion of combining the RealID with your bank account someday, which would inevitably happen. Plastic Money is already used more than cash...imagine how easy it would be to make the switchover to a unified ID card.


Considering that banks are mostly all FDIC insured I am sure this will be the next step. That you cannot bank without a RealID.

[jake]

Wait, how is this going to PREVENT terrorism? Weren't most of the 911 hijackers supposedly hfre on expired visas? Meaning that a simple ENFORCEMENT of the existing law would have done the trick?

well yes, but I assume their argument will be Real ID would make enforcement easier - Which, I am sure is true. but it also destroys privacy and is a total invasion of individual rights. At what point does America say "no more" to the erosion of the most basic of human rights?

[JenaS62]

What does it mean if my state is not listed on here? Has it already been led to slaughter?

[Pepsi]

It means they have not rejected the Real ID, and probley all ready getting ready to enact it.

[newmedia4ron]

-----> YOU CAN USE THIS SITE TO TAKE ACTION NOW <----- (http://www.realnightmare.org/actioncenter/15/)

The Complete List of E-Mail Addresses and Fax Numbers for the U.S. Congress and Governors
(http://www.conservativeusa.org/mega-cong.htm)


Some links
http://www.realnightmare.org/
http://www.privacycoalition.org/stoprealid/
http://epic.org/privacy/id-cards/
http://www.eff.org/issues/real-id
http://www.no2id.net/
http://www.unrealid.com/index.html
http://realidwatch.blogspot.com/
http://papersplease.org/
http://legislatorsagainstrealid.com/
http://nitesquad.org

[Wyurm]

It's not just for protection, etc... It's not just an invasion of privacy, etc... It is mostly for control. Look where they are already going with this. They won't let you fly or enter Federal buildings without it and you may not be able to get a job without it. That's the first step, the next steps will look exactly like Revelations says and mind you, I'm an agnostic.

This would be worse than 1984. That little spot where the camera couldn't see won't exist anymore. What annoys me is that Ron Paul is the ONLY candidate that says no to the REAL ID. The only way to keep from getting one is to get totally off the grid and even then, since there won't be many who can do that in time, I'm sure they will force those who succeed to comply. Most likely when they require implants.

This is like a nuke in the war against liberty. You do what they say, or you die (no food, no services = death)

[newmedia4ron]

bump

[thehittgirl]

This is an easy one to fight with with the evangelicals and religious. Just call it the mark of the devil.

Well, the Christians that read their Bible should know that the mark of the beast will be implanted in the forehead or their right hand. So, it may not wash with them. With their fear of the "terrorists", and combined with sheer ignorance many have, they may not listen. I've tried, but as long as Israel keeps getting their support, everything is ok....even if our sovereignty goes away. :mad:

[Anti Federalist]

NH would have been one of the first to refuse.

The legislation passed the House, was going to be signed by the Gov and was torpedoed by neo-con GOPers in the Senate.

That was when I quit for good, and had it not been for Ron Paul, I'd still be gone. Once this cycle is over their sorry asses are done as far as I'm concerned.

Thankfully it got overridden in the next year's session and we joined the refuseniks.

[Bison]

Here is a link to the LARI website http://legislatorsagainstrealid.com/

[newmedia4ron]

from aclu:

Why is Real ID bad for our country?

Simply put, Real ID would offer significant costs and disadvantages without any corresponding advantages:

* By definitively turning driver’s licenses into a form of national identity documents, Real ID would have a tremendously destructive impact on privacy.
* The Act would impose significant administrative burdens and expenses on state governments, and would mean higher fees, longer lines, repeat visits to the DMV, and bureaucratic nightmares for individuals.
* Yet, it would not be effective at increasing security against terrorism or bring any other benefits which would justify those costs.

What burdens would it impose on state governments?

Real ID would significantly strain state governments. Among the most significant burdens:

* It would require the states to remake their driver’s licenses, restructure many of their computer databases and other systems, create an extensive new document-storage system, and considerably expanded their security measures.
* It would require the states to set up an interstate data-sharing network, which would also require complex administrative, technical, and security measures.
* It includes a devilishly difficult mandate that states verify the “issuance, validity and completeness” of every birth certificate, immigration document, utility bill, and any other document presented at DMVs as part of an application for a Real ID card.
* Yet, it leaves the DMVs with no way to compel utility companies or other document issuers to cooperate with that verification.
* It would require states to expand their DMV payrolls, initiate or expand employee training in such areas as security, document verification, and immigration law, and initiate or expand security clearance procedures for their workers.

Many in state government are saying that it would be simply impossible to comply with Real ID by the Act’s deadline in 2008.
What burdens would it impose on individuals?

Real ID would mean higher fees, inconveniences, and bureaucratic nightmares for individuals.

* Higher fees. Because the Act’s mandates would cost states billions of dollars that Congress is not paying for, fees on individuals applying for driver’s licenses would inevitably rise, perhaps steeply. State taxes might also go up.
* Worse service. Because of the new document requirements for individuals, the labor-intensive complexities involved in verifying those documents, and the need for DMVs to reprocess the bulk of the population that already has driver’s licenses, individuals would be likely to confront slower service, longer lines, and the need for repeat visits to the DMV.
* Bureaucratic problems. The complicated yet often ambiguous maze of requirements created by the Act would throw many unlucky individuals into a bureaucratic quagmire as they try to overcome inflexible verification requirements, bureaucratic errors or mismatches, lost documents, unique circumstances, or other problems. Some individuals, inevitably, would find themselves unable to obtain these new identity papers.

These kinds of problems would be significant for anyone. In addition, for many low-income workers for whom taking off time from work is difficult or expensive, the need for repeated trips to the DMV (and to other agencies such as registrar’s offices in search of birth certificates) would be an even greater burden.
What about people who don’t have driver’s licenses?

Millions of Americans do not have driver’s licenses. Out of a population of 290 million residents, there are only 194 million licensed drivers. In addition to millions of children and teenagers, the elderly are particularly likely to lack licenses. An estimated 36 percent of Georgia residents over age 74, for example, lack driver’s licenses.[1]

By creating strict new identity requirements for federal identification and, inevitably, expanding them over time to cover a growing list of purposes, Real ID would force the people in this population to figure out a way to jump through the bureaucratic hoops required to get compliant identity documents – and leave DMVs struggling with how to process them.
What about people who don’t have birth certificates?

In some cases, individuals would not be able to obtain birth certificates, or the documents they have in hand upon arriving at the DMV would not be able to be verified.

* Over the decades, records are lost through fires, floods, and disasters such as Hurricane Katrina.
* Documents can be rendered suspect due to fraud or malfeasance. In 2004, for example, thousands of Hudson County, NJ residents received word that their birth certificates had been declared invalid because of an ongoing fraud investigation at the County Clerks’ office. [i]
* Over 30 million people in the U.S. are foreign-born, and many of them were born in remote undeveloped nations or other places where no birth records are kept, or in places (such as what is now North Korea) where any records might be difficult or impossible to obtain.
* Some people are not sure when or even where they were born.

It is far from clear what would happen to such people. Real ID is silent on how such individuals should be handled, so DMVs would need to figure out if they would simply be denied identity papers, or if their applications could be processed in some other way consistent with the Act.


What would happen to those who cannot get a Real ID?

It is unclear, but life would become tougher and tougher for them.

Some states might create a “second class” driver’s license that they can provide to those who can’t meet the requirements for getting a Real ID. These licenses would likely be viewed as a badge of real or suspected illegal-immigrant status, and trigger suspicion by law enforcement officers, government agencies, employers, landlords, financial institutions, utilities, and others who demand ID.

But whether or not they obtain second class licenses, those who cannot get Real ID-compliant identity documents could in theory be left unable to fly on commercial aircraft, enter federal facilities such as courthouses or office buildings, or even possibly get a job legally.

Furthermore, the list of activities for which these IDs are required is sure to expand, if the current mindless trend of seeking security through identity papers is not reversed. In fact, the Real ID Act explicitly says that Real IDs shall be required not only for activities like boarding aircraft, but also for “any other purposes that the Secretary [of Homeland Security] shall determine.”

How much would Real ID cost?

The short answers is that at this point, no one knows.

The ACLU has produced a template that outlines many of the factors that must be taken into account by a state in estimating the costs it would face in coming into compliance with Real ID. However, existing technology standards, state administrative structures, and laws within the different states vary widely, with the result that Real ID would prove even more expensive for some states than for others, and no one has actually performed a comprehensive national study of those costs.

However, state officials in Washington State have put together an estimate for the Act’s 5-year cost in their state, which they estimated to be $251 million. Virginia officials also did an estimate, which they put at $232 million. By extending those estimates to the rest of the states, we can obtain a ballpark estimate for the national expense of implementing this legislation.

That basic estimate indicates that Real ID’s total cost to the states would be between $9.1 billion and $12.8 billion.

This is of necessity a crude estimate of the Act’s costs, but until a detailed, comprehensive study is performed that looks closely at the full range of known factors, this is the best we have.

Why do opponents call Real ID a tax increase?

The legislation that was rammed into law provided no money to pay the states’ costs to comply, so those costs would ultimately be borne by the residents of each state – if not in the form of higher fees at the DMV, then in the form of higher taxes.

That is why Real ID is for all intents and purposes a hidden tax increase. If Congressional leaders want to impose a multi-billion-dollar “security tax” on the American citizens, they must do so only through well-established mechanisms and after a proper period of open debate and exploratory hearings that examine the costs and benefits of such a measure. Congressional leaders must not impose an enormously expensive (and dubiously effective) security scheme while trying to weasel out of paying for such a scheme by sneaking its costs along to taxpayers through higher license fees and/or state tax increases.

How would Real ID hurt privacy?

Real ID would become a key infrastructure for, and dramatically accelerate, the surveillance society that is already being constructed in the United States. Once put in place, it would be used more and more for the routine tracking, monitoring, and regulation of individuals’ movements and activities, it would be exploited by the private sector, and it would expose individuals to greater risk of identity theft and other security risks. Its centralized database would inevitably, over time, become the repository for more and more data on individuals, and would be drawn on for an ever-wider set of purposes.