States rebel against Real ID Act

Lawbean.com ^ | 6/11/2007 | staff

[TChris]

It will be easy for insurance companies, credit card companies, even video stores, to demand a REAL ID driver’s license or ID card in order to receive services.

Yes, but those are private businesses. They could just as easily, and legally, make great demands of their customers now. But they don't.

Why should I believe they would begin mistreating their customers if the Real ID were implemented? What incentive would they have to do so?

It's a simple, and deceptive, practice to pursue scary trains of thought in considering what could happen as a consequence of this or that. But applying some cold, hard reality to those predictions is always a good idea.

My BS meter starts swinging over to the right when ever someone starts "what if"ing me with frightening possibilities when the real, direct effects of one choice or another aren't spooky enough.

(If I step outside today, I greatly increase the chances of being hit by a car or struck by lightening. Therefore, I should obviously stay inside all day to eliminate that risk!)

Personally, I don't see too much Eeeeeeeviiiiiillllll in the Real ID act at this point. My opinion could change in the future.

[philman_36]

I’ve heard rumor about this, that states might issue 2 types of IDs.
I'd take it as unsubstantiated runor. The thing is, the States don't want it because of the estimated costs to them.
REAL ID WILL COST STATES MORE THAN $11 BILLION
Why would they have both types of IDs if they're already complaining about the associated costs of having to swap over from the current IDs?
It seems to me that it's going to be one or the other, but certainly not both. It's simply not financially feasible.

[philman_36]

Personally, I don't see too much Eeeeeeeviiiiiillllll in the Real ID act at this point.
Well good for you.
My opinion could change in the future.
I won't be holding my breath. Your current lack of concern 'tells the tale' and you'll probably choose not to investigate it any further than you have to date, which appears to be not at all.

[stevie_d_64]

Resistance seems to be increasing on a lot of fronts, wouldn’t you agree???

Pick an issue...

Dubai Port Deal (successfully resisted)

Immigration reform (ongoing battle)

Trans Texas Corridor (postponed, delayed)

All of these in varying degrees of Federal involvement, and legislative opposition...Not to say that pressure from constituencies seems to be growing everyday to this goverment expansion...

Sometines I really have to wonder why these actually get far enough to where people like you and I get so angry at the ignoring of our will, that it makes them that much harder to deal with...

The phrase, “concent of the governed”, keeps coming to mind for some reason...;-)

Right???

[George W. Bush]

How about: border fence (stalled, delayed since May 12).

Looks like they completely abandoned it, thinking we wouldn't notice.

And I'll bet the major media, including Sean Hannity and O'Reilly will never report on it either.

[George W. Bush]

How about: border fence (stalled, delayed since May 12).

Looks like they completely abandoned it, thinking we wouldn't notice.

And I'll bet the major media, including Sean Hannity and O'Reilly will never report on it either.

[Parmy]

I am shocked! Shocked, I tell you! The socialist State of Washington rejecting and refusing to implement a facet of Central Planning.

[djf]

Hey!!

If shrub has his way,the only people who won’t need a real id will be people named Juan or Pedro!!

[stevie_d_64]

Yep...This is something that can be done, but was an empty shell that got a lot of Republicans elected (and re-elected) that wasn’t really going to be effectively implemented (constructed)...

We got, last time I heard was 3 miles so far built since that bill passed...

If the government (elected officials) is/are scared...I think they have every reason to be that way...

If it were up to me, I’d fire every single one of them, and tell them don’t ever come back...That’s even some of them that I like and know personally, and they would absolutely understand why I feel that way...I wish there were more of us out there that believe as I do...

[gnarledmaw]

"What will be the unintended consequence of Real ID?"

Tagging gun owners by this card is an eventual certainty.

[gnarledmaw]

Sean Hannity was pro-illegal alien before he was against it but his listeners and consevatives as whole rose up to slap him down.

As a mouthpiece that clearly doesnt even understand the background of the talking points hes issued, I suspect that, provided his listeners didnt revolt too quickly, he would eventually be against the fence, too.

[supermop]

Yes, a RFID will be placed in ID cards for FOREIGN VISITORS, i.e. Middle Eastern Muslims. I don’t have a problem with that, do you?? FYI, I have had a “National I.D. Card for many years now and quite proud of it. It is called a US Military Retired ID Card. Yes, it has a magnetic strip with all kinds of information on it and as far as I know, has never been “read” for any reason. Don’t screw up and no authority will demand the card. That’s my philosophy!

[taxcontrol]

Obviously you have not read the RealID act. The Act only stipulates what forms of ID are acceptable to the Federal Government.

[taxcontrol]

4th Amendment, reasonable search. 1st Amendment by inference, freedom of association.

Think in terms of micro to macro.
Do you have the right to require ID before someone enters your house? Does a business have the right to require ID before you are allowed to enter the business or purchase alcohol? Does a State have the right to set standards on what identification you have to provide before you are issued a state drivers license?

I would say that the answer to each question is yes. Likewise, the Federal Government has the right to demand military id before you are allowed to enter a military base. It has the right to demand proof of citizenship prior to allowing you to enter the country. And just as a State has the right to set standards on what is required to receive a driver’s license, the Federal government has the right to set the standards on what they will accept as form of identification for access to federal facilities and services.

What the Federal government does NOT have the right to do is to FORCE the states to stop issuing IDs. Nor do the Feds have the right to say that the states must universally adopt a set of standards. The REALID act does not do either. It allows States to continue to issue IDs using what ever standards the state wishes to use.

The Feds are only saying ... if you want your State's drivers license to be accepted by the Federal government, then it has to meet certain standards.

[roamer_1]

What will be the unintended consequence of Real ID?

Brass-mesh lined wallets?

:P

-Bruce

[philman_36]

Apparently the federal government thinks it has the right to say what form of ID is acceptable period.
Obviously you have not read the RealID act.
You obviously are guessing.

The Act only stipulates what forms of ID are acceptable to the Federal Government.
The Act mandates what States must do to conform to specific standards the Federal government has now enacted.

Here is how one Federal agency reads things...
President Signs Public Law 109-13, the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for Defense, the Global War on Terror, and Tsunami Relief, 2005
P.L. 109-13 prohibits Federal agencies from accepting State-issued driver's licenses or identification cards unless such documents are determined to meet minimum security requirements. It sets forth issuance standards for such documents that require, among other things: (1) evidence that the applicant is lawfully present in the United States; and (2) issuance of temporary driver's licenses or identification cards to persons temporarily present that are valid only for their period of authorized stay (or for one year where the period of stay is indefinite).
Snip...Beginning 3 years after enactment, prohibits a Federal agency from accepting, for any official purpose, a State-issued driver's license or identification card unless the State is issuing driver's licenses and identification cards that conform to the standards specified in the new law.
Snip...These standards require a State
States must...
States must...
States must...
States are required...
States must...

Perhaps you need to review it...PUBLIC LAW 109–13—MAY 11, 2005
This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for Defense, the Global War on Terror, and Tsunami Relief, 2005’’.
DIVISION B—REAL ID ACT OF 2005 (starts at the bottom of page 81 of 93)
TITLE II—IMPROVED SECURITY FOR DRIVERS’ LICENSES AND PERSONAL IDENTIFICATION CARDS
SEC. 201. DEFINITIONS.
(3) OFFICIAL PURPOSE.—The term ‘‘official purpose’’ includes but is not limited to accessing Federal facilities, boarding federally regulated commercial aircraft, entering nuclear power plants, and any other purposes that the Secretary shall determine.

SEC. 202. MINIMUM DOCUMENT REQUIREMENTS AND ISSUANCE STANDARDS FOR FEDERAL RECOGNITION.
(a) MINIMUM STANDARDS FOR FEDERAL USE.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—Beginning 3 years after the date of theenactment of this division, a Federal agency may not accept, for any official purpose, a driver’s license or identification card issued by a State to any person unless the State is meeting the requirements of this section.

And how about this little beauty...
(d) OTHER REQUIREMENTS (page 84 of 93)
(3) Subject each person applying for a driver’s license or identification card to mandatory facial image capture.

And then there is this...
(11) In any case in which the State issues a driver’s license or identification card that does not satisfy the requirements of this section, ensure that such license or identification card—

(A) clearly states on its face that it may not be accepted by any Federal agency for federal identification or any other official purpose; and

However, as I've shown, ‘‘official purpose’’ can mean almost any damned thing at all!

[radioman]

Tagging gun owners by this card is an eventual certainty.

Without a doubt!
.

[radioman]

What the Federal government does NOT have the right to do is to FORCE the states to stop issuing IDs. Nor do the Feds have the right to say that the states must universally adopt a set of standards. The REALID act does not do either

But it will. Mission creep gaurantees that.
.

[Still Thinking]

Well, I’m not sure I agree if they say that you have to have an ID acceptable to them before you can agree to work for someone for wages. They’re not even involved in that transaction.