Real ID

The war is heating up in the Real ID controversy.  Four states (Maine, Idaho, Arkansas and Washington) have already voted to reject the implementation in their states.  But others are going ahead with it.

The Real ID Act of 2005 would turn our state driver’s licenses into a genuine national identity card.  Known as the "Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for Defense, the Global War on Terror, and Tsunami Relief, 2005," it was signed into law on May 11, 2005 after being attached to a military spending bill by its author, Rep. James Sensenbrenner (R-WI).

The stated purpose of the Act is to establish a national standard for state-issued driver’s licenses, tighten laws on deportations and applications for asylum, requires aliens to post a bond before being released pending immigration hearings and change visa limits for some workers.

Requirements to obtain such a card include a photo ID (or non-photo ID with full name and birthdate), documentation of birthdate, documentation of legal status and Social Security Number and documentation showing name and principle residence address.  Digital images of each identity document will be stored in each state DMV database.

Complaints are myriad.

It establishes databases linking state-issued ID with Social Security numbers, enabling the routine tracking of individuals, creating a "surveillance society."  This is a big hit on personal privacy rights.

Millions of government workers will have access to your information and the digital documents backing them up.  Imagine the abuses in the hands of people like those in the Administration.  This is a nightmare waiting to happen.

The authenticity of a national ID card will make it more difficult to prove your identity has been stolen. Although they will be counterfeited like all other forms of identification, their veracity will be harder to challenge...and the charges made against you by such a fake card.

It is an expensive ($23B, unfunded) proposal which be reflected the citizens’ license fees.

Problems with the system have already surfaced.  Watch this video of a retired firefighter who lost his driver’s license due to a 50-year old discrepancy between it and his social security card.  The upshot is that he is powerless to right the wrong.

Oh and it will do little to protect us against terrorism unless you are worried about those evil illegal aliens who were hired to build the border fence on the Mexican border.  (See who the U.S. Attorney was?  No wonder she was fired!)

What can we do?  Get involved.  

Click on this interactive map to see what’s happening in your state.  A quick read tells me that there is already very serious opposition to this act but unless the law fails completely, some states’ citizens may find themselves restricted from flying, traveling, collected federal benefits.  This has to be a crushing defeat for Bush and the neocons who have always wanted a Big Brother society.

•  Agreed.

  The new ID requirements are inconveniences to law-abiding citizens and will prevent no terrorism.

  Let's say that your last name isn't the same as it was when you were born.  You're a woman and you got married, for instance.  Your current driver's license has a different last name than your birth certificate.  Good luck trying to prove that you're you.

  You were born and raised in the USA and have been a licensed driver for decades? Too f***ing bad.

  by Greasy Grant on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 02:23:32 PM PDT

  •  Or normally don't use your full name

    Think of well known people who use(d) their middle names as first names, instead of their given first names. Some records will be First-Middle-Last, some Middle-Last, some First_Initial-Middle-Last, some First-Middle_Initial-Last (because they got tired of fighting the little box for middle initial.

    And pity those poor folk whose birth certificate names don't match the name they've used since they started school or got a library card.

    Busy making un-citizens out of some of the population.

    by wondering if on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 03:19:48 PM PDT

    •  or from certain countries or cultures

      In some Latin American countries, the pattern goes:  First name, FAther's family name, Mother's family name, for example Markos Moulitsas Zuniga.  

      In some part of Asia there are other patterns.  For example President Hu Zintao of China is referred to as President Hu, and Chairman Mao Tse-Tung was later changed to Mao Zedong when other changes were made in the English spellings of the Chinese language (e.g. Peking became Beijing) but still referred to as Chairman Mao.  

      Presumably those cases get mangled or rejected, or they have to get themselves Protestant-sounding names...?

      by G2geek on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 04:12:05 PM PDT

      •  change name to john doe n/t

        by wondering if on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 07:33:03 PM PDT

•  Real ID scared the piss outta me

  I don't have a birth certificate.  Don't ask.  It's a long, ridiculous story.

  by kN3eLb4Z0d on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 02:45:29 PM PDT

  •  "scares" too. n/t

    by kN3eLb4Z0d on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 02:45:58 PM PDT

    •  Honestly,

      if this is passed and you can't get a bonafide copy, you're in deep shit.

      When I applied for a duplicate Social Security card 10 years ago, I found out that the birth certificate I had been using for 30 years was "unofficial."  Fortunately, I was able to get another from the hospital but that's got to be more difficult in these days of terror-hysteria.

      by john07801 on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 03:10:09 PM PDT

      •  Seriously

        I've already had the nightmare brought down on me a few times.

        But, I do have a social security card, and I have a marriage certificate, and many other things that have my proper name and birthdate on them.  I do have a current, valid driver license here in California which comes up for renewal in '09.  I just hope all this is enough.  

        If it isn't, then I'm really, really screwed, and to make matters worse, the hospital where I was born hasn't existed since about 1975.

        by kN3eLb4Z0d on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 03:29:01 PM PDT

•  WTF Are They Afraid Of???...

  requires aliens to post a bond before being released pending immigration hearings

  ...that those aliens might go home?

  Keee-rist!

  by creeper on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 03:05:23 PM PDT

  •  They don't show for their hearings

    and remain in the country as illegals.  But the "bond" suggests that they could be jailed or deported instantly if they don't have the cash.  Truly, WTF?

    Like all other privacy-destroying laws, the abuses will be worse than anything else.

    by john07801 on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 03:13:08 PM PDT

•  US Congress

  Are there any bills introduced in Congress to repeal
  Real Id?

  Thanks for the diary.

  by horsepatsy on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 03:29:16 PM PDT

  •  Not that I know of

    But there's hope in these states outright rejecting to implement it.

    by kN3eLb4Z0d on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 03:33:32 PM PDT

  •  Good question

    Certainly something that should be pushed (and something I might have thought of myself!)

    But the individual states are beating it up pretty well.  Unless there's general compliance among the states, I can't see how the fed can force it.  The states will be like little foreign countries.

    by john07801 on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 03:41:15 PM PDT

    •  Not to mention

      the citizens of those states will essentially be exiles.

      by kN3eLb4Z0d on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 03:43:38 PM PDT

•  I think the we have a right to have

  a national ID system. If the real ID act has unnecesary complications, then fix the act.  We have a right to know who is in the country.  The gov't knows who I am and where to find me real fast. I have driver's license, credit cards, pay taxes, etc.  

  by sandbox on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 03:44:55 PM PDT

  •  I think you're naive as hell.

    A "right" to have a national identity card?  What if they don't want one?  What if they're a stalking victim or celebrity who has to be cautious as hell about things that could give some nutcase the information to track them down and kill them?  And you don't think databases can be hacked?

    If someone wants national ID they can get a passport, that exists right now and it serves a legitimate purpose.  Even though I don't travel, I like having a passport, and it's my choice.

    The difference between democracy and tyranny is that the former says "you may if you choose" and the latter says "you must."  

    If you don't see a problem with centralized and linked databases, chances are you don't see a problem with computer viruses either.  And how long does it take for your machine to boot up when you turn it on?

    by G2geek on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 04:23:33 PM PDT

    •  Great line:

      The difference between democracy and tyranny is that the former says "you may if you choose" and the latter says "you must."

      Yes!

      by tigerdog on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 06:32:57 PM PDT

  •  Personally,

    I think the various jurisdictions have enough information on their residents.  But if you feel otherwise and know that you can absolutely trust your government, then don't fight the implementation of the Real ID Act.

    Just remember, this is the stuff of the likes of Paul Wolfowitz who wrote the Patriot Act years before 9/11.  This diminution of privacy is how the neoConservatives view government's power even in the absence of terrorism.  I don't trust them for a moment.

    by john07801 on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 04:29:32 PM PDT

•  stalker sweepstakes: you bet your life

  "Principal residence address" means where you sleep.  

  Any database that contains residence addresses is a bonanza for stalkers.  

  A stalker is usually a man who is obsessed with a particular woman, and she wants nothing to do with him.  She tries to get away from him and he goes to unimaginable lengths to track her down and harm her.  

  If she moves house, he might even break into the houses of known friends of hers to try to find her current address.  Usually he trolls the public databases, spending literally hours each day trying to trace her whereabouts.  Very often he has developed his "private eye" skills and has a range of tricks for getting the information out of other places that might have it.  Sometimes he engages in wiretapping or computer hacking to get the information he's after (I helped send one of those to prison so I know whereof I speak).  

  When he finds her, a common result is that he simply shoots her dead on the spot.  There was recently a case of this type in the news, where the stalker shot the woman at work.  

  But at work you have other people around who can defend you.  And at home you may be sleeping, where you're defenseless unless you have a good alarm system and a firearm in the bed-table drawer or under your pillow.  (Don't even think of not having a firearm in a case like that: by the time you've dialed 911 the stalker is in your bedroom and you're seconds away from dead.)

  Sometimes they plant bombs, for example under the cars of your family members.  

  Sometimes the stalking isn't sexual.  The guy who stalked and murdered John Lennon was obsessed with him for God-knows-what-reason.  This is an occupational hazard for anyone in popular music or film.  

  The only legitimate reason for government knowing where you sleep is to be able to arrest you for a felony where you're truly a danger for violence or escape.  

  With RealID, you have a centralized database of where people sleep.  An absolute bonanza for stalkers, and yes they will find ways to get in.  

  Regardless of all else, two things are needed:

  One, there needs to be an absolute an unassailable right of individuals to use addresses that are not "where they sleep."  Perhaps this right could be suspended for convicted violent criminals to enable the police to keep closer tabs on them.  Alternate addresses can include post office boxes, private mailboxes, work addresses, or any other address that will serve (as for a corporation) for "receipt of (legal) process."  

  Two, there needs to be a means by which individuals can confidentialize their addresses with respect to data held by utilities, banks and the city tax assessor (if you have a  mortgage), property management companies (if you rent), and so on.  That information is presently avaialble and shared widely.  Every entity holding that information should be compelled under law to offer an option by which individuals can require that they not disclose it to any external party for any reason except in case of a court order (thus the police can find you if you're suspected of a felony).  

  The right to "be secure in your person, papers, etc." means nothing if it doesn't mean secure as in safe from being hunted down and shot by some nutcase with an obsession.  

  And for anyone who thinks this is a small concern or a small number of cases, go do the research.  It's huge.  Think of yourself as one of those victims: being hunted by a nutcase who will stop at nothing to track you down and kill you.  RealID makes it that much easier.  

  by G2geek on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 04:02:09 PM PDT

•  The USDA is creating national ID

  on every farm or property with just one animal, a chicken, goat, one horse, whatever.

  It's been going on in the background while Real ID gets more publicity.

  National Animal Identification System is a surveillance system where all of my personal information goes into a state and national data base and my farm has a Premise Registration number assigned to it.

  I received requests to "volunteer" all my private information for this Premise Registration and get "protection against hardship." I asked my Farm Service agent yesterday, "What protection? Are horses indemnified?" I was told that by registering my premises I could then report all my horses movements.

  So by registering my premises FOR EVER I get the PRIVILEGE of reporting all movement of every horse I own.

  OK.

  Anyhow, Real ID and the NAIS are connected. NAIS is food control.

  by Cc inWinston on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 04:19:54 PM PDT

•  Activism campaign, bill in congress, USDA

  I'm working with the Stop Real ID Now activism campaign; we're working with the ACLU as well as a broad variety of other groups as  part of the huge coalition that's trying to stop Real ID.  Our short-term focus is to encourage people to file "comments" the Department of Homeland Security by their May 8 deadline.  This complements the state-by-state effort and will help add to the momentum for a repeal.

  For those in the SF Bay Area, there's a get-together (at the ACLU office) this Thursday.  For those who are anywhere and would like to help ... please get involved!  Bizarrely enough, even though we've got about 100 people involved, none of them are Kossanians (?) -- I basically created an account here just so I could reply to this post (which is why I'm somewhat delayed) -- so we'd really really appreciate help spreading the word here.

  In response to a couple of other issues people mentioned in the thread:

  • there are repeal bills in the House and Senate (the Akaka/Sununu bill) but it's not clear how much support they have ... yet
  • there's a lot more information about the USDA initiative (NAIS) at NoNais.org

  Excellent points in this thread ... there's so much wrong with Real ID that it's a really broad coalition against it; we've got a real chance to win this one.

  jon

  by jdp on Sat Apr 14, 2007 at 07:01:12 PM PDT

  •  Thanks, jdp

    I'm sorry this diary didn't get a little more attention but, of course, it's all about spreading the  word.

    I'm particularly glad that repeal bills have been started on both sides of Congress.  I'll be watching them closely.

    BTW, for anyone intereested, the ACLU of Northern California is at 39 Drumm Street in San Francisco and is only a block from BART Embarcadero.

    by john07801 on Sun Apr 15, 2007 at 11:27:06 AM PDT