For the record, the bill is HR 418, the “Real ID” act, and it was first introduced by Congressman James Sensenbrenner (R-WI) in February. I get a feeling Mr. Sensenbrenner want as few folks to know about the bill as possible; as the Detroit Free Press notes:
And if you thought identity theft was bad now, you ain’t seen nothing yet:
Supporters say the bill is strictly voluntary, but the fine print disagrees:
So what happens if the FAA decides to actually enforce this clause? Will we be required to have one of these shiny new cross-linked *uber-*database ID cards in order to fly?
Now, I’m not a deep-pocket lawyer armed with a truckload of ten-dollar-words, but doesn’t this effectively turn every DMV across the nation into immigration checkpoints?
And given how much gravity the idea of a national ID card carries, why the !#$@%! is it buried inside an Iraq appropriations bill? What are the backers trying to hide?
Look at the bright side: some smart Democrat can tack a National Firearm Owners ID requirement onto the law in subsequent assemblies and backdoor National Firearms Licenses.
Does this measure also cover ID cards? What about those people who can’t drive due to a seizure disorder or blindness, but who have ID cards for purposes of proving who they are? Here in Kansas at least, the DMV issues ID cards too.
Keep in mind that this is another one of those genius recommendations from the 9-11 Commission, which was to harmonize state drivers licenses. It reminds me of how John Kerry immediately said that he’d endorse every single recommendation of this commission before anyone could have possibly read the entire report.
I hear that there is some dispute over whether the requirements placed on states is constitutional. I’m sure this will end up in court anyways.
Shhh! We’re trying to hide it from the fundies, who would go apeshit over that “Mark of the Beast” stuff.
Seriously, I dunno. But that’s how it’s been done previously. Last time similar requirements became federal law in 1996, the provisions were in that year’s Omnibus Appropriations law (cite). I guess someone got pissed off enough about it to kick up a storm, because the provisions related to driver’s licenses and other current IDs got repealed in 1999, also in an appropriations bill, this time for DOT (cite ). Interestingly (or not), the requirements for birth certificates remained and are law to this day, (like so).
As to politics and partisanship, one of the leading advocates of standardizing state IDs so as to approximate a national ID is noted non-conservative Diane Feinstein. She was also a leader of the movement to introduce biometric passports. On the other side, one won’t be surprised to learn that some of the most conservative members of congress have been among the most vocal opponents. It’s a pet peeve of former Congressman Dick Armey and was before he left Congress and became a full-time civil libertarian, for example. So it’s not really an issue that can be safely put into one of the traditional liberal/conservative boxes.
Personally, I fail to see a real objection to it. We’ve got IDs now. Why not make them accurate and standardized ones? And why not use them? It makes no sense to me that I have to produce a government-produced ID to cash a check for $10 at the grocery store but some idiot claiming to be me can waltz right into a polling place and exercise the most important tool we have in a democracy on my behalf with no ID at all.
I’m not convinced that this act (again, buried in an Iraq appropriations bill) is the same as “harmonizing” state drivers’ licenses. The latter, to me, sounds like a gradual migration of DL standards for all states for consistency, while this seems like a “Thou shalt do this now” imposition from above.
I agree to some extent; we’ve had discussions back-and-forth on national ID cards on the SDMB before, even if I am too lazy to actually find one.
But the thing that really gives me the skivvies about this “Real ID” thing is the covert attempt to get it passed. For something as controversial and polarizing as a national ID card, shouldn’t it be dragged into the sunlight and discussed out in the open for everyone to participate in, instead of being snuck through the back door at 3:00am or whatever? It’s like the PATRIOT ACT all over again.
Standardized IDs is one thing; an identifying badge of citizenship status is another (and with centralized national database to boot). If I buy an airplane ticket to fly to St. Louis, I don’t see why it’s any business of the ticket agent what my immigration/citizenship status is. It’s certainly not as if US citizens are automatically exempt from committing terrorism, as Timothy McVeigh demonstrated.
And the potential for racial profiling abuse that a national citizenship ID card brings to the table skeeves me out some more. How slippery does the slope have to be before a security guard decides to do an ID check on all foreign-looking (read: non-white) visitors to the Washington Monument? Or just imagine what these guys would do to local Hispanics if everyone was required to carry proof of citizenship at all times…
What’s wrong, rjung? Are you afraid that parking ticket you got in Nevada last year will be cross-referenced against your CA driver’s license?
I have mixed feelings about this. It’s unclear where the constitutional authority comes from to do this (I’ll let one of our lawyers weigh in on that topic first), but the fact is some states are bending over backwards to allow people who are in the country illegally to get DLs. I don’t by the slipper slope argument (it is, after all, a logical fallacy) or the racism argument. Is there a provision in the bill requiring anyone to carry his or her DL at all times? If and when that comes up, I’ll protest.
You ARE required to show positive ID on boarding a plane. That’s a seperate issue from this.
Well, some of the key driver’s license provisions state:
(1) IN GENERAL- Beginning 3 years after the date of the enactment 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.....
(a) In General- To be eligible to receive any grant or other type of financial assistance made available under this title, a State shall participate in the interstate compact regarding sharing of driver license data, known as the `Driver License Agreement’, in order to provide electronic access by a State to information contained in the motor vehicle databases of all other States…
(a) In General- The Secretary may make grants to a State to assist the State in conforming to the minimum standards set forth in this title…
Honestly, I can’t make any sort of distinction between the Feds telling states to harmonize their licenses and the Feds telling states to “do it NOW,” as you state, I fail to see that there’s any meaningful difference between the two, except the latter statement makes the law sound bad, and the former makes it sounds good.
I’m a liberal, but I see nothing wrong with a national ID card. In fact, I think it might make things easier for legal immigrants. It’d be much better if everyone could just flash an ID card that showed you were legal rather than racially profiling a semgment of the population and hassling them. This is what happens now near the border.
BUT, lets put some real restrictions on the card. Only basic info should be printed: DOB, picture, height, weight. Other info should either be encoded on the chip or available across the net to authorized people. The info should be compartmentalized; i.e., police officers should be able to access driving license and criminal record info, immigration officers should get access to immigration/citizenship stats, banks should get access to some unique identifier, employers should be able to determine if you are a legal worker, etc.
There’s no such thing as a safe computer database. All you can do is make it more risky and difficult to get into than the benefit from doing so.
A db with everyone’s everything in it is just asking for trouble and saying please.
I’m all in favor of moving towards a national ID card. Let’s face the facts. The current system that we use is insane. There are literally hundreds of different forms of ID that could be accepted when you’re getting a job, getting your boarding pass at the airport, or whenever else you’ll need an ID. This makes it virtually impossible for any person to be enough of an expert to distinguish between real and fake IDs in all cases, much less for millions of employers and thousands of airline employees to do so. Standardizing is simply logical.
I doubt the efficiency of the ID in the War on Terror ™. All it will do is force terrorists to either use counterfeit IDs or use terrorists who happen to be US citizens.
I don’t have a problem in principle with the notion, but this is an unfunded mandate and the states should fight it. If it’s such a great idea, then let the feds come up with the system and the means to implement it.
Despite the claims, I see this as having very little to do with terrorism and security, and lots to do with illegal immigration, the further erosion of civil liberties, and harassment of minorities.
Sounds nice, but I don’t see anything like that in the act.
Not as a ding on DanBlather, but I think it’s important to keep two topics in this thread distinct: is the concept of a national ID card good or bad, and is the “Real ID” implementation of this concept good or bad? There’s no point in saying “I think a National ID would be acceptable with these provisions” if the legislation that gets passed doesn’t have them…
