-
DMV Sees Big Lines Before New Law Takes Effect
DMV Sees Big Lines Before New Law Takes Effect
Employees Fielding Many Questions About Law
POSTED: 12:20 pm CDT March 31, 2007
UPDATED: 5:15 pm CDT March 31, 2007
MADISON, Wis. -- Large crowds stood in line at the Department of Motor Vehicles Friday until closing in a last-minute rush before a new law called Act 126 takes effect on April 1.
TALKBACK: What Do You Think?
Act 126 is Wisconsin's version of the REAL ID Act, a federal law added to increase security and fight terrorism after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. It requires everyone looking to obtain or renew a driver's license to prove that they are legally in the United States.
DMV employee Esteban Candate said the act is creating big headaches for employees.
"We're just telling people if they don't have a legal presence starting April 1 next week, they're not going to be able to get an ID or duplicate license, or any product," Candate said.
Candate, who has worked at the DMV for three years, said that his shift on Friday was the busiest it has ever been.
"This is the first time I've seen something like this," Candate said.
Candate said that questions from DMV visitors have run the gamut.
"(There's been) a lot of questions, and most of the questions we cannot answer because we don't know exactly what's going to happen. So most of the questions people have is, 'What's going to happen April 1?" he said. "Most of the people, they have little kids. They're coming here to get IDs for their kids before April 1. They're really worried; they don't know what to do."
Tiana Gutierrez, an immigration paralegal, said she has received the same questions and that there is no easy answer.
"It's really hard to say because it depends on what the DMV does with the current IDs that are out there. Are they going to electronically revoke everybody?" Gutierrez said.
Immigration experts said that it is up to the federal or state government to answer questions about the validity of recently renewed licenses.
There have been numerous protests against the REAL ID law, including a march at the state Capitol last weekend.
Opponents of the law argue that it targets the wrong group of people and ineffectively combats terrorism. They are quick to point out that the 9/11 hijackers came into the United States legally and were able to attain driver's licenses as well.
http://www.channel3000.com/news/11469738/detail.html
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by jp_48504
What do you think of the new law that will require everyone seeking to get or renew a driver's license to prove they are legally in the United States?
Choice Votes Percentage of 168 Votes
I think it's great. 119 71%
I'm on the fence. 5 3%
I don't support it. 16 10%
It's just going to be a big hassle. 19 11%
I don't care. 9 5%
http://www.channel3000.com/news/11469738/detail.html
Now wait a minute. There's a big difference between making sure that applicants for a drivers license are here legally versus implementing the Real ID Act. This poll has little to do with the topic at hand.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrocketsGhost
Quote:
Originally Posted by jp_48504
What do you think of the new law that will require everyone seeking to get or renew a driver's license to prove they are legally in the United States?
Choice Votes Percentage of 168 Votes
I think it's great. 119 71%
I'm on the fence. 5 3%
I don't support it. 16 10%
It's just going to be a big hassle. 19 11%
I don't care. 9 5%
http://www.channel3000.com/news/11469738/detail.html
Now wait a minute. There's a big difference between making sure that applicants for a drivers license are here legally versus implementing the Real ID Act. This poll has little to do with the topic at hand.
Sorry, I didn’t cut and paste my comments in correctly. They did skew this poll by the way they worded it with the article about the REAL ID. The tow really have nothing to do with each other., since the law allows for special licensees for illegals.
-
National ID’ is flawed, needs revision
‘National ID’ is flawed, needs revision
04/01/2007
It is fitting, in its way, that the law establishing the first national identification card in American history was passed through an abuse of the government’s power, raising the question of what truly constitutes a threat.
The Real ID Act of 2005 was attached to an emergency appropriations bill that provided funding for the war in Iraq and tsunami relief in Indonesia. Congress conducted no hearings and there was scant debate. The result is that the law imposes massive mandates on state governments without appropriate funding, and threatens to erode the privacy of every American.
Every state will be required to have in place a seamless system of driver’s license databases that can be cross-checked by every other state and the federal government. Through some device to be included on every new and renewed driver’s license — a computer chip or a bar code — a host of information about the individual is to be included. And state licensing clerks must determine whether an applicant is a legal resident, even though no database exists to tell them that, and legal residency — not citizenship alone — is a legal question so complex as to require a separate court system.
Congress, without conducting hearings, somehow decided that all of that could be done at an average cost of $2 million per state. It appropriated $100 million to implement the law. The National Governors’ Association and the National Conference of State Legislatures, however, have estimated the five-year cost of the program to state governments at $11 billion.
Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff last week pushed back the implementation deadline from May 2008 to December 2009, demonstrating that the issue is far more complex than Congress seemed to think. And he estimated the implementation costs at $14 billion over 10 years.
Congress should scrap the law and start over, with hearings, debate and honest considerations of what it would cost in terms of money and lost privacy.
Meanwhile, Pennsylvania should join Maine in declining to comply with the law until all of the outstanding issues have been resolved.
http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?news ... 6222&rfi=6
-
PRO-CON: Should national ID cards be required? NO
Posted on Sun, Apr. 01, 2007
PRO-CON: Should national ID cards be required? NO
Before we become tagged like common criminals, we must be able to take a principled stand against one of the building blocks of modern police states.
By Eric Peters
The Army Times
COPPER HILL, Va. | What if we just said no?
Not to drugs — though that’s a good idea, too. But no to being fingerprinted and/or optically scanned for purposes of the soon-to-be-mandatory “national ID” card?
How about it?
We’re supposed to be a fiercely independent, freedom-loving bunch — the sort who’d never trot willingly to the glue factory like so many European herd animals. Right?
So what’s the deal with this national ID stuff — specifically, to meekly submitting to being fingerprinted and having our irises scanned — the so-called “biometric” tags — like common criminals?
In 2005, the government passed into law the Real ID act, which requires all states to change the way they issue driver’s licenses so that they conform to a single federal standard — one that includes a requirement, dazzling in its stridency, that each of us be tagged with those so-called biometric identifiers — digitized fingerprints, retina scans — with the data linked to a single federal database that would be continuously fed information about us and what we do and where we go.
All of it in the name of fighting terrorism; apparently this will be accomplished by setting up one of the building blocks of every modern police state. The national ID card will be required for virtually every transaction of modern life, from boarding an airplane to opening a bank account.
The digitized devices would provide an endless mine of personal data — where you travel, what you buy, etc. — for Beltway bureaucrats to pore over and identity thieves to exploit. Just wait until that $10,000 bill for computer gear you never bought shows up in the mailbox!
Privacy advocates have been up in arms since the idea was first broached after the 9/11 attacks — and rightly observed that homegrown terrorists like Timothy McVeigh had perfectly in-order “papers” — including legitimate driver’s licenses.
A national ID would not have stopped the Oklahoma City bombings — or prevented Mohammed Atta from boarding the 767 that flew into the World Trade Center’s Tower 1. And anyone who believes it will prevent or even put a dent in the endless truckloads of illegal immigrants entering this country from Mexico has been guzzling the Kool-Aid.
Interestingly, several states are showing more guts than most of us — or at least, more self-interest.
Maine, Georgia, Wyoming, New Mexico, Vermont and Washington state have either passed legislation objecting to the federal Real ID Act — or seem poised to do so. It’s not that they’re looking out for us, though. They’re looking out for their bottom lines. Estimates of compliance costs run to $11 billion and more — big money, even at the federal level and huge payouts for states with entire budgets that are smaller than that.
But we — you and me — have a more profound interest at stake.
At a certain point that’s hard to define before it confronts us, we must each be ready to take a principled stand and say — “no.” This is unacceptable. I will not comply. Politely; without violence. But firmly. It is a question of right vs. wrong.
The “law” be damned.
That’s a concept that made this country possible. The Revolution was set off by obnoxious tax edicts from the English crown and Parliament. It’s the kind of attitude that helped self-cleanse some egregious historical wrongs — slavery comes to mind; then Jim Crow. A certain amount of scofflawing from time to time has served, for more than 200 years, to keep Washington from overstepping its bounds.
A people no longer able to get its collective back up, no longer willing to take a stand when something really important is on the line, is a people that is ready for fingerprints and optical scans.
Are we such people?
http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascit ... 007797.htm
-
High-tech biometric industry matures
Posted on Sun, Apr. 01,
High-tech biometric industry matures
Biometric security companies are poised to profit heavily from a nation determined to be safe and secure.
BY DAVE MONTGOMERY
dmontgomerymcclatchydc.com
WASHINGTON -- The U.S. government's growing appetite for biometrics-based ID systems to bolster security, detect terrorists, fight crime and control illegal immigration is generating billions of dollars in opportunities for an evolving industry that's coming of age in the post-9/11 era.
The growth of the identification industry also has spawned an aggressive push-back from privacy advocates against what they call an emerging ``industrial surveillance complex.''
Regardless of the perspective, few would deny that the expanding government market for more secure identification programs is laden with business potential.
Players range from big-name defense contractors to specialty firms largely unknown to the public. And the product line includes now-commonplace offerings that might have seemed possible only on an episode of Star Trek just a decade or so ago.
Video or audio scanners can identify individuals by facial features, voice or even the blood vessels in their eyes, matching the information against data stored in a secure computerized clearinghouse. Fingerprints are widely used for everything from firing up the computer to opening the office door.
The terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, accelerated the identification boom as firms stepped forward to supply a vast range of security networks for transportation, government buildings, law enforcement and other venues.
After a shake-down period in which some hastily formed enterprises crashed and burned, the industry is beginning to mature and may be poised for years of steady growth, said Jeremy Grant of Stanford Washington Equity Research, a stock analyst who's conducted an extensive study of the industry.
At least 10 major U.S. government initiatives will generate more than $8 billion in business over the next five years, with overseas projects generating another $14 billion, Grant said.
The U.S. projects include issuing biometric cards to all 2 million federal workers as well as to federal contractors and giving travelers preregistered ''smart cards'' to speed through airport security.
HOMELAND SECURITY
Perhaps the biggest customer is the Department of Homeland Security, the multiagency bureaucracy that guards the borders and protects the home front from terrorism. Other big government markets include the Defense Department, the State Department and the FBI.
President Bush's call for overhauling the nation's immigration system also could generate more business for the industry if Congress reaches accord on the volatile issue. Most legislative proposals call for biometric cards and employee-verification databases to determine whether immigrants are legally entitled to be in the United States.
''That's a significant business opportunity for these companies,'' Grant said.
The American Civil Liberties Union and other privacy advocates are fighting to curtail the industry, saying biometric cards and centralized databases open the door to government snooping and do not offer foolproof protection from terrorists and criminals, even with recent technological advances.
''Decisions being made now are going to dramatically affect what our lives look like in the future,'' said Jim Harper, the director of information-policy studies at the Cato Institute, a Washington research center that urges limited government.
Industry executives say the privacy dangers are exaggerated and that companies follow rigid procedures to prevent the distribution of confidential information.
REAL ID ACT
One privacy vs. security showdown centers on the REAL ID Act, which Congress enacted in 2005 to require tamperproof driver's licenses that would be available only to legal U.S. residents. More than two dozen states are considering legislation opposing the law, saying it would cost $11 billion to implement.
Industry executives say they're part of an industry with a bright future, made up of companies that offer differing sets of specialties. Some niche firms have been in business for less than five years, while others, such as defense giants Lockheed Martin and Raytheon, are expanding into the identification realm.
One of the bigger companies, Grant said, is L-1 Identity Systems of Stamford, Conn., which was formed by the merger of two other companies and is headed by Robert LaPenta, one of the founders of L-3 Communications.
Another established company is Digimarc, headquartered in Beaverton, Ore., whose systems have produced more than two-thirds of U.S. driver's licenses. Other players include Austin, Texas-based IndentiPHI, which is teamed with Dell Computers, and Cross Match Technologies of Palm Beach Gardens, headed by James W. Ziglar, former commissioner of the now-defunct Immigration and Naturalization Service.
''There's definitely a big space, a lot of growth going on,'' Grant said.
http://www.miamiherald.com/103/story/58951.html
-
Legislators are real doubtful of Real ID
Legislators are real doubtful of Real ID
Sunday, April 01, 2007JANIE HAR
SALEM -- Oregon lawmakers seem about as eager to tackle a new federal driver's license law, known as the Real ID Act, as procrastinators are to start crunching receipts for their tax returns.
Gov. Ted Kulongoski pledged last year to bring Oregon in line with the act, which requires states to verify that drivers are in the country legally and to store supporting documents in a database. Otherwise, Oregonians won't be able to use their licenses as identification to board commercial flights or enter federal buildings next year.
To carry out his campaign vow, the governor needs the Legislature to rewrite Oregon law and budget more money so the state Department of Transportation can make the changes it needs to comply with the act.
Lawmakers tried to address the federal law when it was passed two years ago, but failed, unable to strike a deal on an issue that raises head-spinning questions of illegal immigration, states' rights, traffic safety, privacy and cost. Members are just as divided this session.
"A lot of us aren't crazy about it," says Sen. Rick Metsger, D-Welches, chairman of the Senate business and transportation committee. "The question is what are you going to do about it."
Oregon isn't the only state holding back. Since Congress passed the Real ID Act in 2005 as an anti-terrorism measure, at least two dozen states have introduced bills and other proposals protesting the federal mandate. Idaho and Maine went so far as to approve legislation that flat-out refuses to obey.
In Oregon, many Republicans, including House Minority Leader Wayne Scott of Canby, back the Real ID Act as a way to keep Oregon driver's licenses out of the hands of illegal immigrants. But other legislators oppose the law for reasons including its chilling effect on Oregon's agriculture industry, which relies on immigrant labor, to its Big Brother implications. Nearly all complain that Congress has unfairly stuck states with the bill to carry out the federal act -- an estimated $65 million over six years for Oregon alone.
"There's no clear consensus or critical mass about what direction to go in," says Senate Majority Leader Kate Brown, D-Portland.
Democratic and Republican transportation committee leaders in both the House and Senate have introduced bills refusing to comply with the act unless states get more federal dollars.
Legislators got some breathing room last month when the U.S. Department of Homeland Security extended the implementation deadline from May 11, 2008, to Dec. 31, 2009. States, however, must apply by October for an extension and come up with a compliance plan.
Risk and benefit of delay
Oregon is one of eight states that does not require drivers to prove they are U.S. citizens or legal residents, either through a verifiable Social Security number or another identifying number.
Before winning re-election last year, Kulongoski vowed to change that, and a campaign flier stated he was "leading the state's compliance with the new federal law to ensure that nonresidents don't obtain" driver's licenses.
Advertisement
It's uncertain how he'll do that this session or what, specifically, he wants from lawmakers. He could urge legislators to approve his House Bill 2270, which allows the state to adopt the entire federal act, or he could ask them to give ODOT enough money to get started.
Doing nothing could risk the state's ability to get a federal extension, says Kulongoski spokeswoman Anna Richter Taylor.
"He wants the Oregon driver's license to be recognized for air travel and in federal buildings, and as an official federal form of identification," she says. "The Legislature will need to do something."
Lawmakers such as House Majority Leader Dave Hunt, D-Gladstone, are reluctant to adopt Kulongoski's bill outright this session. Hunt says the new federal deadline gives Oregon time to adjust to whatever changes Congress might make.
Senate transportation committee vice chairman Bruce Starr, R-Hillsboro, agrees there's no hurry. His caucus wants to make drivers prove they're here legally to get a driver's license, but members dislike the federal mandate's potential privacy breaches and cost.
Some critics hope doubts and opposition from states will force Congress to reconsider the act.
Oregon House Speaker Jeff Merkley, D-Portland, expects to introduce a resolution asking Congress for more money, more details and more soul-searching on whether this is the smartest way to fight terrorism.
"They've put in this delay," he says, "but they really haven't carved out time to say, 'Is this the right plan? Should we go forward with this?' "
Janie Har: 503-221-8213; janiehar@news.oregonian.com
http://www.oregonlive.com/news/oregonia ... xml&coll=7
-
Montana close to denying federal ID bill
http://www.greatfallstribune.com/apps/p ... 1/70402009
Montana close to denying federal ID bill
By MATT GOURAS
Associated Press Writer
HELENA — One of the stronger statements against federal identification cards is headed to the Senate floor, a bill that would reject the proposed federal Real ID Act altogether.
A number of states fighting the federal Real ID Act have chosen to protest with nonbinding resolutions. A few, like Montana, are refusing to comply.
“Montana would be seen as a leader,” said Scott Crichton, executive director of the ACLU of Montana.
Montana lawmakers have nearly unanimously called the federal Real ID Act of 2005 an attempt by the federal government to usurp power from state governments. They say it threatens an individual’s right to privacy, which is guaranteed by the Montana Constitution.
“I think this is a good idea to let the federal government know we are unhappy with what they are doing,” said State Sen. Jerry O’Neil, R-Kalispell.
The Senate Judiciary Committee pushed the bill to the floor today, while voting against a similar plan that went a step further and attempted to “nullify” the federal law. Both had previously cleared the state House.
Some Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee supported the plan to nullify the Real ID act, but others said the proposed nullification relies on a murky set of court decisions dating back to before the Civil War.
“This is unconstitutional. We cannot do this,” said committee chairman Sen. Jesse Laslovich, D-Anaconda. “The state doesn’t have the power to nullify a federal law. Period.”
The favored proposal says, in part, that “the state of Montana will not participate in the implementation of the Real ID Act of 2005.”
Maine and Idaho have adopted the stronger action to deny implementation of the Real ID act, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. Similar bills are working through other legislatures, the group said.
Crichton said a national rebellion is taking place against the federal law largely because it forces a mandate on state government without paying for it. The ACLU opposes it because it would require state governments to collect documents such as birth certificates and other private information in a single, national database.
The Real ID Act, which takes effect next year, grew out of a recommendation by the 9/11 Commission to incorporate common security features into state driver’s licenses to prevent tampering or counterfeiting. States will be responsible for verifying the legitimacy of documents used to obtain a license, such as a birth certificates or green cards.
States say it will cost them millions of dollars more in staffing and new computer systems.
Congress is now considering repealing the measure.
-
Washington State, DHS May Use RFID in Licenses
Washington State, DHS May Use RFID in Licenses
Marc L. Songini
April 02, 2007 (Computerworld) --
The state of Washington and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security plan to jointly develop a driver’s license, likely embedded with radio frequency identification (RFID) technology, as an alternative to a passport for travel to some countries.
The state and the DHS late last month announced plans to launch a pilot program to offer drivers in Washington a license that complies with the federal Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative.
Christine GregoireThe WHTI is the government’s plan for meeting one of the mandates of a bill enacted by Congress in 2004. The law requires that all travelers to and from Canada, Mexico, Central and South America, the Caribbean and Bermuda carry passports or other DHS-approved documents to verify their identity.
“This pilot project is a way to boost security at our border without hampering trade and tourism,” Washington Gov. Christine Gregoire said.
The enhanced driver’s licenses are expected to be available by next January. The pilot program will extend until 2009 but can be renewed, said a spokesman for Gregoire.
He added that the state and the DHS have yet to decide on the technology to be used in the license, but he noted that it will likely include RFID chips.
Use of the new license is optional for residents, the spokesman noted. “We very much understand there are folks not interested in carrying around an ID card or license with a chip,” he said.
The deal with the DHS came just after Gregoire signed state legislation requiring that the privacy of ID card bearers be protected and that RFID chips include encryption capabilities to prevent skimming, or the scanning of data without the bearer’s knowledge.
Gregoire’s spokesman also noted that the new license will likely comply with the federal Real ID Act of 2005, which calls for the government to set guidelines to ensure the accuracy of state identification documents.
DHS officials are still developing the act’s technology requirements, and a spokesman for the agency said it will use the Washington program to help it define them.
The plan for using technology such as RFID in the new licenses drew criticism from some privacy advocates.
“An RFID-laced ID card is like a beacon that can transmit personal information to anyone with the right reader device,” said Katherine Albrecht, an author and consumer privacy rights advocate.
“The government is fooling itself, or trying to fool us, if it believes such a tempting target for identity theft can be kept secure,” Albrecht said.
http://link.toolbot.com/computerworld.com/72542
-
And HERE WE GO!!
The hell with "incremental"........they're running as fast as their traitorous legs can take them :evil:
-
Wherefore art thou?
04/02/07 issue
Wherefore art thou?
Program lacks back-end network, authentication architecture
By Wilson P. Dizard III , GCN Staff
Also in this report
• Lead story | Wash. to pilot biometric card
The federal Real ID program to help states develop secure biometric driver’s licenses that also serve as proof of citizenship or legal residence will require major work on back-end systems, and it will require 56 states and territories to agree on a common enterprise identity management architecture that doesn’t yet exist.
“The concern of the state CIOs is to craft an enterprise solution for identity management,” said Doug Robinson, executive director of the National Association of State Chief Information Officers.
Solving that problem for a program such as Real ID would call for states to agree on a common architecture for identification and authentication, Robinson explained. As part of that process, the state motor vehicle agencies would benefit greatly by agreeing on a common schema, or technical pattern, for the data elements used in driver’s license systems.
Robinson pointed to the Law Enforcement Information Sharing Program, sponsored by the Justice Department, as an example of a structure that has harmonized data definitions and schema that provides a common framework for systems spanning all state and federal police and justice agencies.
The Justice program relies on the department’s Global Justice XML Data Model as its base.
“I don’t think these issues are going to come down to technology,” Robinson said. “It’s all about governance and organizational dynamics and funding.”
Unless states concur on an architecture for the systems to support the Real ID program, “there will be a lot of heavy lifting” via the data exchange engines the motor vehicle departments will use to share driver’s license information, Robinson said.
Four states have taken the lead in wrangling with the Real ID technical issues, Robinson and other sources said.
The California, Iowa, Massachusetts and New York DMVs formed a federation in July 2006 that gave formal shape to an informal Real ID technical working group that had been meeting for several months.
The federation has worked with DHS and the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators’ Real ID Steering Committee to set up a Real ID governance structure for all 56 DMVs, according to various sources.
DHS has laid out plenty of work for the DMV officials in its recently released draft Real ID regulation.
For example, DHS expects the 56 agencies to document their business rules, reconcile data quality and formatting issues, and develop best practices and common business rules for Real ID work.
DHS noted in its rulemaking proposal that the Real ID law and the draft regulation call for states to provide electronic access among one another’s DMVs to certain specified driver’s license data.
The draft regulation shifts much of the responsibility for creating links from the DMVs to federal identity databases to other organizations.
The proposal calls for DMVs to query various federal databases to obtain new kinds of information needed for the upgraded driver’s licenses, especially that regarding the applicants’ citizenship or visa status.
DMVs will face various choices for obtaining the new kinds of federal information they will need from the federal “reference databases” of visa status and other information under the Real ID law, according to the draft rule. The draft rule states that the DMVs could:
Maintain or establish direct access to the reference databases of federal information the states will need
Combine direct access with partial use of the common querying service
Verify applicant data against the reference databases in some other manner.
While the states mull their choices for accessing the federal reference databases, they will have time to consider DHS’ admission in the draft rule that those databanks need to be improved to serve the Real ID law’s purposes.
DHS stated that it seeks to upgrade the federal reference databases to meet the Real ID law’s standards for data quality, reliability, integrity and completeness.
“While some of these reference databases are mature and fully operational, others are still under development and need investments of resources,” according to DHS.
http://www.gcn.com/print/26_07/43382-1.html
-
Lawmakers decry federal Real ID Act as move to usurp state's
Lawmakers decry federal Real ID Act as move to usurp state's power
By MATT GOURAS
Associated Press Writer
HELENA — One of the stronger statements against federal identification cards is headed to the Senate floor, a bill that would reject the proposed federal Real ID Act altogether.
A number of states fighting the federal Real ID Act have chosen to protest with nonbinding resolutions. A few, like Montana, are refusing to comply.
"Montana would be seen as a leader," said Scott Crichton, executive director of the ACLU of Montana.
Montana lawmakers have nearly unanimously called the federal Real ID Act of 2005 an attempt by the federal government to usurp power from state governments. They say it threatens an individual's right to privacy, which is guaranteed by the Montana Constitution.
"I think this is a good idea to let the federal government know we are unhappy with what they are doing," said State Sen. Jerry O'Neil, R-Kalispell.
The Senate Judiciary Committee pushed the bill to the floor on Monday, while voting against a similar plan that went a step further and attempted to "nullify" the federal law. Both had previously cleared the state House.
Some Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee supported the plan to nullify the Real ID act, but others said the proposed nullification relies on a murky set of court decisions dating back to before the Civil War.
"This is unconstitutional. We cannot do this," said committee chairman Sen. Jesse Laslovich, D-Anaconda. "The state doesn't have the power to nullify a federal law. Period."
The favored proposal says, in part, that "the state of Montana will not participate in the implementation of the REAL ID Act of 2005."
Maine and Idaho have adopted the stronger action to deny implementation of the Real ID act, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. Similar bills are working through other legislatures, the group said.
Crichton said a national rebellion is taking place against the federal law largely because it forces a mandate on state government without paying for it. The ACLU opposes it because it would require state governments to collect documents such as birth certificates and other private information in a single, national database.
The Real ID Act, which takes effect next year, grew out of a recommendation by the 9/11 Commission to incorporate common security features into state driver's licenses to prevent tampering or counterfeiting. States will be responsible for verifying the legitimacy of documents used to obtain a license, such as a birth certificates or green cards.
States say it will cost them millions of dollars more in staffing and new computer systems.
Congress is now considering repealing the measure.
http://www.greatfallstribune.com/apps/p ... 30327/1002
-
Good call on Real ID measures
Good call on Real ID measures
The Senate Judiciary Committee made a wise move Monday to table a bill attempting to nullify the federal Real ID Act while moving another, more reasonable bill to the Senate floor on a 12-0 vote.
The nullification measure relied on some less-than-iron clad legal precedents said to give states the right to reject federal laws that improperly wrest authority from the states. But that’s a shaky proposition: generally speaking, states (as opposed to the courts) simply have no authority to overturn laws passed by Congress.
The other bill is more reasonable, and still adamantly rejects the Real ID Act by flat-out refusing to implement the measure.
The rejection has wide bipartisan support because the Real ID Act has something to offend just about everybody. On the one hand, by requiring states to adopt identical drivers’ licenses and verify the documentation necessary for people to obtain them — and by not footing any of the bill — the Department of Homeland Security would in effect “commandeer” control of state drivers licensing bureaus and cost states more than $11 billion over the first five years.
On the other hand, the Real ID Act would significantly undermine the individual privacy guaranteed by the Montana Constitution, and could even put people’s identity at risk. Storing all that private information in databases that can be shared with other states and the federal government is an open invitation for it to be stolen, sold or accidentally revealed.
The hope is that if enough states rebel, Congress will repeal the act as the bad idea it always was.
http://www.helenair.com/articles/2007/0 ... 307_01.txt
-
Quote:
Some Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee supported the plan to nullify the Real ID act, but others said the proposed nullification relies on a murky set of court decisions dating back to before the Civil War.
Can anyone here guess why standing decisions dating to before the Civil War would not be usable in this case? Hint: aptheosis.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrocketsGhost
Quote:
Some Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee supported the plan to nullify the Real ID act, but others said the proposed nullification relies on a murky set of court decisions dating back to before the Civil War.
Can anyone here guess why standing decisions dating to before the Civil War would not be usable in this case? Hint: aptheosis.
Do you mean, apotheosis...as in glorification?
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrocketsGhost
Quote:
Some Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee supported the plan to nullify the Real ID act, but others said the proposed nullification relies on a murky set of court decisions dating back to before the Civil War.
Can anyone here guess why standing decisions dating to before the Civil War would not be usable in this case? Hint: aptheosis.
CG, I think you mean apotheosis and I agree, there is no other perfect example of our laws than those wirtten before the Civil Waw. Like that piece of paper called the US Constitution.
-
Sorry for the typo. Yes, I meant apotheosis, but in the sense of the elevation of a person or office to the condition of theos as under the old Roman Empire and the later Holy Roman Empire. Since the acceptance of apotheosis from the HRE by Lincoln, the de facto government in Washington has ceased to be the servant of the several states created under the compact of the Constitution of the United States of America and has become an autocratic and dictatorial arm of the HRE. Prior to the unCivil War, the states possessed all their rights (such as the right to secede) and were protected against encroachments by the federal government in the form of the exercise of powers not specifically delegated by enumeration. After Lincoln's usurpation of power under the auspices of the Holy Roman Empire, those constitutional protections were lost. Much pretense has been made that we are still operating under the Constitution, rather than under a wholly separate system created under Roman Civil Law, but the fact that cases from before the Civil War are no longer valid (whether they are standing decisions or not) and that later all cases adjudicated before 1938 became inadmissable under stare decisis in most of our courts proves otherwise.
-
Rebuff REAL ID: NH gets a second chance
Rebuff REAL ID: NH gets a second chance
17 hours, 17 minutes ago
Last spring the state House of Representatives passed a bill rejecting the state's participation in the federal REAL ID Act. The Senate killed the bill. Today the House has a chance to correct the Senate's mistake from a year ago.
House Bill 685 would prohibit the state from taking part in REAL ID, a misguided 2005 federal law designed to create a national identification card.
REAL ID would turn New Hampshire driver's licenses into electronic federal identification cards. Personal information stored in the licenses would be accessible via computer by thousands of federal bureaucrats, not to mention state DMV personnel.
This national database of personal information would be a hacker's mother lode. And if you think it would be safe in the federal government's hands, just remember those FBI laptops.
The House Transportation Committee sees this act for the burdensome intrusion that it is. The committee voted 16-0 to recommend passage of HB 685. The full house should pass the bill. This time it might find a more friendly reception in the Senate and New Hampshire can stand up to the federal government and say, no, we are not risking the privacy of our citizens for the false sense of security given by REAL ID.
http://www.unionleader.com
-
South Carolina Senate rejects federal driver's license plan
Posted on Wed, Apr. 04, 2007
South Carolina
STATE NEWS IN BRIEF
COLUMBIA
Senate rejects federal driver's license plan
The S.C. Senate voted Tuesday to join the growing number of states that are rejecting a federal call for a national driver's license.
Complying with the federal Real ID Act of 2005 would cost the state $25 million to start, then $11 million a year.
Under the bill the Senate approved Tuesday, South Carolina would not participate in the program, which also would link states' record-keeping systems to national databases, until the federal government agreed to help pay for it and provide privacy protections.
http://www.myrtlebeachonline.com/mld/my ... 025398.htm
-
Could Real ID Act Herald the Apocalypse?
From Robert Longley,
Your Guide to U.S. Gov Info / Resources.
Could Real ID Act Herald the Apocalypse?
Just in case you needed another reason the hate the federal Real ID Act, besides its cost, potential invasion of privacy and monumental inconvenience, some evangelical Christians are sure the law is the next step to the apocalypse and represents the "mark of the beast."
By requiring the universal issuance of high-tech national identification cards, typically in the form of a drivers license, some fundamentalists contend that the Real ID Act is predicted in the Book of Revelations.
"Some Christians interpret verses from the book of Revelation that say humans will be 'marked … so that no one can buy or sell who does not have that mark' as a prophecy of a global numerical control system to be used by the beast, or antichrist. The number would be used during the Great Tribulation, which some Christians believe will precede the second coming of Jesus," writes Derek Kravitz in the Jefferson City, Missouri Post-dispatch.
Under the Real ID Act, persons not carrying the state-issued ID cards would not be allowed to board commercial airliners, open certain bank accounts or enter federal buildings, including courthouses -- acts equated by some with the ability to "buy or sell" as stated in Revelations.
The Book of Revelations, Chapter 13, Verses 15-18:
15: And he had power to give life unto the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak, and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed.
16: 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:
17: 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.
18: Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man, and his number is Six hundred threescore and six.
Also See:
Real ID Act: Better Have Your Birth Certificate!
Real ID Act Could Costs States $11 Billion
States Race to Reject Real ID Act
REAL-ID Act Deadline Extended by DHS
Wednesday April 4, 2007 | comments (0)
http://usgovinfo.about.com/b/a/217566.htm
-
Perspective: Real ID is bad? Compared to what?
Perspective: Real ID is bad? Compared to what?
CoreStreet founder Phil Libin says the absence of a meaningful debate has hindered a serious discussion about the implications of a controversial new technology.
http://i.i.com.com/cnwk.1d/i/ne/mugs/lg/lg_libin_p.jpg
By Phil Libin
Published: April 5, 2007, 4:00 AM PDT
See all Perspectives
TalkBack E-mail Print del.icio.us Digg this
perspective The Department of Homeland Security has published the proposed details of the Real ID act, and criticism is starting to pour in from all sides. The Real ID act is supposed to standardize driver's licenses issued by the states. Supporters say that this is necessary to improve security. Critics usually focus on the weakening of privacy protections. The arguments and counterarguments usually don't bother to address each other and, lofted on volume rather than substance, quickly grow heated and dim.
There's a way to have a meaningful debate on this. Any new security proposal must be compared to the status quo on four dimensions: Security, privacy, convenience and cost. If the new proposal is clearly better at all four, then it's a no-brainer. If the new program is worse on all four, then, well, it has no brains. What if the new program is better on some dimensions but not on others? Should we weigh the relative merits and compromise? Yes, eventually, but not right away! Since the new proposal enjoys the airy freedom of not actually existing yet, we should go back and rework the proposal until it is overwhelmingly better than the status quo.
If we just throw our hands up and refuse to engage Real ID, we'll get the lousy law we deserve.
What is the status quo that Real ID is aiming to replace? Basically, each state has its own standards for driver's licenses, which differ on many of the important details. This is pretty bad across all four dimensions.
If we just throw our hands up and refuse to engage Real ID, we'll get the lousy law we deserve. Security is a mess under the current systems. Methods of collecting, verifying and storing background data differ from state to state, as do the physical protections on the cards themselves and the qualifications of the people that handle your licenses. It's not terribly difficult to get a fraudulent driver's license in any state, and it's easier in some states than others. This kind of setup is structurally likely to worsen over time as people "shopping" for a fake license disproportionately target states known to have weak security. The argument that monoculture and homogenization of systems are generally bad for security doesn't apply here; all the state systems don't have to fail for a terrorist to get a fake license--it only takes one.
At the security line at Chicago O'Hare Airport, a New York driver's license is functionally equivalent to a California license. Since the federal government has to treat all the licenses as equal, it's perfectly reasonable to ask that they all be equal. And not just equal, but at least passably secure. Real ID can improve this.
Privacy with the status quo isn't much better. All of your personal data is already stored on your license and can be read electronically by anyone with a simple 2D bar code scanner. DMV databases are susceptible to data theft, and there are no consistent regulations for what you're allowed to do with a driver's data. With the bar set so low, Real ID should be able to provide a significant privacy upgrade, so it's disappointing that the initial proposed language is mostly mute on privacy. If passed today, Real ID would probably do no net harm to our already meager privacy, but this isn't good enough. Let's work explicit privacy protections into the plan. Real ID should be about real privacy and real security.
Now on News.com:
Rewriting ethics rules for the new media
Google makes map mashups simple
Newsmaker: Wikipedia today, Citizendium tomorrow
Extra: U.S. denies destroying Russian satellite
Video: Mashups for all
Convenience, usually the single most important factor in the successful adoption of new security programs, is pretty much a wash here. The quality of the worst licenses will go up and more attention to training should even out the experience of dealing with DMV staff, but most people won't notice a difference in convenience. My friend who routinely gets extra special airport security treatment because his official DC license is so poorly printed that it looks completely fake, will feel better, but most people won't care.
Cost is tricky as well. Initial adoption of a new driver's license standard will certainly be more expensive in the short term, but the efficiencies of scale and standardization may save money over time. Is this wishful thinking? Probably.
So how do we judge Real ID? We are already living with a national-scale identity system, except it's an accidental system that sucks for security and privacy and is lackluster in convenience and cost.
Is Real ID overwhelmingly better? Not yet, but it can be made so. Let's.
Biography
Phil Libin is president ofCoreStreet, an ID management and access control company in Cambridge, Mass. His regular thoughts can be found at Vastly Important Notes.
###
<sarcasim>No he doesnt have any intrest in pushing the real National NAU ID</sarcasim>
8O
-
N.H. House backs REAL ID ban
Thursday, April 5, 2007
N.H. House backs REAL ID ban
By NORMA LOVE
Associated Press Writer
CONCORD, N.H. (AP) _ The New Hampshire House voted overwhelmingly Thursday to reject the federal REAL ID Act as amounting to the creation of a national ID card.
The House voted 268-8 to send the bill to the Senate that would bar the state from complying with the federal act that sets standards for driver's licenses.
Gov. John Lynch has said he will sign the bill if it reaches his desk.
Ban supporters said New Hampshire needs to send a clear statement that the federal government strayed too far.
''It is probably the worst piece of blackmail to come out of the federal government. This is pure, unadulterated blackmail,'' said. Rep. Sherman Packard, R-Londonderry.
Last year, New Hampshire led the way in opposing the law _ a move now being considered by other states.
''If we are the first state to opt out, so be it,'' said Packard.
President Bush recently bowed to pressure from the nation's governors and Congress and granted states until Dec. 31, 2009, to comply. Two years ago, Congress set a deadline for states to comply with uniform licensing standards by May 2008.
The law passed in response to the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. It requires all states to bring their driver's licenses under a national standard and to link their record-keeping systems. States must verify identification used to obtain a driver's license, such as birth certificates, Social Security numbers and passports.
Driver's licenses not meeting the standard won't be accepted as identification to board a plane and enter federal buildings.
Critics complain the law is too intrusive and costly to states to implement. They also say creating a national database of drivers' information will be a target for thieves looking to steal identities.
In January, Maine lawmakers adopted a nonbinding resolution opposing the law.
Rep. Neal Kurk, R-Weare, the prime sponsor of New Hampshire's bill, says 26 states have either legislation or resolutions in the works opposing REAL ID. He said 11 states have legislation facilitating compliance _ some of which also have measures opposing the act.
Last year, New Hampshire's House voted against participating and Lynch said he would sign the bill, but the Senate rejected it. New Hampshire also was one of two states picked to pilot the program, but Lynch and the Executive Council did not approve the $3 million grant.
Earlier this year, Lynch reiterated his concerns that too many questions remained about the cost, privacy and turning motor vehicle workers into de facto agents of Homeland Security. He said implementing the federal identity system could cost New Hampshire tens of millions of dollars.
http://www.fosters.com/apps/pbcs.dll/ar ... 1/70405048
-
Quote:
''It is probably the worst piece of blackmail to come out of the federal government. This is pure, unadulterated blackmail,'' said. Rep. Sherman Packard, R-Londonderry.
Last year, New Hampshire led the way in opposing the law _ a move now being considered by other states.
Way to Go, NH!
More great news today. :D
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2ndamendsis
Quote:
''It is probably the worst piece of blackmail to come out of the federal government. This is pure, unadulterated blackmail,'' said. Rep. Sherman Packard, R-Londonderry.
Last year, New Hampshire led the way in opposing the law _ a move now being considered by other states.
Way to Go, NH!
More great news today. :D
I am pushing for my state legislator to do the same, but he doesnt seem to anxious to do anything about it. perhaps, I will have to post his info so others can "encourage him" to put an end to this nonsense. :evil:
-
SC Senate Says 'No' to Federal REAL ID Act
SC Senate Says 'No' to Federal REAL ID Act
VIDEO: SC Senate Says 'No' to Federal REAL ID Act - Robert Kittle reports
http://www.wltx.com/video/newsPlay.aspx?aid=32323&bw=
(Columbia) - The South Carolina Senate has a message for Congress: no money, no REAL ID.
Congress passed the REAL ID Act of 2005 as a way to improve homeland security by standardizing states' driver's licenses and ID cards. The cards themselves would be more secure, and getting them would take more scrutiny, like verifying all forms of identification used to get a license.
But Congress is not giving states the money they need to implement the act. It's estimated to cost at least $28 million to start the program in South Carolina, then at least $10 million a year after that. The money is to create new databases and computer systems to be able to share information nationwide so states can verify identification. The new licenses would be made a different way, which requires a new system. DMV workers would also have go through FBI background checks and get training on the new system.
DMV director Marcia Adams says putting REAL ID in place would mean wait times at the DMV would go back to an hour or more, like they were five years ago when the state switched to a new computer system at the DMV.
"What the REAL ID act requires is people to come in person to re-enroll, to bring their documents so that we can look at those documents and electronically verify them. It really does away with any web renewals and any mail renewals," she says.
The license would also cost you more. Instead of $25, she estimates it would cost $60-$85.
Idaho and Maine have already passed resolutions saying they won't take part in REAL ID, and South Carolina is the sixth state with a bill pending to do the same.
But the act says you'll need a REAL ID to board a commercial airplane or enter a federal building. What happens to South Carolinians if the state doesn't comply with the law?
Sen. Larry Martin, R-Pickens, main sponsor of the bill to opt out, says, "That is within the province of members of Congress to determine. I really think that, with South Carolina and some other states that have looked at this and have said, 'Look, we just can't do it,' it really puts the ball back in their courts to do something more reasonable."
Congress is already looking at changing the REAL ID Act because of all the complaints from the states. Sen. Martin says he doesn't think Congress would shut down air travel or federal buildings if the state doesn't comply because of the impact that would have on commerce.
http://www.wltx.com/news/story.aspx?storyid=48499
:D
-
Quote:
But Congress is not giving states the money they need to implement the act.
If the only impediment to this nonsense is federal funding, God help us. Congress will be more than happy to spend more of our money to enslave us.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrocketsGhost
Quote:
But Congress is not giving states the money they need to implement the act.
If the only impediment to this nonsense is federal funding, God help us. Congress will be more than happy to spend more of our money to enslave us.
You are correct, congress has no problem with wasting our tax dollars on us.
-
Delay of Real ID through houses
Delay of Real ID through houses
JENNIFER BYRD
The Associated Press
A measure that delays Washington's implementation of the federal Real ID Act, a 2005 law signed by President Bush requiring strict national standards for state-issued driver's licenses, is headed to Gov. Chris Gregoire's desk.
Her office said she is expected to sign the bill, which passed the state House 95-2 on Thursday. The Senate passed an identical bill earlier this session.
The measure directs the state not to spend money to implement the act unless privacy and security protections have been met, the implementation doesn't place unreasonable costs or record-keeping burdens on citizens, and the state has received federal money to put the act's requirements into effect.
The bill also allows the state attorney general, with the approval of the governor, to challenge the legality or constitutionality of the act.
The Bush administration agreed earlier this year to grant states an extra 1 1/2 years to comply with the law. The original law set a May 11, 2008, deadline, but no funding had been provided. The new deadline is Dec. 31, 2009.
The state Department of Licensing had estimated it would cost $96.7 million over the next two years and $93.4 million in 2009-2011 to implement the act.
According to the American Civil Liberties Union, Washington is the fourth state to pass legislation opposing the law, joining Maine, Idaho, and Arkansas.
"Real ID has been controversial since it was first started," said House Transportation Chairwoman Judy Clibborn, D-Mercer Island. "It's definitely an unfunded mandate."
Clibborn said that because Washington state is developing "enhanced" driver's licenses - which will include proof of citizenship, residency and other information - a Real ID is not needed.
"We have the enhanced license, which is possibly going to be the prototype for the rest of the nation," she said.
The optional Washington enhanced driver's license, to be available in January, has been approved by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security for testing as a secure border-crossing document. It will also allow scanners to tell if the person is on a watchlist or has a criminal record.
"The overwhelming margin of today's vote shows how truly bipartisan is the opposition to REAL ID," Jennifer Shaw, ACLU of Washington legislative director, said in a statement. "It would threaten personal privacy, as well as create a bureaucratic nightmare to implement."
http://www.theolympian.com/125/story/77465.html
-
Representatives okay Real ID ban
Representatives okay Real ID ban
After 268-8 vote, bill heads to the Senate
By NORMA LOVE
The Associated Press
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
April 06. 2007 8:00AM
The New Hampshire House voted overwhelmingly yesterday to reject the federal Real ID Act as amounting to the creation of a national ID card.
The House voted 268-8 to send the bill to the Senate. The legislation would bar the state from complying with a federal act that sets standards for driver's licenses.
Gov. John Lynch has said he will sign the bill if it reaches his desk.
Supporters of the ban said New Hampshire needs to send a clear statement that the federal government strayed too far.
"It is probably the worst piece of blackmail to come out of the federal government. This is pure, unadulterated blackmail," said. Rep. Sherman Packard, a Republican from Londonderry.
---ADVERTISEMENT---
Last year, New Hampshire led the way in opposing the law - a move now being considered by other states.
"If we are the first state to opt out, so be it," Packard said.
President Bush recently bowed to pressure from the nation's governors and Congress and granted states until Dec. 31, 2009, to comply. Two years ago, Congress set a deadline for states to comply with uniform licensing standards by May 2008.
The law passed in response to the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. It requires all states to bring their driver's licenses under a national standard and to link their record-keeping systems.
States must verify identification used to obtain a driver's license, such as birth certificates, Social Security numbers and passports.
Driver's licenses not meeting the standard won't be accepted as identification to board a plane and enter federal buildings.
Critics complain that the law is too intrusive and is costly for states to implement. They also say creating a national database of drivers' information will be a target for thieves looking to steal identities.
In January, Maine lawmakers adopted a nonbinding resolution opposing the law.
Rep. Neal Kurk, a Republican from Weare and the prime sponsor of New Hampshire's bill, says 26 states have either legislation or resolutions in the works opposing Real ID. He said 11 have legislation facilitating compliance - some of which also have measures opposing the act.
Last year, New Hampshire's House voted against participating. Lynch said he would sign the bill, but the Senate rejected it. New Hampshire also was one of two states picked to pilot the program, but Lynch and the Executive Council did not approve the $3 million grant.
Earlier this year, Lynch reiterated his concerns that too many questions remained about costs and privacy. The act would turn motor vehicle workers into de facto agents of Homeland Security, he said.
The governor said implementing the federal identity system could cost New Hampshire tens of millions of dollars.
------ End of article
By NORMA LOVE
The Associated Press
http://www.concordmonitor.com
-
State, federal privacy issues arise
State, federal privacy issues arise
Reprints By Robert Gellman, Consultant
April 6th, 2007
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The new legislative sessions that began in January have already produced two major but incomplete privacy stories. One story comes from a number of states, including Maine and Idaho. The other story comes from Washington.
The state story involves the Real ID Act, a federal law enacted in 2005. The law establishes strict federal standards for drivers’ licenses. Unless state license procedures meet those standards, the federal government will not accept the state’s licenses as identification.
There has been outrage about Real ID, and many other advocacy organizations from right to left also oppose the law. Some of the consequences for privacy arise from the requirement that states keep copies of all identification documentation provided by license seekers, as well as from the enhancement of the machine readability of the new licenses.
At the end of January, the Maine legislature approved a resolution saying the state refuses to implement the Real ID Act. The resolution cited four reasons. First, the federal law imposed an unfunded mandate. Second, the cost for Maine would be $185 million. Third, the resulting database will invite identity theft and invasion of privacy. Finally, the costs and inconveniences offer no benefits such as terrorism prevention.
What we have here seems to be a genuine state rebellion of a sort perhaps not seen since the 1800s. Further, Maine is not alone. Idaho followed suit in March. Other states are still working on similar action.
The chief sponsor of the Real ID Act is the former chair of the House Judiciary Committee. Since his party lost control of the House, he has lost his ability to control the issue. The rebellion plus the lack of a firm policy foundation for Real ID could force major changes, if not a total repeal.
What’s happened already is something of a privacy success, but the story isn’t over. The Bush Administration is going ahead with regulations, and the final outcome is far from clear. What is clear, however, is that the privacy argument must share the stage with the cost argument. Had Congress fully funded the law, then the state rebellion would likely have fizzled.
The second story begins with the pledge of House Democrats to implement all recommendations of the 9/11 Commission. The legislation to accomplish this pledge is H.R. 1, and the bill number tells you of the importance of the matter to the new House leadership.
The Commission recommended that there be a board within the executive branch to “oversee adherence to the guidelines we recommend and the commitment the government makes to defend our civil liberties.” The Intelligence Reform Act, passed in 2004 when the Republicans ran the Congress, established a civil liberties board. However, as H.R. 1 observes, that board does not have the authority necessary to protect civil liberties. The board is seen by some as too powerless and too subject to presidential control.
Title VII of H.R. 1 would replace the existing board with a Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board as an independent agency within the executive branch. Board members would serve fixed terms, be from both political parties and not be under the President’s thumb. The board would also have subpoena power, a tool that could have great force and effect.
The bill would also establish privacy and civil liberties officers in federal agencies that have major functions related to national security and intelligence. Several privacy and civil liberties officers already exist, but other officers would be newly created. The privacy and civil liberties officers would have a broad portfolio and the authority to report directly to the head of the agency and to the board as well.
My favorite feature of the bill is the independence of the board. I have advocated an independent privacy board for a long time. However, the board’s focus is a bit too narrow. It is understandable that the 9/11 Commission focused on terrorism and the board’s responsibilities reflect that. I would like to see the board have some broader privacy responsibilities but no regulatory powers.
Regardless of the details, the major point is that for the first time since 1974, a bill to establish a privacy agency passed a House of Congress. A similar agency is also in a companion bill that passed the Senate.
The conclusion to both of these privacy stories has yet to be written. There could be more developments at any time.
Robert Gellman is a Washington-based privacy and information policy consultant and former chief counsel to the House subcommittee on information, justice, transportation and agriculture. His e-mail address is bob@bobgellman.com
Next Article in Legal/Privacy
Trackbacks
Trackback URL: http://www.dmnews.com/cms/trackback/40662-1
-
Driver's licenses to feature radio chips
Driver's licenses to feature radio chips
State introducing cards that encode personal information
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: April 6, 2007
1:00 a.m. Eastern
By Jerome R. Corsi
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com
Washington Gov. Christine Gregoire
The state of Washington announced a pilot project to introduce a driver's license "enhanced" with a radio frequency identification, or RFID, chip that would encode personal information and possibly serve as a passport-alternative if approved by the Department of Homeland Security.
Democratic Gov. Christine Gregoire signed a bill March 23 allowing Washington residents to apply for the $40 voluntary driver's license beginning in January.
Gregoire spokeswoman Kristin Jacobsen told WND in an e-mail the enhanced license is intended to be an alternative way of complying with theWestern Hemisphere Travel Initiative mandated by the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004.
(Story continues below)
The Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative, the Real ID Act, the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America all call for ID technology to be built into drivers' licenses, passports and other types of border-crossing identification.
Concerns are being expressed within the Department of Homeland Security, however, regarding the wisdom of applying RFID technology to human identification programs.
Under the WHTI, as of Jan. 23 all citizens of the U.S., Canada, and Mexico were required to present a valid passport, or some other federally accepted document, to enter or re-enter the U.S. by air travel.
As early as Jan. 1, 2008, these passport requirements will be extended to all citizens of the U.S., Canada, and Mexico who enter or re-enter the U.S. by land or sea, extending even to ferry travel.
The Department of Homeland Security is in the process of setting requirements regarding acceptable documentation and preparing to implement the passport requirements under the WHTI.
Jacobsen told WND the Washington state enhanced driver's license will require verified proof of citizenship, identity and residence.
"They will look similar to current licenses and ID cards," Jacobsen explained, "but will have an icon on the front that indicates the holder is a U.S. citizen."
The $40 fee for the RFID license is designed to be less than the cost to apply for a passport ($97 on initial application, plus $67 to renew every 15 years). Regular driver's licenses in Washington state cost $25 to renew every five years.
"The enhanced driver's license will cost significantly less than a passport, but will carry many of the same features," Jacobsen stressed. "Features will include an embedded technology that will allow for quick and effective identification checks at border crossings."
Naomi Elmer, a spokeswoman for DHS, confirmed to WND that DHS is working with Washington state on the RFID enhanced driver's license pilot test.
Yet, Elmer positioned the Washington initiative under the Real ID, not under the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative.
"Currently we are working with Washington state because they came to us with a proposal to see if they could create an ID that would be acceptable for Real ID," she said.
"Right now, we are now fulfilling the congressional mandate proposing minimum standards for state-issued driver's licenses and ID cards that the federal agencies would accept for official purposes," Elmer said. "These requirements will go into effect after May 11, 2008."
Elmer acknowledged not all state drivers' licenses can be reissued by that date.
"DHS is permitting states to apply for and receive extensions up to Dec. 31, 2009," she said. "For the states that are receiving extensions, their drivers' licenses will need to meet our requirements by Jan. 1, 2010."
Elmer told WND that DHS is working with Washington state on its RFID-enhanced driver's license proposal.
"We are still working out the details with Washington state at this time," Elmer said
DHS has not yet approved Washington state's proposal, she noted.
Within DHS, there is controversy over whether RFID technology should be applied to ID cards.
On Dec. 6, 2006, the Data Privacy & Integrity Advisory Committee advised DHS against the use of RFID for human identity verification. Concerns over invasion of privacy and whether RFID information could be kept secure were primary considerations in the committee's recommendation that DHS proceed cautiously before implementing the program.
Elmer also told WND that Washington state's proposal had nothing to do with the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America.
Under SPP, the "2005 Report to the Leaders" specified the SPP working groups have determined that "trusted travelers of North America" will be issued bio-metric border crossing passes, similar to the electronic measures being issued trucks and other commercial vehicles under the "trusted trader of North America" initiative.
The Real ID Act of 2005 was passed as Division B of the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for Defense, the Global War on Terror, and Tsunami Relief, 2005.
DHS has issued proposed minimum standards for driver's licenses and identification cards under the Real ID Act.
Still, a move to reject the Real ID Act is gaining momentum at the grassroots level, with nearly half the states voting not to participate.
Idaho, Maine and Arkansas have passed state resolutions rejecting participation.
Other states – including Arizona, Georgia, Montana, New Mexico, Utah, Vermont and Wyoming – are considering similar legislation.
Bills rejecting Real ID also have been introduced in Hawaii, Kentucky, Maryland, Massachusetts, Missouri, Nebraska, New Hampshire, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina and West Virginia.
On March 2, the White House announced the requirements of the Real ID Act would be put off until the end of 2009, acknowledging widespread opposition to the measure.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Related offer:
"Spychips: How Major Corporations and Government Plan to Track Your Every Move with RFID"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Previous stories:
Powerful new radio chip unveiled
Chip-maker wants to implant immigrants
Employees get microchip implants
Hold off on that chip, says Thompson
GOP star to get chip implant
People tracking closer to reality
School daypack features satellite tracking
Theme park tracks all patrons
Paying for drinks with wave of the hand
Bio-chip featured at government health showcase
Wal-Mart used microchip to track customers
Shopping to go high-tech?
GPS implant makes debut
Miami journalist gets 'chipped'
SEC investigating Applied Digital
Applied Digital gets reprieve from creditor
Implantable-chip firm misses final deadline
Implantable-chip company in financial straits
Dark side of supermarket 'savings cards'
Post-9/11 security fears usher in subdermal chips
Supermarket cards threat to privacy?
'Digital Angel' not pursuing implants
Big Brother gets under your skin
'Digital Angel' unveiled
Human ID implant to be unveiled soon
Concern over microchip implants
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jerome R. Corsi is a staff writer for WND. He received a Ph.D. from Harvard University in political science in 1972 and has written many books and articles, including co-authoring with John O'Neill the No. 1 New York Times best-seller, "Unfit for Command: Swift Boat Veterans Speak Out Against John Kerry." Corsi's most recent book was authored with Michael Evans: "Showdown with Nuclear Iran." Dr. Corsi's other recent books include "Black Gold Stranglehold: The Myth of Scarcity and the Politics of Oil," which he co-authored with WND columnist Craig. R. Smith, and "Atomic Iran."
http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.a ... E_ID=55058
-
Out-of-state traffic violations will haunt Oklahoma drivers
Published: April 05, 2007 11:55 pm
Out-of-state traffic violations will haunt Oklahoma drivers
It will be harder for a person moving to Oklahoma from out of state to hide traffic violations under new guidelines adopted by the Oklahoma Department of Public Safety.
New guidelines that have been mandated since last year will require the state to perform a national driver status check on any person seeking an initial, renewal or replacement driver’s license.
The state’s computers have just been programmed to comply with the requirements. Now, when a person applies for a driver’s license or a driver’s license renewal,suspensions, revocations or other issues involving the driving record anywhere in the United States will show up in a database.
This new regulation is another move toward setting up a national driver’s license system. There are pros and cons to having such a system.
The biggest fear, of course, is the creation of a national identity database and how that impacts privacy rights of individuals.
The positive part of such a program, however, is if a person’s driver’s license has been suspended or revoked in another state, he or she won’t be able to get a driver’s license in Oklahoma until that issue is resolved.
It also will force people to pay traffic violations issued in other states. These violators are called “drive-thrus.” They receive a ticket while passing through a state in which they don’t live and fail to take care of that violation.
With Congress passing the Real ID national identification act last year, it’s a certainty in the future more and more personal data about individuals will be stored and shared among states.
http://www.enidnews.com/opinion/local_s ... 35548.html
-
Quote:
The bill also allows the state attorney general, with the approval of the governor, to challenge the legality or constitutionality of the act.
Alright!! Washington........now we're beginning to spark and sputter.
I'd like to see a resounding.......STICK IT WHERE THE SUN DON'T SHINE but this is a start :D
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2ndamendsis
Quote:
The bill also allows the state attorney general, with the approval of the governor, to challenge the legality or constitutionality of the act.
Alright!! Washington........now we're beginning to spark and sputter.
I'd like to see a resounding.......STICK IT WHERE THE SUN DON'T SHINE but this is a start :D
A small start, but a start indeed.
-
Real ID Takes the Slow Train to Certainty
Real ID Takes the Slow Train to Certainty
US Will Have Until 2013 to Forget All About It
By Lucas Power
Posted: 04/08/2007
http://www.twistedpolitics.com/images/real_id.jpg
Not really the Real ID in real life. Really.
The Real ID Act of 2005 has its roots in the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for Defense, the Global War on Terror, and Tsunami Relief, 2005. That mouthful of legislation is what polite company refers to as “a massive appropriations bill”. Think of it as the Super Wal*Mart of lawmaking; a sprawling, all encompassing property where everyone can find something to take home. Building on recommendations made by the 9/11 Commission, the Real ID Act set forth minimum standards by which individual states issue a driver’s license or identification card. The standards were only recently released for a purely symbolic 60 day period of public scrutiny.
The DHS touts Real ID as a nationwide effort to prevent terrorism. By reducing fraud they claim to improve the reliability and accuracy of state issued documents. Real IDs would make sure everyone is who they say they are and that no one is a terrorist. The act requires that a Real ID driver’s license be used for “official purposes”. As defined by DHS, official purposes include accessing a Federal facility; boarding commercial aircraft; and entering nuclear power plants. There has also been talk of limiting access to certain bank accounts without the standardized ID. That’s just for now, though. DHS says they may consider expanding these official purposes through future rulemakings in order to maximize the security benefits of Real ID. In other words, the sky’s the limit.
Real ID has made some strong opponents since it was first suggested in legislation. Both the Electronic Privacy Information Center, or EPIC, and the ACLU have been quite vocal regarding what they consider a de facto national ID card. State lawmakers have also voiced concern. Three states have passed legislation urging either additional privacy safeguards or total abandonment of the Real ID Act. Twenty other states are considering such legislation. Some critical points on the Real ID include requiring a verifiable permanent address. This feature creates a problem for citizens without a fixed address such as the homeless, or for victims of domestic violence.
While voicing privacy concerns, states have been more critical over cost than anything else. Full implementation is estimated to cost at least $28 million to start the program in South Carolina, then at least $10 million a year after that. The National Conference of State Legislatures estimates the cost to states will be more than $11 billion over five years. That is over one hundred times the original $100 million cost that Congress estimated. For 2006, $40 million was allocated for start-up costs. DHS has announced that up to 20 percent of a state’s Homeland Security Grant Program funds can be used to help implement Real ID during the 2007 grant cycle.
The money is needed to create new databases and computer systems with the ability to share information nationwide so states can verify identification. The new licenses would be made with a new system requiring DMV workers to undergo FBI background checks and get training for the equipment. There is also an increased cost to the citizens. The license would cost an estimated $60-$85. Apart from the jump in cost from around $25, Real IDs would mean mandatory presence at the DMV, as mail-in and web renewals would be suspended. A host of documents must then be provided and subsequently verified by DMV personnel to prove the applicant’s birth, address, and lawful status.
While the official regulations stipulate a machine readable technology, generally satisfied by a two-dimensional barcode containing a minimum of information, some states have taken “machine readable” to the next tier. With the full support of DHS, the state of Washington has begun testing radio-frequency identification chips in their cards. This technology, known as RFID is used primarily for tracking products with a retail space, for automatic collection of tolls, and for large groups of livestock. It has been used recently on passports as a way to authenticate identity for a variety of purposes, chief among them, making individuals suitable for travel to Canada, Mexico, and beyond.
Even DHS has been timid about using RFID, but one supposes that there are alternatives. The field of biometric authentication is broad. What someone can steal off of an RFID tag, they cannot steal in the way of fingerprints, eye retinas and irises, facial patterns and hand measurements. A few successful pilot programs could bring the technology into favor. Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY) supports a biometric ID card for curbing immigration. If all states had an ID card of the same caliber, he reasons, the government could provide a scanner to employers or providers of various services to verify the eligibility of the seeker. No card, no work.
At this point, the Social Security card is essentially a national ID card. No one will hire you without it, you can't get a bank account, cash a check, or get a driver's license without one. The mandates for a Social Security number far exceed its original intentions. Only, there's almost no one voicing protest against the widespread use of the Social Security card as an identifier. Clearly our society doesn't have a problem with providing a document to prove we are who we say we are. Is the problem then, having a document that is harder to forge?
Originally, the deadline for instating the new standards was May of 2008. The Department of Homeland Security has extended the deadline until December 31, 2009. Even still, the full “phase-in period” for Real IDs isn’t until May 11, 2013. It is by this date that the act prohibits federal agencies and airlines from accepting any state-issued driver licenses or identification cards that do not meet minimum security requirements. States who currently oppose the Real ID have said Congress must decide an outcome if their concerns are not addressed and they remain in “opt-out” status by the 2013 deadline. It’s important to remember DHS doesn’t want to issue you a national ID card, but rather wants your state to issue a standardized card that will be accepted nationally, or as they put it “one driver, one record, one record of jurisdiction.” Papers, please?
http://pine-magazine.com/content.php?id=662
-
Washington, New Hampshire, South Carolina Oppose Real ID
Washington, New Hampshire, South Carolina Oppose Real ID
OLYMPIA, WA-The Washington state legislature has passed a bill in a landslide to block implementation of the federal REAL ID Act. The action makes Washington the fourth state to pass legislation opposing the law, joining Maine, Idaho and Arkansas.
New Hampshire and South Carolina Legislatures also took action to oppose the REAL ID act last week, New Hampshire with a vote of 268-8.
"The overwhelming margin of Washington's vote shows how truly bipartisan the opposition is to REAL ID. It would threaten personal privacy, as well as create a bureaucratic nightmare to implement," said ACLU of Washington Legislative Director Jennifer Shaw.
The measure will prohibit state implementation of the REAL ID Act, unless the federal government fully funds it and provides stronger protections for the privacy of Washington drivers. Previously passed by the Senate, the measure was approved by the House by a 95-2 vote. Senator Mary Margaret Haugen (D-Camano Island) is the bill's prime sponsor, and Senators Dan Swecker (R-Rochester) and Ed Murray (D-Seattle) are cosponsors.
Passed by Congress in 2005 in response to the 2001 terroist attacks, the REAL ID Act requires states to produce standardized driver's licenses and to store the drivers' information in nationally connected databases, creating a de facto national ID card. By placing personally identifiable information in databases accessible across the country, REAL ID makes the information more vulnerable to identity theft and misuse.
The law requires states to start issuing these licenses by Dec. 31, 2009, but it did not set aside funds to make that possible. In Washington, the net costs of implementing this new system would be approximately $50 million per year for the first five years, according to a survey by the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators.
REAL ID has drawn opposition from organizations across the political spectrum, including the American Bar Association, the American Conservative Union, the Council of State Governments, Gun Owners of America, the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence, the National Conference of State Legislatures and the National Governors Association.
More information about REAL ID is available online at www.realnightmare.org 4-08-07
http://www.northcountrygazette.org/arti ... ppose.html
-
Quote:
At this point, the Social Security card is essentially a national ID card. No one will hire you without it, you can't get a bank account, cash a check, or get a driver's license without one. The mandates for a Social Security number far exceed its original intentions. Only, there's almost no one voicing protest against the widespread use of the Social Security card as an identifier. Clearly our society doesn't have a problem with providing a document to prove we are who we say we are.
Says who? I am among several million Americans who have a HUGE problem with universal identifiers like the Social Security Number. If the federal government wants to limit access to its own benefits and programs with the SSN, fine, but when it starts limiting my ability to engage in private business and travel it has crossed a serious line into tyranny and we can no longer claim to be a land of liberty.
-
Quote:
Says who? I am among several million Americans who have a HUGE problem with universal identifiers like the Social Security Number. If the federal government wants to limit access to its own benefits and programs with the SSN, fine, but when it starts limiting my ability to engage in private business and travel it has crossed a serious line into tyranny and we can no longer claim to be a land of liberty.
You have that correct. I was listening to the radio today and how Wesley Snipes removed himself from the SS# and renounced his USA citizenship and now says he is a citizen of the U.S. which is different than the corporate run USA. I suppose that is why he is in such water with the IRS. He is fighting on the grounds right now that the District Court doesn’t have jurisdiction/authority over his case.
Interesting stuff.
-
More U.S. States Oppose Federal Real ID Act
More U.S. States Oppose Federal Real ID Act
In the New Hampshire statehouse last week, legislators sent a message to federal officials, voting 268 to 8 to bar the state from participating in the U.S. Real ID program. The bill will now go to the state senate and then the governor, who has already made his opinion clear. "I continue to have many concerns about Real ID, including the cost, the impact on the privacy of our citizens and the burden it will place on state government employees," Gov. John Lynch said in a statement. Legislators in four other states, Maine, Idaho, Washington and Arkansas, have also voted to oppose the act.
The Real ID act, passed in 2005, is designed to make driver’s licenses issued by states—and used as de facto ID cards in the United States—less susceptible to counterfeiting. The law also aims to set out more uniform rules on the documents people must provide to receive a license. An association of state governors has criticized the federal requirements; in large part because U.S. officials haven’t offered to fund the cost of the $11 billion cost of the program, in estimates cited by the association.
President George Bush had bowed to pressure from the governors and Congress and granted states until the end of 2009 to comply. The U.S. government declined to mandate that U.S. driver’s licenses be smart cards. However, the proposed driver’s license rules released in March by the U.S. government open the door for some border states to add smart card chips to their driver’s licenses to serve as border-crossing cards. (2007-04-09)
http://www.cardtechnology.com/article.h ... 097BJH12PP
-
Post-9-11 Fears Fuel Boom in High-Tech ID Business
Post-9-11 Fears Fuel Boom in High-Tech ID Business
Apr 09, 2007 By Dave Montgomery
http://media.govtech.net/Digital_Com...printlock1.jpg
The U.S. government's growing appetite for biometrics-based ID systems to bolster security, detect terrorists, fight crime and control illegal immigration is generating billions of dollars in opportunities for an evolving industry that's coming of age in the post-Sept. 11 era.
The growth of the identification industry also has spawned an aggressive push-back from privacy advocates against what they call an emerging "industrial surveillance complex."
Regardless of the perspective, few would deny that the expanding government market for more secure identification programs is laden with business potential.
Players range from big-name defense contractors to specialty firms largely unknown to the public. And the product line includes now-commonplace offerings that might have seemed possible only on an episode of "Star Trek" just a decade or so ago.
Video or audio scanners can identify individuals by facial features, voice or even the blood vessels in their eyes, matching the information against data stored in a secure computerized clearinghouse. Fingerprints are widely used for everything from firing up the computer to opening the office door.
The terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, accelerated the identification boom as high-tech companies stepped forward to supply a vast range of new security networks for transportation, government buildings, law enforcement and other venues.
After a shake-down period in which some hastily formed enterprises crashed and burned, the industry is beginning to mature and may be poised for years of steady growth, said Jeremy Grant of Stanford Washington Equity Research, a stock analyst who's conducted an extensive study of the industry.
At least 10 major U.S. government initiatives will generate more than $8 billion in business over the next five years, with overseas projects generating another $14 billion, Grant said.
The U.S. projects include issuing biometric cards to all 2 million federal workers as well as to federal contractors, and giving travelers preregistered "smart cards" to speed through airport security.
Perhaps the biggest customer is the Department of Homeland Security, the multi-agency bureaucracy that guards the borders and protects the home front from terrorism. Other big government markets include the Defense Department, the State Department and the FBI.
President Bush's call for overhauling the nation's immigration system also could generate more business for the industry if Congress reaches accord on the volatile issue. Most legislative proposals call for biometric cards and employee-verification databases to determine whether immigrants are legally entitled to be in the United States.
"That's a significant business opportunity for these companies," Grant said.
The American Civil Liberties Union and other privacy advocates are fighting to curtail the industry, saying biometric cards and centralized databases open the door to government snooping and do not offer foolproof protection from terrorists and criminals, even with recent technological advances.
"Decisions being made now are going to dramatically affect what our lives look like in the future," said Jim Harper, the director of information-policy studies at the Cato Institute, a Washington research center that urges limited government.
Industry executives say the privacy dangers are exaggerated and that companies follow rigid procedures to prevent the distribution of confidential information.
One privacy vs. security showdown centers on the REAL ID Act, which Congress enacted in 2005 to require tamperproof driver's licenses that would be available only to legal U.S. residents. More than two dozen states are considering legislation opposing the law, saying it would cost $11 billion to implement.
Industry executives say they're part of an industry with a bright future, made up of companies that offer differing sets of specialties. Some niche firms have been in business for less than five years, while others, such as defense giants Lockheed Martin and Raytheon, are expanding into the identification realm.
One of the bigger companies, Grant said, is L-1 Identity Systems of Stamford, Conn., which was formed by the merger of two other companies and is headed by Robert LaPenta, one of the founders of L-3 Communications.
Another established company is Digimarc, headquartered in Beaverton, Ore., whose systems have produced more than two-thirds of U.S. driver's licenses. Other players include Austin, Texas-based IndentiPHI, which is teamed with Dell Computers, and Cross Match Technologies of Palm Beach Gardens, Fla., headed by James W. Ziglar, former commissioner of the now-defunct Immigration and Naturalization Service.
"There's definitely a big space, a lot of growth going on," Grant said. "This is a classic growth industry right now. But not everybody's going to win."
http://www.govtech.net/digitalcommuniti ... ?id=104842