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
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