Thread: Support H.R.220 - Common Sense About Identity Theft & RE

Heck no
Originally published May 29, 2007
You gotta admire a governor who doesn't mince words about whether his state will comply with a knuckle-headed mandate from Washington as costly as it is offensive. "No, nope, no way, hell no" was how Montana's Brian Schweitzer put it, according to an Associated Press account of a recent ceremony in which the governor signed one of the strongest rejections so far of the federal law known as Real ID.
Montana is justly proud of being at the forefront of a national rebellion against an anti-immigrant measure the Republican Congress passed in 2005 that would turn state-issued driver's licenses into national identity papers through a chaotic and expensive process fraught with the possibility of privacy violations and identify theft.




This rebellion is a refreshing sign that common sense can prevail even when federal officials fan fears of international terrorism and threaten citizens of recalcitrant states that they won't be able to board airplanes. Nearly a dozen other states have also formally refused to participate in the program, and more than half are debating the choice.

Maryland is biding its time. Motor vehicle officials are preparing about as much as they can without committing funds to a tab estimated at $50 million to $100 million. They wisely anticipate that Real ID may be repealed by Congress or at least remodeled. It has already been delayed once.

Probably chief among concerns for the states is the program's $23 billion price tag, with which the federal government has offered no meaningful help.

But states also bristle at being directed to create - on the cheap - a national identity data bank that Americans have long resisted. All 245 million drivers would have to show up at state offices armed with birth certificates or other proof of citizenship. Their documents would be digitally copied and stored along with biometric material, such as a fingerprint or retina scan. All the state data banks would be linked, so hackers would have access to vital private information for everyone who drives a car.

The ostensible purpose for creating this elaborate system was to improve security in a country that relies so much on driver's licenses for identification. But Real ID got passed (as a last-minute add-on to an emergency war spending bill) because it was sold as an easy way to curb illegal immigration by demanding proof of citizenship for licensed drivers - as though undocumented workers wouldn't simply drive without a license.

Even with a new Democratic Congress, repealing Real ID may be difficult. But if one-fourth or more of the states refuse to participate, the program will likely collapse of its own weight.

Driver's licenses should be secure and tamper-proof, but they can't be even part of the answer to America's immigration problems. Outside of Washington, Americans understand that.



http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinio ... -headlines

New Hampshire officials say no to Real ID
Governor set to sign bill that rejects compliance with federal law
Marc L. Songini


May 30, 2007 (Computerworld) -- New Hampshire is poised to become the latest of a handful of states to enact a law to ban implementation of the federal national identification act.

The Real ID Act, whose evolving guidelines were last updated in March by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS), was passed by Congress in 2005 with a May 2008 deadline for compliance. The deadline can now be extended until December 2009 with DHS approval.

About a dozen states, including Maine, Hawaii and Idaho, have so far passed legislation opposing the federal law, said a spokesman for the Washington-based American Civil Liberties Union.

“The concerns are all similar,â€

Posted on Thu, May. 31, 2007
News from around the Statehouse on Thursday
The Associated Press

South Carolina would reject a federal call for a national driver's license under a proposal senators agreed to Thursday.

Complying with the federal Real ID Act of 2005 would cost the state $25 million to start, then $11 million a year. Also, lines at Department of Motor Vehicles offices could be hours long, as all drivers would be required to show up in person for a new license, according to state officials.

Under the approved bill, South Carolina would refuse to participate in the program, which also would link states' record-keeping systems to national databases.

The Senate's initial proposal included stipulations, saying the state would not participate until the federal government agreed to help pay for it and provide privacy protections. But the House removed those requirements before approving the bill Wednesday.

"We're not interested in participating at all," said House Education and Public Works Chairman Bob Walker, R-Landrum.
---
COLUMBIA, S.C. (AP) - A resolution called "Plan B" for the 2007-08 state budget received key approval Thursday in the House.

The measure would fund state government at the same levels as this fiscal year if legislators can't agree to a new spending plan by July 1.
"This is Plan B in case we don't get to a budget," House Ways and Means Chairman Dan Cooper said.

The Senate approved the measure last week. It will receive final approval in the House with an automatic vote Friday.

Budget negotiations between House and Senate conference committee members have stalled. Sticking points on the $7.4 billion plan include whether income tax relief should apply to top earners or to the bottom tax bracket, how to reform the Department of Transportation, and whether to increase cigarette taxes.

Only three days remain in the regular 2007 legislative session. House members are considering a resolution to extend the session to deal with the budget and other limited items. It was approved in the Senate last week.

http://www.charlotte.com/205/story/142605.html

EXCELLENT!!!

Absolutely Wonderful

The statement that California provides drivers licenses to illegals is as valid as the rumor started by Mike Savage that gas is or was $4.00 a gallon in California. Neither are true. The California Democrat legislature has passed several bills granting illeagals d.l. Arnold has vetoed them all.

As for the national id, I would wear mine on a chain hanging from my neck. I have nothing to hide or to fear.

Originally Posted by JerryMack

The statement that California provides drivers licenses to illegals is as valid as the rumor started by Mike Savage that gas is or was $4.00 a gallon in California. Neither are true. The California Democrat legislature has passed several bills granting illeagals d.l. Arnold has vetoed them all.

As for the national id, I would wear mine on a chain hanging from my neck. I have nothing to hide or to fear.

Having nothing to hide is not a vaild reason for accepting a National ID. Hitler had national ID's, what did it get those who accepted it?

Two more states reject Real ID

WASHINGTON, June 1: New Hampshire and Oklahoma have joined Montana and Washington in rejecting the U.S. government's 2005 Real ID Act.

The states passed statutes refusing to submit to the program, meaning driver's licenses issued by those states will eventually be disallowed as official identification to board airplanes and enter federal buildings, Stateline.org reported Friday.

Meanwhile, the Idaho Legislature refused to allocate any money to pay for the act and the Georgia Legislature gave Gov. Sonny Perdue the authority to ignore the act. Perdue's spokesman, Bert Brantley, said the governor is hoping the federal government will make the expensive program more affordable for states.

Opponents of the $14 billion program have criticized its high costs for states and expressed fears the new security system for compliant driver's licenses would amount to an invasion of privacy for the holders.

"It's more and more clear that the Real ID system won't work to secure the country," said Jim Harper of the Libertarian Cato Institute. He predicted more states will join those rejecting the act.

--- UPI

http://www.newkerala.com/news.php?actio ... s&id=34645

Maine and N.H. vs. the Real ID Act
National card system opposed on privacy, civil liberty grounds


By Rachel M. Collins
news@seacoastonline.com
June 03, 2007 6:00 AM
New Hampshire and Maine are leading the opposition to a national driver's license or identification card system.

Dubbed the Real ID Act of 2005, the federal law passed by Congress sets a nationwide standard for new driver's licenses or personal identification cards for everyone that would link states' record-keeping systems to a national database.

In addition to being a hefty cost for the states — an estimate that has ranged between $11 billion and $24 billion to implement nationwide — some lawmakers in Maine and New Hampshire argue the measure infringes on privacy rights and civil liberties.

In response, the New Hampshire House and Senate have passed a bill barring the state from participating in the identification system.

Though 26 states — including Maine — this year have introduced either a resolution or a bill stopping their states from participating in the program or criticizing Congress for mandating Real ID, the N.H. House was one of the first to pass a bill forbidding the state from complying with the act, said Rep. Neal Kurk, R-Weare, the bill's prime sponsor.

Calling the act "contrary and repugnant" to both the New Hampshire and U.S. constitutions, legislators — by an overwhelming 268-8 vote — sent the measure to the state Senate for a vote.

State senators voted unanimously last month to support the bill. And Gov. John Lynch has said he will to sign it, after the two chambers reconcile their versions.

The act calls for Americans to be required to have a federally approved ID card to travel on an airplane, open a bank account, collect Social Security payments, avail oneself of any government service or even enter a federal building.

Kurk said opposition is strong, particularly in New Hampshire, the "Live Free or Die" state, because of the program's ramifications.

"The government has said this program was put in place as one way to make the country more secure against terrorist attacks," he said. "It is neither going to enhance safety or security."

In fact, Kurk argues that by creating a national database, it will make it easier for hackers and identity thieves since all vital information would be in the same place.

He also said if terrorists were able to produce some kind of "legitimate document" such as a driver's license — obtained through bribery or theft — they then would be able to get their own national ID card and " would now be inside the fortress."

In addition, Kurk said even "ordinary citizens are absolutely amazed" that our federal government would mandate a system "that would allow them to keep track of all citizens under the guise of national security."

For those reasons, from the start, New Hampshire and Maine lawmakers have been in the forefront voicing concerns. Maine was the first to take a formal stand against the legislation when its Senate and House voted nearly unanimously to approve a joint resolution urging Congress and the president to repeal Real ID.

Admittedly, there have been a few concessions already.

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security, which had set an initial May 2008 deadline to comply with the uniform licensing standards, backed down in March, along with President Bush, from that deadline.

That action was prompted by a Senate amendment introduced by Sen. Susan Collins, a Maine Republican.

Though the federal government continues to stand by the need for "machine-readable" national ID cards, the states now will have until Dec. 31, 2009, to comply.

"This is significant progress," Collins said. "The department has finally recognized that it was simply unfair to impose this burden on the states to set such an unrealistic compliance date."

Still, Collins admitted, the new deadline does "not solve all of the issues and the all of the problems with the Real ID Act, the biggest of which is the huge cost of compliance."

But for many in Maine and New Hampshire funding still is not the only problem.

In fact, even though New Hampshire was chosen last year as one of two states to pilot the program, Lynch and the Executive Council have not moved forward on accepting the $3 million grant, according to Lynch press secretary Colin Manning.

And, all of the states' maneuverings could become moot if U.S. Rep. Tom Allen, D-Maine, has his way.

Allen is sponsoring a bill in Congress that would repeal Real ID. "Real ID enacted statutory regulations that were too prescriptive," he said. "I think the bill needs to be repealed."

Instead, his proposal is that DHS and the Department of Transportation work with state officials and privacy and civil rights experts on setting minimum standards for licenses and personal ID cards with common machine-readable identity information.

The bill not only would provide states flexibility in producing tamper- and counterfeit-resistant driver's licenses, but it would seek "to protect privacy and civil liberties."

That is because Allen said the Real ID Act requiring every state department of motor vehicles to gather personal information to be "shared with all of those around the country raises some significant privacy issues."

"A lot of this is about process," he said. "If we're going to have some form of an ID system, then the states and their motor vehicle or other related agencies need to have a say in drawing up the regulations to figure out how much flexibility and uniformity to include."

The bill also requests Congress to provide the secretary of Homeland Security with $300 million for each fiscal year from 2008 to 2015 to assist states in paying for the new cards.

http://www.seacoastonline.com/apps/pbcs ... 50/-1/NEWS

There are many reasons to oppose 'Real ID Act'
June 6 , 2007

It was a surprise when the recent, strife-torn Legislature passed the bill denying the federal Real ID Act, not because the bill passed but because it passed unanimously.

In a session that couldn't agree on the shape of the negotiating table, the fast and overwhelming support for this repudiation of a federal power grab was stunning.

And because of it, even U.S. Rep. Denny Rehberg, R-Mont. and originally a supporter of the idea of standardized national identification cards and a connected human database, reversed his position and supported undoing the federal legislation.

Instituted on the recommendation of the 9/11 Commission, he said he thought most Montanans agreed with the strong anti-terrorism move.
"The Legislature has disagreed, the governor has disagreed and I will accept and support their position," Rehberg said on the April day on which Gov. Schweitzer signed the state legislation.

At the time we found ourselves in sympathy with Rehberg. While there's something distressingly Orwellian about the idea of Big Brother having the tools to know our personal data and whereabouts, it was hard to see how law-abiding people had anything to fear from it. And, it seemed, it might help law enforcement working to fight interstate crime.

Most onerous in our view was that it constituted another of those dreaded unfunded mandates: By one reckoning standardizing 50 states' driver's licenses, IDs and computer records would cost the states $14 billion.

The "live free or die" rhetoric that accompanied debate on the state bill was a surprise.

"No, nope, no way, hell no," said Schweitzer as he signed the bill announcing that the state wouldn't comply with the federal ID act — the strongest statement of opposition yet by an individual state.

Montana's U.S. senators have led the charge to strip Real ID from the immigration bill.

We heartily endorse the move as a matter of states rights and on the basis of the cost to states. We'll leave the rhetorical objections to the politicians.

Said Schweitzer: "This is still a free country and there are no freer people than the people that we have in Montana."




http://www.greatfallstribune.com/

Maine Enacts Real ID Statute

POSTED: 11:14 am EDT June 6, 2007
UPDATED: 11:48 am EDT June 6, 2007



AUGUSTA, Maine -- In January, Maine lawmakers led a national revolt against the Real ID law by passing a resolution objecting to the 2005 act of Congress.

Now, the Maine Legislature has gone a step further by passing a bill prohibiting the state from implementing Real ID or any other similar national identity card system. The House and Senate both gave the bill final approval on Tuesday, and it awaits the signature of Gov. John Baldacci, who also opposes Real ID.

The program sets a national standard for driver's licenses and requires states to link their record-keeping systems to national databases.


Opponents said it would create a national identity card system. Those cards would be valuable to identity thieves. Opponents also see the cards as an invasion of privacy.

The law's supporters said Real ID is needed to prevent terrorists and illegal immigrants from getting fake identification cards.

More than a dozen states have followed Maine's lead with resolutions or statutory prohibitions on Real ID.

http://www.wmtw.com/news/13452802/detail.html