If you want to bank, have REAL ID. If you want to fly, have REAL ID (or a passport). If you want to work, have REAL ID (attempted in the as-of-yet failed EEVS legislation.) If you want to drive, have REAL ID.
If you want to function in normal life, have REAL ID. It may not be "required" that a person function in normal life, but isn't such talk meaningless?
A few questions:
1. Does not REAL ID link all 50 state databases into 1 network?
2. Does not REAL ID have the federal government tell the states how to do a driver's licenses? What's it matter if the states can decide what color it is?
3. Did not a leader at DHS give a speech where REAL ID was described as helpful for "countless other uses?"
4. The federal government is heavy into regulation of banks. So hows does saying " In fact, the federal government does not have the authority to regulate how or whether a bank... requires REAL ID. " It is inherent in the law that banking will require REAL ID.
5. Are you not saying "Real ID is not required, but you have to have it to function in daily live." To me this is a contradiction.
Why doesn't the following equation does work?
1. It has requirements demanded by the NATIONAL government.
2. The purpose is for IDENTIFICATION.
3. It is on a CARD.
1+2+3= National ID Card.
I believe in the fight against terrorism. But I am also concerned about statism. Surely these are not our only options.
Congress slipped this law into a "must pass" spending bill. No debate. No air. No sunshine--in the open arena. I think the debate should be wide open and fair. (Thanks for the blog.)
Spirited and Honest Debate rising from honest concerns...
I have more.
March 28, 2008 11:54 AM
Anonymous said...
Thanks for the explanations. I, for one citizen; am all for the Real ID. I want one, and I want all driver’s license’s to be compliant.
I admit I am getting frustrated at the multiple delays in implementing this program. It has been years, and all 50 states have had plenty of time to comply. I don’t think they should be given any more time. If the DHS keeps caving-in and granting these delays on all security matters (such as sealing the border; requiring Passports; Real ID Driver’s licenses, etc) no state or entity could possibly take the DHS requirements seriously!
It’s like the DHS is saying, “You have until this particular time; but if you don’t comply, then never mind, because we really don’t mean what we say!”
It’s creating a lack of public trust that anything can get done. It makes us feel vulnerable and unsafe.
I commend the hard work you guys are doing to keep the people of America safe.
March 28, 2008 2:34 PM
Amir said...
Great job writing this blog, keep up the good work.
March 29, 2008 3:53 PM
Anonymous said...
One of our US senators said, "It [REAL ID] wasn’t properly considered in the Senate, it creates a national ID card, and it’s a massive unfunded mandate.”
Forget about the nit-picking... Please answer this simple question:
Under what powers, delegated to the United States by the Constitution, is the REAL ID legislation derived from?
Herein lies the problem with REAL ID, it's yet another step that gives the federal government powers it was never intended to have, while taking liberty away from the people.
March 31, 2008 2:40 PM
Anonymous said...
QUOTE FROM ABOVE BLOG COMMENT ENTRY: One of our US senators said, "It [REAL ID] wasn’t properly considered in the Senate, it creates a national ID card, and it’s a massive unfunded mandate.” ************* YOUR SENATOR WAS WRONG. It is neither a so-called national ID card, nor is it underfunded. States can apply for grants to pay most of the cost.
April 1, 2008 3:06 PM
Anonymous said...
This ( REAL ID ) the Border; Passports; US-VISIT Exit system; NO-MATCH Letters.........are ALL taking much; much too long to implement.
This is 2008, 7 years since the 2001 attack on the NY World Trade Center Towers and nothing seems like it gets done.
We've got to get beyond this. ----------------------
I've asked why the following equation is wrong:
1. The standards for REAL ID are set by THE NATIONAL GOVERNMENT.
2. The drivers' licenses are will be used for many IDENTIFICATION PURPOSES. Used for "countless other" activities--as stated by a major leader at DHS.
3. The driver's license is a small piece of plastic the size of a credit CARD
1+2+3= NATIONAL IDENTIFICATION CARD. ------------
Then tell me why the REAL IDENTIFICATION card, used by the national government is NOT a national id card.
I see webbed feet, wings, and a bill. And I hear quacking...
It must be a....
April 2, 2008 11:22 AM
Anonymous said...
The spaghetti is being thrown by DHS propagandists, at the thoughtful people who patiently point out the truth.
RealID is a monstrous bureaucracy imposed on America. GOOGLE "SAVE Driver's License" and you will see that this monstrosity has been taking away the driving privileges of law-abiding, taxpaying LEGAL RESIDENTS without any recourse to appeal, and not even the courtesy of a temporary driving permit while these bureaucratic bunglers "validate" legal documents provided by the United States of America to these taxpayers. I have seen cases of a new mother, a busy physician, college professors, and others being summarily denied RENEWAL of their driver's licenses, because the corrupt, incompetent "SAVE" database can't find their information.
Please read "Catch-22" to see the creations of the original "RealID" peddlers.
Today they take away driving privileges, tomorrow they will take away your children, your homes. Maybe they'll call it RealLIVING - real simple.
This is how dictatorships are born, and this is how Nazi Germany became what it became, as passive, patriotic German citizens sneered at the "troublemakers" being dragged away from their neighborhoods. Now they don't even PRETEND to need any reason to deny livelihoods to law-abiding taxpayers. How safe are "citizens"?
April 4, 2008 10:12 PM
Anonymous said...
It's not an national ID card becuase it is not required.
And because the STATES decide what information they collect as identifaction; it still will vary from state to state.....just as it does now. Duh.
In CA. they collect fingerprints, currently, as it is………some states collect SSN; some do not.etc, etc, etc………….only difference is the info. they do collect, will be scrutinized MUCH, MUCH more to make sure it is not fake.
If REAL ID is "not required" then DHS should just shut up about it.
What does "it is not required" mean?
IT IS REQUIRED for flying, banking, entering federal buildings. It will soon be required for working in the U.S. (REAL ID was included in the EEVS portion of the failed Comprehensive Immigration Reform legislation--which will be brought up again...)
I get the feeling that people too easily hear catch phrases and believe what they're told without actually thinking through the details.
REAL ID will be required for every major function (especially banking) of a citizen.
This is double-speak. "It is not required. But you have to have it--and we'll pressure the states until you do."
This is not personal, and I'm not simply trying to insult "Anonymous." I just want you to consider point by point the concerns opponents of REAL ID have--and answer them.
The issue is bigger than a three word catch-phrase...
"And because the STATES decide what information they collect as identifaction; it still will vary from state to state.....just as it does now. Duh."
The above statement is simply not true.
The whole thing about REAL ID is that the FEDERAL government sets the "minimum standards."
If REAL ID is not a significant change, why have it?
On one side, I hear from proponents that we're all gonna die without REAL ID.
On the other side, I hear from proponents of REAL ID that it is no big deal.
Now which is it?
April 8, 2008 10:10 PM
Anonymous said...
I agree with John R.
It's a national ID and nobody needs one. Each of us are citizens of a State. We are the United States of America and not the Federal States of America. Under the Tenth Amendment, the Federal government has no rights to direct the States on citizen identification. And I think the 4th amendment requires your State government not to divulge your personal information to the Federal government without a warrant of probable cause. We all need to be safe in our papers and providing our identity to the federal government thru a national ID program is assuredly unconstitutional.
I am all for it! We need better security measures in the United States today. After 9/11 we can all see that the times have come and gone where we can assume we're safe. It's time to get ourselves ready for the worst! - Mike.
I hope everyone at DHS has listened to what Governor Sanford said at the Cato Institutes forum on REAL ID--especially the Jefferson part, the 1st Amendment part...well--every part.
I encourage DHS to "go after" the terrorists. Please leave the American alone. He/She hasn't done anything wrong.
DHS would be served very well to go back and read the Constitution and the spirit it embodies.
May 7, 2008 12:32 PM
Critics of REAL ID often misrepresent what it is and what it is not. Probably the most egregious myth is the claim that the law creates a national ID that Americans will be required to carry.
Wrong. REAL ID is simple. The regulation requires that states meet minimum security standards when they issue driver’s licenses and identification cards necessary for “official purposes,” like getting on a plane or entering federal buildings. That’s it. The federal government’s role is to make sure that states meet minimum standards of security, so that banks and airports in one state can count on the quality of licenses issued in another.
States will still control their licenses and the personal information they collect. And, they will have plenty of flexibility in setting the license’s design, physical security features, and issuance procedures. These minimum standards will make it harder for terrorists to take advantage of the weak security of a particular state, the way Timothy McVeigh did when he used a fake South Dakota license to rent a Ryder truck in Oklahoma to bomb the Murrah Federal Building.
Don’t want a REAL ID? Don’t get one. If you don’t need a driver’s license or similar ID today, nothing in the REAL ID Act requires you to get one. In fact, the federal government does not have the authority to regulate how or whether a bank, grocery store, retailer, or school requires REAL ID. States and private companies make those determinations. So, given that states will have control over the production and issuance processes, the design and features of the card, and the data stored, how can anyone argue that REAL ID is a national ID? In short, they can’t, but that does not stop them from trying.
REAL ID is one of the last 9/11 Commission recommendations that still remains to be implemented. All but one of the nineteen 9/11 hijackers carried some form of government-issued ID, mostly state driver’s licenses, many of which were obtained fraudulently. In the planning stages for the attacks, these documents were used to rent vehicles, evade law enforcement, enroll in flight school, and board airplanes on that fateful day.
The 9/11 Commission was dismayed, like the rest of us, by how easy it was for the hijackers to beat the system. That’s why the Commission recommended that “(s)ecure identification should begin in the Untied States. The Federal Government should set standards for the issuance of birth certifications and sources of identification, such as driver’s licenses.”
Critics of REAL ID have been busy throwing a lot of spaghetti on the walls. They’ll tell you it’s a national ID, it invades privacy, or that it’s too expensive. Spaghetti throwing is almost a pastime in the beltway. It is also an indication that one lacks valid arguments. So, absent that validity, they’ll throw out a bunch of poor arguments and see which ones stick.
But, REAL ID is too important for these sorts of myths or games. I have commented on some of them in earlier blogs, and I’m still waiting for a convincing argument in favor of insecure identification. If you have one, I’d sure like to see it.
17 Comments
Close this window Jump to comment formBut...
If you want to bank, have REAL ID.
If you want to fly, have REAL ID (or a passport).
If you want to work, have REAL ID (attempted in the as-of-yet failed EEVS legislation.)
If you want to drive, have REAL ID.
If you want to function in normal life, have REAL ID. It may not be "required" that a person function in normal life, but isn't such talk meaningless?
A few questions:
1. Does not REAL ID link all 50 state databases into 1 network?
2. Does not REAL ID have the federal government tell the states how to do a driver's licenses? What's it matter if the states can decide what color it is?
3. Did not a leader at DHS give a speech where REAL ID was described as helpful for "countless other uses?"
4. The federal government is heavy into regulation of banks. So hows does saying " In fact, the federal government does not have the authority to regulate how or whether a bank... requires REAL ID. " It is inherent in the law that banking will require REAL ID.
5. Are you not saying "Real ID is not required, but you have to have it to function in daily live." To me this is a contradiction.
Why doesn't the following equation does work?
1. It has requirements demanded by the NATIONAL government.
2. The purpose is for IDENTIFICATION.
3. It is on a CARD.
1+2+3= National ID Card.
I believe in the fight against terrorism. But I am also concerned about statism. Surely these are not our only options.
Congress slipped this law into a "must pass" spending bill. No debate. No air. No sunshine--in the open arena. I think the debate should be wide open and fair. (Thanks for the blog.)
Spirited and Honest Debate rising from honest concerns...
I have more.
March 28, 2008 11:54 AM
Thanks for the explanations.
I, for one citizen; am all for the Real ID. I want one, and I want all driver’s license’s to be compliant.
I admit I am getting frustrated at the multiple delays in implementing this program. It has been years, and all 50 states have had plenty of time to comply. I don’t think they should be given any more time. If the DHS keeps caving-in and granting these delays on all security matters (such as sealing the border; requiring Passports; Real ID Driver’s licenses, etc) no state or entity could possibly take the DHS requirements seriously!
It’s like the DHS is saying, “You have until this particular time; but if you don’t comply, then never mind, because we really don’t mean what we say!”
It’s creating a lack of public trust that anything can get done. It makes us feel vulnerable and unsafe.
March 28, 2008 12:52 PM
I commend the hard work you guys are doing to keep the people of America safe.
March 28, 2008 2:34 PM
Great job writing this blog, keep up the good work.
March 29, 2008 3:53 PM
One of our US senators said, "It [REAL ID] wasn’t properly considered in the Senate, it creates a national ID card, and it’s a massive unfunded mandate.”
March 30, 2008 3:24 PM
Forget about the nit-picking...
Please answer this simple question:
Under what powers, delegated to the United States by the Constitution, is the REAL ID legislation derived from?
Herein lies the problem with REAL ID, it's yet another step that gives the federal government powers it was never intended to have, while taking liberty away from the people.
March 31, 2008 2:40 PM
QUOTE FROM ABOVE BLOG COMMENT ENTRY: One of our US senators said, "It [REAL ID] wasn’t properly considered in the Senate, it creates a national ID card, and it’s a massive unfunded mandate.”
*************
YOUR SENATOR WAS WRONG. It is neither a so-called national ID card, nor is it underfunded. States can apply for grants to pay most of the cost.
April 1, 2008 3:06 PM
This ( REAL ID ) the Border; Passports; US-VISIT Exit system; NO-MATCH Letters.........are ALL taking much; much too long to implement.
This is 2008, 7 years since the 2001 attack on the NY World Trade Center Towers and nothing seems like it gets done.
April 1, 2008 3:11 PM
"It's a National ID Card."
"No it is not."
"Yes it it is."
Here we go again...
We've got to get beyond this.
----------------------
I've asked why the following equation is wrong:
1. The standards for REAL ID are set by THE NATIONAL GOVERNMENT.
2. The drivers' licenses are will be used for many IDENTIFICATION PURPOSES. Used for "countless other" activities--as stated by a major leader at DHS.
3. The driver's license is a small piece of plastic the size of a credit CARD
1+2+3= NATIONAL IDENTIFICATION CARD.
------------
Then tell me why the REAL IDENTIFICATION card, used by the national government is NOT a national id card.
I see webbed feet, wings, and a bill. And I hear quacking...
It must be a....
April 2, 2008 11:22 AM
The spaghetti is being thrown by DHS propagandists, at the thoughtful people who patiently point out the truth.
RealID is a monstrous bureaucracy imposed on America. GOOGLE "SAVE Driver's License" and you will see that this monstrosity has been taking away the driving privileges of law-abiding, taxpaying LEGAL RESIDENTS without any recourse to appeal, and not even the courtesy of a temporary driving permit while these bureaucratic bunglers "validate" legal documents provided by the United States of America to these taxpayers. I have seen cases of a new mother, a busy physician, college professors, and others being summarily denied RENEWAL of their driver's licenses, because the corrupt, incompetent "SAVE" database can't find their information.
Please read "Catch-22" to see the creations of the original "RealID" peddlers.
Today they take away driving privileges, tomorrow they will take away your children, your homes. Maybe they'll call it RealLIVING - real simple.
This is how dictatorships are born, and this is how Nazi Germany became what it became, as passive, patriotic German citizens sneered at the "troublemakers" being dragged away from their neighborhoods. Now they don't even PRETEND to need any reason to deny livelihoods to law-abiding taxpayers. How safe are "citizens"?
April 4, 2008 10:12 PM
It's not an national ID card becuase it is not required.
And because the STATES decide what information they collect as identifaction; it still will vary from state to state.....just as it does now. Duh.
In CA. they collect fingerprints, currently, as it is………some states collect SSN; some do not.etc, etc, etc………….only difference is the info. they do collect, will be scrutinized MUCH, MUCH more to make sure it is not fake.
April 7, 2008 4:24 PM
Not a national ID card! It is not required.
April 8, 2008 12:34 PM
If REAL ID is "not required" then DHS should just shut up about it.
What does "it is not required" mean?
IT IS REQUIRED for flying, banking, entering federal buildings. It will soon be required for working in the U.S. (REAL ID was included in the EEVS portion of the failed Comprehensive Immigration Reform legislation--which will be brought up again...)
I get the feeling that people too easily hear catch phrases and believe what they're told without actually thinking through the details.
REAL ID will be required for every major function (especially banking) of a citizen.
This is double-speak. "It is not required. But you have to have it--and we'll pressure the states until you do."
This is not personal, and I'm not simply trying to insult "Anonymous." I just want you to consider point by point the concerns opponents of REAL ID have--and answer them.
The issue is bigger than a three word catch-phrase...
April 8, 2008 10:07 PM
"And because the STATES decide what information they collect as identifaction; it still will vary from state to state.....just as it does now. Duh."
The above statement is simply not true.
The whole thing about REAL ID is that the FEDERAL government sets the "minimum standards."
If REAL ID is not a significant change, why have it?
On one side, I hear from proponents that we're all gonna die without REAL ID.
On the other side, I hear from proponents of REAL ID that it is no big deal.
Now which is it?
April 8, 2008 10:10 PM
I agree with John R.
It's a national ID and nobody needs one. Each of us are citizens of a State. We are the United States of America and not the Federal States of America. Under the Tenth Amendment, the Federal government has no rights to direct the States on citizen identification. And I think the 4th amendment requires your State government not to divulge your personal information to the Federal government without a warrant of probable cause. We all need to be safe in our papers and providing our identity to the federal government thru a national ID program is assuredly unconstitutional.
April 9, 2008 11:20 PM
I am all for it! We need better security measures in the United States today. After 9/11 we can all see that the times have come and gone where we can assume we're safe. It's time to get ourselves ready for the worst! - Mike.
April 10, 2008 4:27 PM
I hope everyone at DHS has listened to what Governor Sanford said at the Cato Institutes forum on REAL ID--especially the Jefferson part, the 1st Amendment part...well--every part.
I encourage DHS to "go after" the terrorists. Please leave the American alone. He/She hasn't done anything wrong.
DHS would be served very well to go back and read the Constitution and the spirit it embodies.
May 7, 2008 12:32 PM