“Real ID” opposition grows
Monday, Feb 5, 2007 - Posted by Rich Miller
Opposition to the federal Real ID law is heating up at the state level. The $11 billion implementation cost is just one factor in the dust-up, as this article notes.
Barry Steinhardt, a lawyer with the American Civil Liberties Union, said the Real ID ordered by Congress would require a digital photo and probably a fingerprint on each driver’s license or state-issued ID card. That, he said, will make it more valuable to identity thieves because the ID card will be accepted as much more than a driving credential.
“It’s going to be a honey pot out there that’s going to be irresistible to identity thieves,” Steinhardt said.
An identity thief, he said, could buy a Real ID from a rogue motor vehicle department employee with is own photo and fingerprint on it.
So far, lawmakers in 34 states have joined a coalition to propose legislation that would a majority of the states have taken some sort of protest action. The Congressional sponsors of the bill said it would fight terrorism by making it more difficult for terrorists to get a government identification card.
Here are some of the other objections to the law, according to the above article:
-Some states will have to invest millions in new computer systems that can communicate with federal databases. That is something they probably will not accomplish by the deadline.
-It will be difficult to comply with the requirement that license applicants prove they are in the country legally. There are more than 100 different immigration statutes, Steinhardt said, which will pose problems for motor vehicle clerks unfamiliar with immigration law.
-It does not solve the problem of terrorism. Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh and some of the hijackers from the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, had legitimate driver’s licenses.
-Even the requirement that applicants’ full legal names appear on licenses will pose problems because some states limit the number of characters on the face of the card.
Thoughts?
- Leroy - Monday, Feb 5, 07 @ 8:07 am:
It is ironic that the only thing that is holding us back from being turned into a dystopian, totalitarian state is bureaucratic incompetence.
- VanillaMan - Monday, Feb 5, 07 @ 9:55 am:
Billions of people can prove their nationality via passports and secured ID systems. I can prove I am an American citizen because I have a passport. However if you do not have a passport, you have no national ID except those issued from leaky, poorly defended, regional databases, private databases owned by banks, and thousands of other databases that sell your private information, and make it easy to steal. Our SS cards were available by mail until 1975. They are easily forged and easy to obtain. Driver’s licenses? That has already been proven to be a laughable system uncapable of providing security. The US is one of the only countries lacking a secured national ID system that provides data security and individual rights to data privacy. It is time to get on board.
The debate over a national ID system in this country has been controlled by ignorant, yet sincere people. The ACLU is also using the low road to fight any national ID system, but that isn’t a surprise considering the organization.
It is time to demand that organizations discontinue creating databases containing information irrelevant to their business needs. It is time to tell all governments that they are not privvy to our personal information outside their juridictional needs. It is time to have real data security by creating a national ID system.
You see, a national ID system won’t float on top of everything we already have out there - it should replace what we already have. Instead of having mountains of personal data within each government agency, bank, credit business, and for each monthly bill you have out there - of which there are thousands, waiting to be hijacked - you replace them with ONE database protected by national law. With this system in place, you use your national ID number instead of supplying every Tom, Dick or Sally, with rheams of your personal data.
No one would know it is you when you fill out your taxes. No one would know it is you when you apply for a credit card. No one would know it is you when you fill out any new agency service request, application or whatever. By using a national ID number, the system wouldn’t know if the person they are processing through their files is you - or Tom Cruise. You would enjoy a level of security unparalleled in today’s mismash of leaky databases, unregulated and inaccurate.
You see, I studied real working national ID systems that have been in place for hundreds of years. Through global wars, economic depressions, holocaust, and good times, national ID systems work. You don’t see milk cartons with kid’s pictures on them in Europe. You don’t see thousands of children going without child support payments. This is because the system in place knows where people are, who they are, and where they live. Sounds scarey? Well, it isn’t as bad as what we currently have, is it?
In Germany, the Bundespersonalausweis is locked down on a national level. It is administered by each state, but protected from attack or scandal by each state. Each state has a group of Ombudsmen that contact you whenever there is a data request concerning your personal information. After 60 years under the current system, there has been few needs to update this system. The most recent has been organ donor groups seeking permission to obtain personal data through the system. There has been very few instances where the current system has failed on a personal level.
The cards are not alterable. You do not have to carry them on you, but need to be able to get them should a set of needs arises, (these are also spelled out). This is not a “Big Brother” system so feared during the Cold War era.
We have real security needs today. We need to know who is in this country, and we need a system in place to get rid of the laughable dangerous systems we currently have. We currently have the WORST of both worlds, we need to move forward.
What we have is far worst for you. A national ID system is a necessary step to clean up the disaster that currently exists, spells out your rights of data privacy, and finally prevents the thriving illegal businesses of data fraud.
- Anon - Monday, Feb 5, 07 @ 9:59 am:
Almost every country in the world requires id’s and they seem to get along fine.
In fact, a lot of the people seem to admire the rest of the world more than the U.S.
In the US, the Democratic politicans do not support IDs for the simple reason they get more votes out of the mess.
All the double talk about how id thieves could operate, etc.,etc.
With one ID for each person, the minute someone else used it, hand cuffs would be used to haul the person away.
Real IDs would bring identity theft to a grinding halt.
- Leroy - Monday, Feb 5, 07 @ 11:03 am:
I also find it ironic that a poster advocating using REAL IDs, and all the benefits it would bring us, hides behind an ‘Anon’ user name….
Good one.
- steve schnorf - Monday, Feb 5, 07 @ 11:38 am:
The state’s raised the same objections to the CDL requirements 20 years ago.
- Judy, Judy, Judy - Monday, Feb 5, 07 @ 12:20 pm:
Well I see I’m on the wrong side of the street on this one. I simply do not believe in giving our government that kind of control over it’s citizens. The criminal mind that leads to terrorism is smart and will get around any system that is designed. Their mind set is such that they are more determined than you or I have ever been about 1 thing - their plot to undermine America. A national ID system will not fix that. Sorry, but I strongly disagree.
- cermak_rd - Monday, Feb 5, 07 @ 1:59 pm:
I don’t see where in the Constitution this would fall (unless you really push it by saying National Security.) Seems as though it should fall under the 10th amendment, reserved to the states. Besides I don’t trust the federal government as it tends to be run by people in other regions.
- Way Northsider - Monday, Feb 5, 07 @ 4:53 pm:
Government ID requirements are a BAD idea. It’s bad enough that everyone tries to ask for a drivers license for all kinds of things other than driving without giving them the authority to do so. I have refused to show my drivers license in various situations and so far, no one has actually refused to do business with me. I always tell them I am against national ID and will not use a drivers license for things outside of driving and they are at liberty to not sell me groceries or whatever but they will have to accept the credit card without the license if they want me to buy from them. They always give in after making speeches about how it is their policy and it is to “protect” me. I always say I don’t need protection. I have a 0 amount responsibility if my card is used fraudulently and not to lie to me about who they are really protecting - themselves and the credit card companies.
- kimsch - Monday, Feb 5, 07 @ 5:51 pm:
-It will be difficult to comply with the requirement that license applicants prove they are in the country legally. There are more than 100 different immigration statutes, Steinhardt said, which will pose problems for motor vehicle clerks unfamiliar with immigration law.
That’s not a problem. Each State DMV will have a list of acceptable ID to issue a DL. State employees will be trained in what is acceptable. It doesn’t matter if California accepts something… If a driver in Illinois wants a license, he or she will have to produce what is acceptable in Illinois. (even with REAL ID).
- Frozen magnolia - Tuesday, Feb 6, 07 @ 12:04 pm:
On the question of where to find it in the Constitution: sure, you could call it “national security,” but when the national government starts doing all kinds of somewhat related things that the states ought to be doing, all under the banner of national security, I get very worried about our federal system. It’s bad enough that so many military/intelligence/policing actions have been subsumed under the “war on terror” label so as to cloak them in wartime dignity and secrecy.
I also agree that hackers will find a way to get to the national ID information; it’s just a matter of time. The guarantee that the U.S. government is putting all its resources behind guarding the database doesn’t make me feel much more secure than guarantees from corporations and others who possess data. Yes, the government has greater resources. But it’s also a bigger and more tempting target, and the more people involved in securing the database, the greater the potential for an inside job. I’d rather worry about all the different organizations that possess some of my data than worry about the one big one that has all of it.