Real ID Gets Delayed Again

The Bush Administration and Congress' Real ID plan (code word for national identity card) got another delay yesterday. States will have five more years to put it into effect.

The AP has more here.


DHS revised its ID plan after states and civil libertarians criticized draft regulations, issued last March and setting a 2013 deadline, as unworkable and threatening to Americans' privacy by creating a de facto national ID for 245 million U.S. drivers. Seventeen states have passed legislation opposing or opting out of the program.

America is supposed to be a country where police don't get to ask, "Where's Your Papers?" For driver's now older than 50, that will change by 2018. For those born after 1964, it may change by 2011.

Maybe we can get a Congress elected by then to repeal this ill-advised law, which the ACLU and others aptly call a "real nightmare." More here and here.

< Hillary Goes Door to Door in Nevada | Andrew Cuomo's "Shuck and Jive" Comment >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    I think when you consider (none / 0) (#1)
    by Jgarza on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 01:43:58 AM EST
    the implications of real id, the cost(really expensive), the inconvenience, the lack of privacy, and take that in the context of voter ID laws, you are going to have a lot of disenfranchised disabled/elderly/poor people.  On their own both are very sad developments, but combined they form a voting rights catastrophe far greater than the sum of their parts.

    Have you never been pulled over before??? (none / 0) (#2)
    by privatemale on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 01:52:23 AM EST
    When was the last time you were pulled over by the police? The first thing you are always asked by the police is for your "papers". They have to verify your drivers license, vehicle registration, and insurance. Lacking that you'll be fined or even taken to the station and your vehicle impounded. I don't hear anyone complaining about that violating our privacy. It helps to keep the roads safe from repeat DUI offenders and unlicensed / uninsured drivers. The point of the "Real ID" is to make it harder to fake that ID. It does not require non-drivers to carry an ID. It doesn't give the government any more data than they all ready have. Social security numbers are already used in tracking everything from your healthcare to your finances. What's worse is social security cards are easy to fake and are often accepted as ID for obtaining services.

    Real ID (none / 0) (#3)
    by Jgarza on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 02:18:30 AM EST
    Will start to be required for opening a bank account, flying, and official transactions, probably voting as we have seen in previous posts, if it were just for the purpose of driving, why would you ever need something that secure?

    The problem with this ID is that it is extremely expensive, DL's will cost in the hundreds.  The process for getting it is extremely cumbersome, you will have to renew in person, it will require a large increase in bureaucracy.  

    Certainly it will make an individuals ID more secure, but it will greatly increase the people who  aren't getting ID's.  So look for more people driving without DLs, more people not using banks accounts.  It is one of these ideas that sounds great in theory, but the practical application of it will be a mess.


    Re (none / 0) (#4)
    by privatemale on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 05:57:20 AM EST
    Can you really disagree with requiring a valid ID to open a bank account? Anyone could open one in your name without it and really damage your credit.
    The reason for adding extra security features is to reduce counterfeiting.
    The ID is not a seperate federal issued ID. It is a set of guidlines for states to follow, plus a centralized database to prevent requests for IDs in multiple states. Most of the guidelines and the holographic image on the face of the ID are already standard in most states. In California for instance, the only proceedure change in obtaining an ID is that they'll take your photo as the first step instead of the last step. Most states already maintain ID databases for use by the police. Sharing that data with a national database will require very little effort.

    I'm sure there would be huge protests if they ever tried using a process that would link your ID to your specific vote. I'd certainly protest that, but requiring ID to prove your eligibility to vote is appropriate.


    some sort (none / 0) (#7)
    by Jgarza on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 10:06:55 AM EST
    of ID is required and that system seems to work fine.  Narrowing acceptable ID down eliminates some peoples ability to vote, with no evidence that voter fraud is a problem, i don't see the benefit.

    The dead (none / 0) (#10)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 11:51:35 AM EST

    Do you consider votes cast in the name of a dead person to be a problem?  Jimmy Carter had that done against him once.

    that was 30 (none / 0) (#13)
    by Jgarza on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 03:14:50 PM EST
    years ago, voting irregularities have not been centered on ID problems since the 70's

    Identity theft (none / 0) (#8)
    by Jgarza on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 10:08:33 AM EST
    occurs in application processes that require no picture ID, not because our current form of picture ID is not good enough.  

    Ya lost me... (none / 0) (#12)
    by kdog on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 02:44:40 PM EST
    at centralized database.  There wasn't a centralized database ever created that wasn't chock-full of errors.  When this one has an error, some poor supposedly free American slob can't catch a flight or vote.  No thanks...

    Still need probable cause (none / 0) (#6)
    by lilybart on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 07:28:40 AM EST
    to demand your "papers."

    If that rule is followed, I dont' see the problem.


    If you have a big (none / 0) (#9)
    by Jgarza on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 10:17:09 AM EST
    national data base it makes using facial recognition technology possible.  So you don't een have to ask for someones papers.

    There are lots of national databases..... (none / 0) (#11)
    by privatemale on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 12:09:20 PM EST
    For anyone worried about privacy concerns with a national ID, they should be aware the FBI already has access to all state driver's license databases, the pictures, etc. The point of the national ID system is to consolidate the data into a database that is accessible by all state ID issuing centers to prevent people from using fake ids from one state to obtain a real ID in a second state.

    I am aware..... (none / 0) (#14)
    by kdog on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 03:45:53 PM EST
    that's why privacy is such a concern to me.  We're already to far gone when it comes to privacy...no doubt.  Privacy lost out to fear and law & order.

    Real ID may be necessary. (none / 0) (#5)
    by lilybart on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 07:27:14 AM EST
    If the Supreme Court upholds voter ID laws in the states, then it is better to create a national system of FREE IDs for everyone, so people can F-ing VOTE.

    Privacy? Please. SS#s are already a form of National ID anyway, as are Driver's licenses for most people.

    We may NEED Real ID so certain states cannot enact draconian voter rules.

    Just need to make sure there is a mandate to get everyone an ID.

    mark of the beast (none / 0) (#15)
    by dr jay on Sat Jan 12, 2008 at 04:31:58 AM EST
     and he caused all to recieve a mark in the right hand or the forhead both rich.poor,small.great! save he that had the mark! there is located in california the worlds largest and fastest computer that processes over 500 trillion bits of ifo per second called the beast and will keep track of everything that has rfid chip including all who have real id wich does have this chip! this is the precursor of what will be implemented next, homeland security wants this chip implanted in us thru global health care!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!