| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: Tech |
| FAQ: How Real ID will affect you |
| 2005-05-07 |
| What's all the fuss with the Real ID Act about? President Bush is expected to sign an $82 billion military spending bill soon that will, in part, create electronically readable, federally approved ID cards for Americans. The House of Representatives overwhelmingly approved the package--which includes the Real ID Act--on Thursday. What does that mean for me? Starting three years from now, if you live or work in the United States, you'll need a federally approved ID card to travel on an airplane, open a bank account, collect Social Security payments, or take advantage of nearly any government service. Practically speaking, your driver's license likely will have to be reissued to meet federal standards. The Real ID Act hands the Department of Homeland Security the power to set these standards and determine whether state drivers' licenses and other ID cards pass muster. Only ID cards approved by Homeland Security can be accepted "for any official purpose" by the feds. How will I get one of these new ID cards? You'll still get one through your state motor vehicle agency, and it will likely take the place of your drivers' license. But the identification process will be more rigorous. For instance, you'll need to bring a "photo identity document," document your birth date and address, and show that your Social Security number is what you had claimed it to be. U.S. citizens will have to prove that status, and foreigners will have to show a valid visa. State DMVs will have to verify that these identity documents are legitimate, digitize them and store them permanently. In addition, Social Security numbers must be verified with the Social Security Administration. |
| Posted by:God Save The World |
| #20 I am going to go out on a limb here and state that there are VERY few people who don't have some form of ID with a picture on it. If they "force" everyone to get a national Id (like most other countries) then I fail to see the downside. OK you might have to trek to the nearest ID center and get your picture taken and show some legal documents. Why an ID is not required to vote is hard to defend because even poor people have some sort of ID, to get food stamps, apply for welfare, or get section 8 housing. |
| Posted by: Cyber Sarge 2005-05-07 21:44 |
| #19 There is one possible fraud proof ID system. Take a DNA sample from each newborn baby, and incorporate it into the birth certificate. Anything else is intrinsically compromised by opportunity for fraud. Do it right or don't bother making it worse. |
| Posted by: Grunter 2005-05-07 20:45 |
| #18 I just don't want the idiots at DMV trying to understand my documents. I know that they are not bright enough in the average office. Let the passport or the SS folks do it. |
| Posted by: 3dc 2005-05-07 18:28 |
| #17 Fortunately you still will not need to have a pulse in order to vote in Washington (state). |
| Posted by: DMFD 2005-05-07 18:13 |
| #16 It says you'll need it to "open a bank account" -- nothing about ATM transactions. You need a couple of forms of ID to open a bank account anyway. |
| Posted by: Tom 2005-05-07 17:23 |
| #15 I used to write at length on this topic before I had my falling out with the Libertarians at Samizdata on exactly this subject. What it comes down to is a tradeoff between the strength of identity and identity systems, and security (in general, not just relating to terrorism). People and societies become more secure (i.e. less crime) as identity becomes stronger (i.e. more difficult to fake or avoid). One other thing, many especially those on the Left would have you believe that privacy is somehow an extension of liberty and decreasing your privacy (as better ID systems unquestionably do) somehow restricts your liberty. I would argue that decreased privacy results in increased security and the opportunity for increased liberty. The example I use is someone in a crime ridden neighbourhood who can go out on the streets as security increases. Most of the arguments against it are of the form - its not going to be perfect, so we shouldn't do it. Well nothing's perfect. Roll on the day when we have the same in Australia, where our identity systems are a worse mess than yours. |
| Posted by: phil_b 2005-05-07 16:32 |
| #14 In California, DMV employees get busted selling 'real' Drivers Licences on a regular basis. One of my sisters had a friend(DMV Fresno)of hers get pre-dated docs.,so she could Junk a number of vehicles. (bad Sis) Yes, I would like bullet proof I.D, administered in a secured professional manner but I'm NOT going to hold my breath until that day arrives. |
| Posted by: Pyotr Spembolov 2005-05-07 14:43 |
| #13 To further My previous comment, I want to repeat that I think this is a good thing for border control and more honest voting. I just have two (unrelated) concerns. 1. Some people think this is something we should do instead of patrolling the borders, searching out and arresting jihadis, and removing dangerous governments, just as they think that spending more money on firefighters and ambulances is an alternative to spending money rebuilding Iraq. I don't want support for this to undermine support for the other. 2. The tranzis are adept at warping any law or regulation to suit their program. They twisted RICO from going after the mob to going after anti-abortion protestors (not those who murder doctors, but peaceful protestors). They misuse the courts with SLAPP lawsuits (yes, others do it, but only after the left blazed the trail). Eminent Domain has been twisted into giving land to other private parties, that will pay more taxes. |
| Posted by: Jackal 2005-05-07 14:11 |
| #12 Here in Oregon, we already have to show picture ID to buy over-the-counter flu meds. Our idiot child state government has determined that we are not to be trusted with flu meds, because some morons can use them as base chemicals for making meth. So, punish the whole state instead of crucifying the meth makers, since Oregon now has moved into the People Republic category. |
| Posted by: Shieldwolf 2005-05-07 13:55 |
| #11 Here in the People Republic of Washington (state) you will soon have to show picture ID to obtain cold medicine. All because a few people make meth (who the left would claim are simply misunderstood and should not be punished). |
| Posted by: CrazyFool 2005-05-07 11:45 |
| #10 When I can't use cash, I'll worry about the nutters haveing taken over here. When Fred has to get SSN for comments, I'll worry. Till then, I'd rather try to make it harder for the nutters to do business here and easier to track them. |
| Posted by: Mrs. Davis 2005-05-07 11:17 |
| #9 I'm actually more pissed off than that rant showed. |
| Posted by: Frank G 2005-05-07 11:08 |
| #8 ya know, moose? It's paranoid drivel like yours that combines with the ACLU/CAIR/MALDEF bullshit concerns over profiling to cause nothing to happen. While you wring your hands, things continue. Take off the tinfoil hat, dude. Who says it'll abolish all crime. Strawman. Who says roundups will occur? Strawman. Chicken Littles like you make me wanna puke |
| Posted by: Frank G 2005-05-07 11:08 |
| #7 Oh, joy. And if you liked Prohibition, you are just gonna *luv* this. They seem to have the idea that by having a national ID, that they will magically abolish *all* crime, and force everybody to obey every petty rule they can think of. Not only that, but can you imagine some small town arresting 500 people because they don't have ID? I look forward to a grassroots revolt over this turkey. |
| Posted by: Anonymoose 2005-05-07 10:08 |
| #6 SPoD: The new ID will combine info. Your current driver's license looks at least a little like you, I presume. However, it doesn't prove citizenship. Add a birth certificate (or naturalization papers), which proves citizenship, but does not have a picture. The combined picture plus citizenship is what the new ID card will show. I suppose we could have simply required everyone to get a passport (and quintuple the State Dept's budget), though that doesn't show current address. Frankly, I'm a little worried about this. Showing ID to vote or otherwise deal with the government is fine. I approve of it greatly. No problems there, provided it stops there. But it won't. When it becomes required to do a bank transaction, and then any ATM/debit transaction (buying "adult" books, AIDS drugs, or mental illness drugs) that I don't like it at all. The people supporting this are not the people who want to record all your food purchases and tax you on "inappropriate" or "excessive" calorie consumption. But those people exist, have openly stated they want to do that, and someday (Jan 2009?) may get into power. |
| Posted by: Jackal 2005-05-07 09:36 |
| #5 Mrs. D. :) |
| Posted by: Shipman 2005-05-07 09:06 |
| #4 What�s going to be stored on this ID card? They're missing Mother's maiden name. |
| Posted by: Mrs. Davis 2005-05-07 06:24 |
| #3 So you HAVE visited the main DMV office in Bakersfield Ca? I would not even trust that all the workers are legal citizens? You need a picture ID to get a Drivers license which is the default picture ID? That is a circular bit of BS. So I am going to use a drivers license to get a drivers license? |
| Posted by: Sock Puppet 0’ Doom 2005-05-07 01:56 |
| #2 I am sorry. The DMV folks are just too stupid for this. Passport people ok. DMV.. Half the time I can't even understand what they say. I was born overseas with an embassy registered birth certificate. I know that there is not enough cummulative IQ in my local DMV to deal with that. |
| Posted by: 3dc 2005-05-07 00:38 |
| #1 Ummm, it won't affect me at all. I'll be glad to show my birth certificate AND my passport to renew my drivers' license. Or to vote. Of course, I have those to show. The Tough. |
| Posted by: Barbara Skolaut 2005-05-07 00:38 |