Slashdot Mirror
Maine Rejects Federally Mandated ID Cards
WebHostingGuy writes "The State of Maine rejected the federally mandated ID cards passed by Congress. In a non-partisan vote the legislature flatly stated that they would not force its citizens to use driver's licenses that comply with digital ID standards, which were established under the 2005 Real ID Act. It also asked Congress to repeal the law."
I thought we got rid of the Doctrine of Nullification after the civil war?
I didn't vote any of them in, but they did the right thing. For once.
The exponentially increasing transportation budget for side roads that get repaved with increasing frequency is another matter entirely. Oh and that whole laptop for children thing. Yes, I am a Maine resident. Like many young people, I'm out of here as soon as I graduate. Soon Maine will be come a state of elderly crotchety people, just like Florida, but without the beaches and spring break crowds.
Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress at this period in history.
It amuses me that the link "non-partisan vote" in the OP goes to a page whose title is "The Maine Senate Democrats".
Seriously, someone explain to me what is wrong with a national ID standard... without saying "papers please".
There is no "I disagree" mod for a reason. Flamebait, Troll, and Overrated are not substitutes.
The article made it sound like that all the legislature cared about was the money it would cost to implement the national ID, and that they didn't care about any of the privacy issues.
Requiring a National ID "to fight terrorism" is like punishing everyone for the offense of one. Many corporations are like that, the military is like that, and too many governments are adopting that practise. One person (or a small number) does something wrong, and suddenly there are procedures made that everyone must follow "to prevent the acts" of the few (look at the airports).
How about punishing those who commit the offenses in such a way as to eliminate the desire of those, who would follow them, to commit the offense?
In the USA, States need to fight for the States' Rights as Maine just did, and as Wisconsin did by outlawing mandatory chipping of people.
This "pervasive" form of governing, or ruling, seems to becoming more and more "invasive". Some would argue, "...if you have nothing to hide, then what are you afraid of?" , of which my argument is, "I am a good civilian, so leave me alone."
Of course, all of my comments are IMHO.
If Congress refuses to significantly change the Real ID Act, then rebellion is the way to make it fail. The Act is built on a flimsy deck of cards. If a few of the most populated states like CA, NY, IL, MI, TX decide to blow it off. The Federal Gov't would be in a bind. On one hand, if they enforce it, it will kill the airline industry. On the other hand, if they don't enforce it, they are disobeying the law that Congress passed.
It needs to be completely repealed. It was passed without discussion, without debate. It became law as a "rider" on a must-pass piece of legislation. With the Democrat Congress, its demise is more likely. We should contact Contact Congress and ask the law be repealed completely concerning the driver's license provisions.
Someone had to be first to stand up to this. (I was betting on New Hampshire, which has been very vocal about their opposition, or Vermont based on their general countercultural eccentricties. But they all share a remnant of that good old Yankee stubborness.) Other states have voiced their concerns, but now that someone had the balls to be first, maybe more states will make their opinions known through their own legislatures.
Or maybe it means nothing at all, and all the states will eventually kowtow to their federal masters like they always do. Yeah....that's probably the way to bet.
"Every great cause begins as a movement, becomes a business, and eventually degenerates into a racket." -- Eric Hoffer
it's like this..
28 guys want military spending
31 guys want tsunami relifer
only 2 guys want both.
that means, lump them together, get 57 votes
every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
Actually it is. Maine was the northern part of Massachusetts (which is a Commonwealth). Massachusetts doesn't recognize that Maine broke away and considers Portland and Kennebunkport to merely be suburbs of Boston.
Laws affecting technology will always be bad until enough techies become lawyers.
This Federal ID idea is definitely rediculous. I'm glad someone is actively opposing it. I suppose it is good they are trying to push states to actually have good ID cards. Some of them (West Virginia, New Jersey until recently) are rediculously easy to fake. Not that I, ahem, would know anything about that.
But let's not give them too much credit. This is obviously another step toward removing already eroding privacy rights in this country. And of course the convenient excuse "war on terror" will be stamped all over this.
Let's get a run-down of what this will actually mean to the average consumer.
~ By "common machine readable technology", I'm assuming they mean RFID, which we all know has its drawbacks.
~ I doubt this will end up being a substitute for a Driver's License. What if you lose driving privilages and have to turn in your ID? Do you have to get a new "non-driver" card just to go to the bank? Bull shit. Inevitably, this will have to be carried around in addition to a driver's license. Great, another unnecessary card to carry in my wallet. Why don't they just make us all wear collars around our necks. Not like nobody's ever thought of that before.
~ It will obviously be scanned at every point of use. I forsee an amendment in the near future extending this to train/bus travel as well.
~ Inevitably, this will be part of a big government database. We all know those are generally bad ideas. I wouldn't be surprised if they link this up to your EZ-Pass so they can see where your car is going too. Remember (FTA) this is an $83 billion project. It is going to be BIG. ~ What if you lose this thing? It's bad enough getting the state to replace an ID... who do I complain to now? The FBI? Dept of Homeland Security?
I don't even want to think about this anymore. Go Maine.
Partial Credit: The Engineer's Best friend
"Well, the bridge didn't fall all the way down!"
The law doesn't have a way to force Maine to comply as that's a states rights issues.
What I predict will happen is that the Federal government will start by holding back the money that they would disperse to the state for highway dollars just like they have done for other measures. (The ones that come to mind is seat-belt and drunk driving laws but I know that there are others.). If holding back Federal highway funds they will find other funds not to give the state.
my daughter said something quite profound about a year ago: "Standing up to bullies is easy, you just stomp on their toes".
It is profound for several reasons. You shouldn't fight the bully head on, they are bigger and (in this case) control the White house and the Army.
But you make it hurt, a lot (you "stomp"), but you do it below the vision of most people watching.
You stand right up to the bully, to their face and make them face you. Most bullies are craven and will crumble at the first sign of real resistance.
Bush Psychology -- http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/011807J.shtml
This is just the first step in a long, painful road to recovery for this nation.
Personally I have no problem with congress appointing non-government experts to define minimum security standards for important documents. But congress is treating RealID as a security end in itself.
Yea, I already have my nationally issued I.D. card... It's called my social security number! People ask me for it all the time when I do even the most basic of purchasing. Soooo, this would solve??? There will always be ways around it no matter what you do. Remember... those "sneaky terrorists" get more resourceful all the time!
Norway outlaws iTunes, and Maine outlaws RealID.
Now I can't decide WHERE to move! Can sombody outlaw something wicked in a place that doesn't have winter?
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."
...would be some sort of RFID chip injected under the skin, or maybe something lower tech.. perhaps a serial number tattooed on the arm. We should make one of those standard.
"I'm so moist I'm sticking to the leather." -Kermit the Frog on The Late Late Show
The contest for ages has been to rescue liberty from the grasp of executive power. -- Daniel Webster
To me, as an European, the whole fight against Real-Id seems absurd. Without a national id-system I would be really worried that any neighbor guy could act as me ! The only problem I find in the Real-Id law is that the cards might be remote readable. And that could be solved with a metallic box for the card. Not that handiest idea, but the security brought with reliable identification is much more important. Ok there's another thing too: "The card may include 'a common machine-readable technology' that Homeland Security will decide on". Sounds too vague. The content should be decided beforehand.
I'm not now talking about president Bush's ridiculous terrorist fíght. I'm talking about someone else using bank account or getting my private medical information. Or opening a bank account under my name and getting a big loan.
Why 21 is better drinking age than 18? As it is, at least here in Finland, almost everybody have drank alcohol long ago before turning to 18. In other parts of Europe young people also drink alcohol very young, and this haven't flushed the continent under the table. What I have heard, both from European exchange students visiting US and from Americans, is that young people instead of drinking alcohol, because it's so hard to get, blow pot. So one 'bad habit' is traded to another one.
On a note, when one turns to 18, he is adult, he usually moves to own his/her place, he can vote, he can be elected and he can/has to go to a army. So why not give all the rights to 18 year old at the same time when he/she comes fully liable on his/her own life?
Survey research tool for commercial and scientific use
Drivers licenses are not for identification, they are used for control and information gathering.
That should be reason enough for you. If you don't believe me, have your driver's license stolen (mine was), and try to get the stolen license invalidated. It's practicaly impossible to do, even if you have a police report in hand.
The problem is that everywhere a driver's license is used does not phone home to verify that the driver's license is in fact not stolen; so anyone who looks roughly like the picture on the front of the license (a biometric identification device intended to prevent fradulent use, BTW) can use the license to identify themselves as you, and there's no cross-check that they are in fact NOT you. This is roughly the same as if you did not do a reverse DNS check followed by a forward lookup on a contacting IP address to verify that the machine contacting you is in the domain which the claim to be from. Your SMTP server might as well be an open relay.
My personal experience ended up with them doing effectively nothing but charging me $25. I suggested that they place a sign on their desk that said "This Side Towards Enemy", since their processes were clearly not directed at the criminal(s) who stole my license.
-
As to privacy, when they swipe your license in a reader to allow you to purchase cold medicine in most large drugstore chains these days, they are in technical violation of the Patriot Act Section 711, 21 USC 830(e)(1)(A)(iv)(I)(bb), in not taking a written signature for the log book, and they are in violation of HIPPA.
The HIPPA violation is collection of more information than they are authorized by law to collect (name, address, and amount purchased); instead, they collect the entire three stripes of the license, which includes all the information in the AMMVA mandated standard ANSI D320-2003, which also includes type of license, whether or not you are a senior citizen, your age, sex, birthdate, identification number, expiration date of the license, endorsements, hair color, eye color, height, weight, restictions (handicaps relevent to driving), and the issue date.
The HIPPA violation, depending on whether the information is controlled according to HIPPA standards, could also constitute a second violation of the Patriot Act, Section 711, 21 USC 830(e)(1)(C)(ii): "prohibit accessing, using, or sharing information in the logbooks for any purpose other than to ensure compliance with this title or to facilitate a product recall to protect public health and safety" -- in other words, they better be damn careful about their information systems attached to their cach registers.
Think about that the next time someone asks you about a national ID card, or you have a cold and consider buying Sudafed.
-- Terry
Speaking as someone who was an exchange student in the US (from the UK) the average american student gets to university, goes to a party, has large (for them) amounts of beer for the first time and cann't handle it.
The average brit on the other hand has probably been drinking beer since about the age of 12 (younger if you count shandy) the amounts will have increased over the years, they have probably been really ill once on holiday and after enduring their parents laughing at them and talking very loudly the next morning they tend to have a much better idea when to stop.
I remember one party where I drank 4 frat boys under the table - what was scarey was it was sequential not parallel!! But then the beer there is in 330ml cans and only 3 or 4 percent!! Me I'm a real ale person - 6-8% and in pints (yes it comes in pints) or yards...
$_="Slashdotter";$syn="OTT";s;..;;;sub _{print shift||$_};s!ash!Perl !;s=$syn=ack=i;tr+LLEd+BLAH+;_"Just Another ";_
In any case, Britain really does have some kind of a very different culture regarding alcohol. And that's speaking as a Canadian, a citizen of a country that's already pretty serious about its boozing (there are few things we love more than watching a visiting American tourist drink four Canadian beers and start puking their guts out ... other than watching them weep when they discover how shitty the conversion rate from the US dollar is these days...)
[*] before you mod me troll, that was what Sir Winston Churchill called a guy named Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi.
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
By the way, in 1839 the Governor of Maine decared war on England over a boundary dispute with New Brunswick. This was the only time a state has decared war on a foreign power. The conflict was settled before any blood was shed.
1. Frequent shopper cards from grocery stores so that they get 25cents off a loaf of bread. In return they let their grocery shop+pharmacy uniquely brand them with a number and track all their purchases, from birth control pills to diapers.
2. Use credit cards even after they send them a year end profile of expenses, making it a no secret how much data they collect and retain
3. are least bothered by the extensive data collection by their banks and their "partners" who pelt them with "new and exciting products".
Come on guys. The private sector is a bigger threat to your privacy and well being than US Govt is. You have some semblance of control over US govt, whereas you have none over the private sector. The interests of US Govt coincides with the interests of people lot more than the interests of private sector overlapping the interests of people.
But if you want mod points and build your karma, you have to blast the govt.
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
As an American who grew up in the Cayman Islands (where the drinking age is 18 and until recently was very lax) I have to agree with you. When I got to college in the US I didn't really feel the need to overdrink (either too much at once or too often), while a lot of people I met did. The best way to get people to not drink too much or do stupid things while drinking (ie drive) is for parents to expose them to what it's like before they get out and figure it out on their own.
You unbelievable dipshit.
The reason why the 9/11 hijackers had legal IDs is because THEY WERE ENTITLED TO THEM! Each one was in the US legally, and each one legally obtained ID, using his own name. ID ensures nothing except a person's identity.
Having law enforcement figure out that an individual is planning some criminal activity before it takes place is what will prevent another 9/11. And it's quite clear that 9/11 took place in no small part because numerous agencies failed in that task.
Yup, just sock the brain with enough alcohol to knock out an elephant before its development is complete, and then you wonder how these half-naked fakirs [*] are overtaking your economy. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/6294409.stm
[*] before you mod me troll, that was what Sir Winston Churchill called a guy named Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi.
That is interesting indeed. I had been told by Indians that Gandhi was called the "nanga fakir" which they said meant "naked fakir" although the most naked he is ever depicted, unlike some ascetics, was to have his top half uncovered (basically like being shirtless, though he is usually shown wearing a type of robe). I did not know that this originated as an insult by Churchill (of all people) but it did. I guess it is similar to the New England colonists adopting the moniker "yankee" which originated as a Dutch slur lobbed at them from New Amsterdam,and the later adoption of "Yankee Doodle" as a fight song after British soldiers used it to mock those colonists in the Revolution.
It does look like it is not too late for others to get in on the act of mocking Gandhi, if even in jest.
Still, I think it is disengenuous to refer to the Indians who are "taking our jobs" as "naked fakirs." After all the reason they are able to do your job so well is partly due to the fact that in addition to the Indian appreciation for education they also have learned to appreciate certain aspects of European and American culture; you'll find that most of them are for lack of a better term very much westernized, and certainly modern. They are thoroughly Indian as they are part of the new India. Though it does often please us American IT folks to be called wizards and gurus, I am not sure how Indian IT people would feel about being called fakirs, naked or not, especially given the religious implications. I guess they can answer for themselves, unless they feel like you are trolling after all and do not deign to respond.
(I actually think that this was probably a troll after all given the username, but it was thought-provoking even if unintentionally so, and given the subject matter I felt compelled to comment anyhow).
The current British PM is a Scot. The current Home Secretary is a Scot. The next Prime Minister will most likely be a Scot. The Home Office is admittedly in chaos; we have severe prison overcrowding. The head of the Youth Offending division has just resigned and given an interview in which he complained of the criminalisation of the behaviour of young people and the drawing of excessive numbers of them into the criminal justice system, with no signs whatever that this was reducing crime or reforming the convicted. This guy is no bleeding heart liberal; he is the former head of the Probation Service with an excellent track record. Because he opposed the Government lock-them-up policy, he was told he had to re-apply for his own job. The present Government is attracting the opposition of the judges because it keeps passing new laws to create new crimes, regardless of whether existing ones are being applied. Of course a mess of new laws lengthens trials, increases the number of appeals, increases the cost of justice and creates confusion in the police, who are expected to understand them all, completely and immediately they are passed. My side swipe about Scots passing excessive legislation in England was based on a serious point about Government attitudes and policy.
When it was clear that the Government had lied over Iraq, I formally resigned my membership of the Labour Party. I learnt last week that a former leading party activist in our area - who had asked me not to leave - has now resigned in disgust.
Personally, as a very English - Home Counties, Cambridge graduate, working in IT - person, I feel I usually have far more in common with English people of Indian and West Indian extraction than the Scots, and I don't just mean cricket. Their whole cultural and philosophical tradition I find quite alien, more so than, say, the Dutch and the North Germans (and yes, I have read Hume as well as Trainspotting. But I do make an exception for that great genius Macaulay). Now that there is a separate Scottish parliament, there is a perfectly legitimate question to be asked as to why the Scots are allowed to legislate on social laws, education etc., when England cannot legislate for Scotland. Consider the hypocrisy of Scottish MPs who voted for university tuition fees in England while their fellow party members voted against them in Scotland. If it's flamebait to refer to this, then the level of what is allowed in political debate has sunk very low indeed.
Pining for the fjords