National ID Cards Mandated in the US, If You're Under 50

charleste writes "CNN is reporting that the US Homeland Security Department has mandated Real ID for drivers licenses. According to the article, this will not include a 'chip', but a list of options by state. Despite legislation passed in various states and objections by groups such as ACLU, this appears to be a done deal. Without one of the new IDs you will be unable to board a plane after 2014 if you are under 50."

Comments

Papers please

[Chairboy]

1984 was not supposed to be an instruction manual.

Re:Papers please

[eldavojohn]

Yeah, and just think what this is going to do to counterfeiting!

Man in Black Coat in Alley: "Would you like a real fake ID or a fake Real ID?"
Citizen: "Well, I'm only 18 so I need both."
Man in Black Coat in Alley: "Very good, sir. Now, remember when you're buying alcohol, you're a 22 year old student named James Huffington from Rhode Island. When you're boarding a plane, you are Agnes Krakaour, age 51 ... you winter vacation in Florida and enjoy shuffle boarding and watching Matlock."
Citizen: "Thank you so much!"

Re:Papers please

[RobBebop]

1984 was not supposed to be an instruction manual.

I believe you are off-base comparing Real ID to 1984...

1984's rigid governmental controls were setup by the Inner Party to keep the rest of the Party in-line. The Proles were free to go about their lives more-or-less uninterrupted. Sure, they were spied upon and the government created nonsensical "shortages" for things like razors. The real spying, though, was upon members of the Party who were employed at the four Ministries (DoD (PEACE), Media (TRUTH), Prison (LOVE), and Wall Street (PLENTY)). These individuals were made to suffer until even the most basic mathematics was a lie. Meanwhile, the vast majority lived in ghettos outside of the insanity.

Thus, to the point that it will constrain everybody... Real ID is very dissimilar to anything in 1984. If you *really* want to cast stones, simply knowing the main slogan of 1984 provides better insight.

War is Peace,
Freedom is Slavery,
Ignorance is Strength

And if you'd like to read utopian science fiction *WITH* Real ID... follow the link in my sig. It isn't done, but it is polished enough that you'll get an enjoyable story.

Re:Papers please

[Shakrai]

Yeah, and just think what this is going to do to counterfeiting!

You got a +5 funny but it should have been +5 insightful. I don't care how many smartchips or anti-counterfeiting features they add to our licenses, it will still be possible for people to counterfeit them. In the extreme example, somebody motivated enough to obtain a false id would just pay off the right person at DMV to obtain a legitimate one. Hell, if you think that doesn't happen right now then you are deluding yourself.

I don't recall reading that any of the 9/11 hijackers used fake IDs to get onto the airplanes. They obtained them quite legally. Perhaps we should be looking into reforming who can obtain a drivers license, rather then reforming the drivers license itself.

Or better yet: Perhaps we should stop all of this Orwellian nonsense to begin with and just accept the fact that we live in a dangerous world and I'd personally rather have my civil liberties and live with that basic fact then trade them in for the illusion of security.

Re:Papers please

[ArcherB]

I will be over 50 at the time.

Probably emigrated to NZ by that time, if I can squeeze out before the gate comes down.

My poor, poor children... Can you board a plane in NZ without ID?

Re:Papers please

[pilgrim23]

"When a place gets crowded enough to require ID's, social collapse is not far away. It is time to go elsewhere." -Robert Heinlein

Re:Papers please

[cayenne8]

"Or better yet: Perhaps we should stop all of this Orwellian nonsense to begin with and just accept the fact that we live in a dangerous world and I'd personally rather have my civil liberties and live with that basic fact then trade them in for the illusion of security."

Thank you!

I gotta say, I dunno where all this fear comes from. Personally, I'm more afraid of the govt. screwing me over or a glitch in the system, preventing me from doing something (flying, entering public building, banking) than a terrorist blowing me up.

I mean, the odds of something happening wrong with the govt. that I deal with quite a lot throughout my life is much greater than Habib lighting a fuze somewhere near where I'm standing at any given time.

Re:Papers please

[Andy Dodd]

"I don't recall reading that any of the 9/11 hijackers used fake IDs to get onto the airplanes. They obtained them quite legally. Perhaps we should be looking into reforming who can obtain a drivers license, rather then reforming the drivers license itself."

Based on reading the article, it looks like most of the changes being made are not changes to the license itself, but to the process of obtaining them.

It appears to me that this is not a "federal ID", but consists of the following:
1) Requirements levied on the process of granting a person a drivers' license, in terms of verifying that that person is who they say they are.
2) Requirements levied on the anti-counterfeiting features of that license.

TFA states that a number of states already issue licenses that meet all of these requirements. For example, California residents will apparently not notice any difference except the point at which their picture is taken during the process of obtaining a license. From the looks of it, this will also not affect me, as my state (New York) already implements all of the process and anti-counterfeiting requirements levied here.

Re:Papers please

[Shakrai]

I gotta say, I dunno where all this fear comes from

I'll give you a hint: "If we make the wrong choice, then the danger is that we'll get hit again -- that we'll be hit in a way that will be devastating from the standpoint of the United States" -Dick Cheney

Seriously. Our own Government has done a lot more to make us afraid of terrorism then the terrorists themselves have done. How depressing that in 60 years we've gone from "The only thing we have to fear is fear itself" to "Buy duct tape!".

Re:Papers please

[cayenne8]

"How is this any different than without Real ID? What does Real ID change?"

Because this now will be tracked on a national database. Now...all your movements will be tracked starting with air travel. Where you went, how long, etc.

Next, who is to say what information is tracked? National healthcare? Maybe you are penalized in healthcare...since they now know you go to a bar 3 times a week. Cashing checks? Well, they can now associate what you buy each time...tsk tsk...you're still smoking, eh?

Do you now have to swipe it each time you use a credit card? Why not...not an infringement...just 'proves' you are the person on the credit card. Heck..why bother with a separate card at all? The credit card companies just start using your swipe to assoc. with an account with them. Then all the nice databases are hooked together nicely, and a great picture of your life can then be assembled.

But, what problems would that cause?? I mean, we've known the govt. doesn't make mistakes, especially ones that are near impossible to get cleared up in a reasonable amount of time, if at all. We all know there hasn't been anyone misuse their govt. powers to personally screw with someone life before...so, no worries there.

I guess think of it this way. Have there been many laws passed for one reason, that haven't been used for other things? RICO laws used to be just for gangsters...they're being used in creative ways these days for numerous other prosecutions. Patriot act laws were just for terrorists, right? Haven't we seen slashdot articles already alluding to them now being used for less dangerous domestic infractions?

Sure, I paint a slippery slope picture with what the RealID could lead to, with its national database...but, is it THAT far fetched? Who is to stop the next administration from adding a 'little more' functionality to the system?

Re:Papers please

[daeg]

This will stop no terrorist. Period. Terrorism is not solved by cracking down on citizens. Terrorism is only solved when you solve the underlying problem, e.g., typically a bad relationship between two cultures or groups. If we actually worked productively on our relationship with the middle east instead of being hypocrites and supporting terrorism ourselves we are practically begging to be struck again.

Look at it this way: if Canada was supplying the South with weaponry to stir up tensions again to force another civil war in the US while at the same time decrying the London bombings, wouldn't you be a little pissed at Canada?

Now imagine that, but stretched over decades from the United States, and hundreds of years from multiple European monarchies throughout the last thousand years.

Am I trying to justify it? No. However, a bit of understand would go a long way to improve out relationships abroad.

Sorry to rant.

Re:Papers please

[Jeremiah Cornelius]

Well, not without a Passport. That itself was a horrible imposition, instituted after the first World War.

Read B. Traven's novel, The Death Ship, for a perspective on this - among other things.

Re:Papers please

[Skreems]

That's true. California citizens probably won't notice the new behind-the-scenes checks between every government agency in existence the next time they renew their licenses.

Re:Papers please

[Oktober Sunset]

Of course the 9/11 hijackers didn't have fake ID, they hadn't done anything wrong before that, 9/11 was the first terrorist thing they did. All an ID does is prove who you are, it does prove you aren't a terrorist. People who should be able to get a drivers licence are anyone who can drive, that's what drivers licences are for. All ID does is tell you who someone is, it doesn't tell you that they aren't a terrorist.

Re:Papers please

[Shakrai]

Terrorism is solved by simply getting those groups who raise fuss and EX-TER-MI-NATE them. The rest is fluff for weakling loserboy nerds.

Even if you buy into that load of crap that you just spewed, how does imposing new restrictions on Americans and granting the Government sweeping new powers help towards that goal? I'd like to think that my drivers license bears no relationship to the military strength of the United States.

And I'll address your theory that we need to exterminate them with a quote from one of my favorite movies: "He seems to have a serious weed up his ass and a legitimate gripe, always a dangerous combination" -Captain Ramsey from Crimson Tide.

Point being, that the Muslim World has several legitimate gripes with the Western World. We can kill all the terrorists we want but until we address those gripes we'll just be creating more of them to fight us. Unless you plan on exterminating them all?

Re:Papers please

[Shakrai]

Stop being rational about this. Real ID will protect us from terrorism. The Department of Homeland Security says so, so it must be true.

Re:Papers please

[ContractualObligatio]

RTFA: "The American Civil Liberties Union has fiercely objected to the effort, particularly the sharing of personal data among government agencies. The DHS and other officials say the only way to make sure an ID is safe is to check it against secure government data;"

That is a federated system - this is a federal ID. Putting quotes around "federal ID" is being either dismissive or ignorant of the ACLU's concerns.

Re:Papers please

[cayenne8]

" TFA states that a number of states already issue licenses that meet all of these requirements. "

One big change for me...from what I read, it will now have my Social Security number contained in it. My current license does not. I never showed my SS# when applying for it, and my number does not appear on the front of the license.

From the article, it implies that the SS will be at least encoded on the bar code.

I try not to give my SS out for anything but ss tax related things. Now...why are the Feds requiring it be part of my fscking drivers license?? What does a drivers license have to do with SS taxation?

Re:Papers please

[Danga]

The most humorous thing was a day later finding out she had her lighter in her jacket pocket the entire flight home, so even on the connecting flight up from Florida it was on her and she didn't know and no one checked for it.

What kind of lighter was it? As long as it was not a Torch Lighter TSA has allowed lighters since April of last year so unless she flew before then it would not have been a problem. You can read more about TSA's lighter guidelines here and here

Re:Papers please

[poticlin]

I Dont' even know why i'm answering this...
Exterminating over a billion people is called a genocide and is the most heinous of all crime against humanity.
And horrifyingly reminds me of WWII's genocide and Germany's mind set at the time.

Re:Papers please

[colmore]

Pretty clever to grandfather out the voting block that can remember pre-police state america.

Re:Papers please

[BobMcD]

What amazes me is the assumption that we're not at risk from this kind of threat is LAUGHABLE at the highest level. Last night's GOP debate brought up the issue of the speed boats that approached our destroyers. Ron Paul thought it was ridiculous to assume that the world's most powerful navy should feel threatened by speed boats. Everyone else thought it was a good reason to go to war with Iran...

We, the American public, have been duped. Lucky us that it wore off it before the politicians realized it.

Re:Papers please

[holophrastic]

Scared of your own shadow now? I guess I'll no longer be travelling to your country. You didn't like my dollar when it was weak, now you won't get it when it's strong.

But seriously, what's wrong with you? Don't you realize that adding security measures to individual people doesn't do anything? By all means, secure the buildings, and secure the runways, and secure the documents. But you can't secure your people without turning them into documents themselves.

What's more, every single method you guys seem to choose helps to secure against something that didn't actually happen. As has been said elsewhere here, 9/11 wasn't a passenger hjjacking -- and yet, as a result, you've taken crazy measure to stop passengers from hijacking. Sorry, that was a wish, I meant "to prevent passengers from hijacking". Before you're done, you'll have "prevented" hundreds of things that would never have happened. One shoe bomb in a hundred years, if I remember correctly, was caught in time anyway. And now you inspect everyone's shoes.

In any pure game of cat and mouse, the cat always wins -- that's the only end-game scenario. In any came of cops and robbers, the robbers always have the huge advantage. Consider the airport security guards, and the one terrorist. The guards get to look out over a sea of many people, and search for hundreds of possible weapons. The terrorist gets to choose his weapon from centuries of warfare techniques. The terrorist has access to the guards' procedures, and knows exactly what they'll do -- because the guards have set procedures to follow. And all the while, your civilians can't brush their teeth, eat their steak, charge their laptop, shave, or generally enjoy life on a flight of any reasonable length.

Why don't you just get it over with. Allow anyone on the plane, and just sedate everyone. Forget about security. You walk up to an airport, with a badge around your neck that has your destination airport code printed in big block letters. Crocodile Dundee snipers you with a dart before you even reach the airport doors. And you wake up at your destination point -- hopefully not raped by your pilots, but definitely raped by your government.

Maybe, just maybe, it's time to look at your foreign policies and figure out why you're under such constant attack when so many others are not.

Re:Papers please

[jamstar7]

Muslim World ... Unless you plan on exterminating them all?

Anyone have a problem with this?

Yes. If (and that's a highly unlikely if,) this is 'managed to be done', what's to stop those doing the ordering from targetting the next group for elimination? And who is that group going to be? Catholics? Anglicans? Any so-called Christian sect that doesn't speak in tongues, handle snakes, consider Evolution and science to be a tool of the devil and that all knowledge outside of one book needs to be suppressed for 'everyone's own good'?

Re:Papers please

[Fulcrum of Evil]

Actually, it's us who need someone to hate. Sure, a lot of the ignorant masses believe all sorts of stupid things about jews (because that's what they've been taught and they've never met a jew), but do you really think they'd be so pissed off if we weren't bombing the bejesus out of them every 5-10 years?

Re:Papers please

[russotto]

Can you board a plane in NZ without ID?

Last time I was there, I was able to board a domestic flight (Queensland to Christchurch) not only without showing ID, but without even going through a metal detector).

Re:Papers please

[swillden]

we also cant stand around and do nothing in todays world.

Why not?

9/11 was a flea bite. It killed fewer people than die every month on the highways, and did less property damage than good-sized hurricane (and *far* less than a major disaster like Katrina).

Re:Papers please

[ScrappyLaptop]

...anyone else read that as "X-ray your carrion"?

Re:Papers please

[FranklinDelanoBluth]

I gotta say, I dunno where all this fear comes from.

Take a look at The Power of Nightmares, a three part documentary that aired in late 2004 on the BBC about how governments/movements can use myths of foreign threats to consolidate/unite their power bases in the context of both sides of the current "war on terror" (i.e. both US neocons and Islamic fundamentalists). You can find the documentary on YouTube: Part 1, Part 2, Part 3.

I highly recommend it as an even-handed, nuanced historical analysis, as opposed to liberal agit-prop or conspiracy theory.

Re:Papers please

[DCTooTall]

Ok... I know that this is going to probably be considered troll-y by some, and I do not mean to be. This post is just to ask a simple question.

By grouping an entire religion due to certain tactics of fanatics who claim to follow those beliefs, and then assuming that that same problem does not exist within another, doesn't sound quite right to me.

Here in the US you have groups claiming to be Christian who for decades would burn crosses to terrorize an entire section of the population... and perform all sorts of murders and other crimes against those segments of population for the express purpose of causing fear. More recently, you have people claiming to be Christian blowing up abortion clinics because they do not agree with the idea.

If you ask me, No religion is really free from having people claiming to follow it doing really stupid things. The real differences I see is that when it is the religion you believe in (or are just more familiar with) it is a lot easier to see the person as a crazy person with his own agenda hiding behind the religious beliefs. It also doesn't help that unlike christianity which has such a large coverage over the globe today that it's almost impossible to associate it with one skin tone, culture, or part of the world. Islam however, while also having a very large world-wide following, seems a bit easier to "define"...


Yes... there are some legitimate religion based issues that exist here. (thinking the whole grudge about the crusades doesn't help). But there are also much LARGER and more important issues that need to be addressed. Unfortunately human nature and the way things are currently being handled definately doesn't help the situation... from either side.

Re:Papers please

[TGoddard]

I live in NZ and nowadays you do require ID to board a domestic flight when you check in. I expect somebody else could still board under your name though. Most of the security here is purely theatrical. There was a little scandal a while back when the media discovered that the metal detectors at parliament were being disabled during peak hours because they slowed things down too much. One group of reporters also decided to visit the parliament buildings during the night, got in without seeing any security people and went around with a TV camera filming the cabinet meeting rooms and other important places. Really though NZ is just a very safe place to live. Most small-time criminals wouldn't carry a gun, let alone normal people. Any firearm must be locked away and cannot be carried in public. All semi-automatic guns and all handguns are under total ban. Even our police have to ask permission to arm themselves with a firearm (from a locked box in the boot of the car) and that only happens in violent situations. One of the hottest controversies of 2008 was whether they should be allowed to carry tasers.

Re:Papers please

[ArcherB]

Anyone care to explain how this post is "troll"? Or did a moderator not like what I was saying and not smart enough to come up with a legitimate counter?

Muslim World ... Unless you plan on exterminating them all? Anyone have a problem with this? Yes. If (and that's a highly unlikely if,) this is 'managed to be done', what's to stop those doing the ordering from targetting the next group for elimination? And who is that group going to be? Catholics? Anglicans? Any so-called Christian sect that doesn't speak in tongues, handle snakes, consider Evolution and science to be a tool of the devil and that all knowledge outside of one book needs to be suppressed for 'everyone's own good'? I agree, only because not all Muslims are evil head-hunters. The vast majority of them are peaceful, kind people who are simply trying to live their lives and provide the best for their families.

However, comparing Christians with Muslims is not a fair comparison at all. I don't see the Pope or any other Catholic calling for the genocide of people of other religions. I don't read about Christian fathers killing their daughters because they wear makeup or date outside of the religion. I don't see Anglicans hijacking planes full of unarmed civilians and flying them into buildings filled with more unarmed civilians. These activities are pretty much owned Muslim based groups today.

The western world is not at war with Islam, but parts of Islam is at war with the west.

Re:Papers please

[Shakrai]

A realistic appreciation of the tragedy would lead us to (a) take reasonable safety precautions (like locking cockpit doors during flight), (b) focus our response on actions that really will make us safer -- largely, more intelligence effort -- and (c) go on with our lives in as unaffected a manner as possible, to avoid giving the terrorists their victory.

Completely agree. The simple action of locking the cockpit doors and training the pilot to immedidately land during an attempting hijacking prevents another 9/11. End of story. No TSA, no "remove your shoes", no "no-fly" lists.

Hell, unless they can bring guns onto the aircraft there's no way terrorists even take over a plane in the United States after 9/11. Look at Flight 93. No American is going to meekly submit to an attempted hijacking after 9/11.

I've always thought we've done more damage to our way of life then the terrorists did. I wonder if they were smart enough to count on that? I know I wasn't. I figured we'd have more rage and less self-pity and fear. Guess I was wrong :(

OH NOES!!

[hbean]

THE BLACK HELICOPTERS ARE GOING TO GET US!

Seriously people, I'm all for civil liberties, but theres nothing wrong with have a solid method of making sure people are who they say they are and verifying they are allowed to get the identification they are allowed to get.

Re:OH NOES!!

[whoever57]

Seriously people, I'm all for civil liberties, but theres nothing wrong with have a solid method of making sure people are who they say they are and verifying they are allowed to get the identification they are allowed to get.

But what is the benefit? Remember that the 9/11 hijackers all had valid IDs -- identification would not have prevented that tragedy.

Re:OH NOES!!

[Jeremiah Cornelius]

None of this would have prevented anything about 911, the purported impetus for this. All legal ID's.

Re:OH NOES!!

[m0rph3us0]

Yeah, there is nothing wrong with a national ID card if people want one.

When people are denied freedom of movement by the gov't when they don't have one is when it becomes a problem.

Also, exactly which problem is this designed to solve? And how is this the least intrusive method of the gov't achieving its goals.

In 2014, about 40% of the US population will be over 50. Even better, Osama Bin Laden himself would be excluded from this requirement.

Re:OH NOES!!

[mcsqueak]

But some states are still issuing ID's that are literally little more than a laminated piece of paper.

Here in Oregon, when you move the Oregon DMV sends you a STICKER to fold over the bottom of your license. It has your new address, as well as a barcode on the back... and it just looks so tacky and fake.

Whats even better is when you go in to get your license renewed, they no longer have the printing/laminating machines to make you a proper one on the spot. They give you a piece of paper to carry around for two weeks while you wait for your new license to arrive in the mail. There have been plenty of reports here about bars turning patrons away because they are concerned they are fake and don't want to face fines for accidentally allowing someone underage to drink by mistake.

Re:OH NOES!!

[Joe the Lesser]

I can think of other solid methods of identifying people, but I don't want to break Godwin's law. ...Unless I just did.

Re:OH NOES!!

[truthsearch]

I don't think you read the comment correctly. The hijackers had valid IDs, not fakes. Meaning they could do anything we would normally do with those IDs.

Re:OH NOES!!

[jedidiah]

Weak. Very Weak.

All Mohammed has to do is get a job at the DMV.

Haven't you even seen the Simpsons?

This only slows down and complicates things. We're not exactly
dealing with a bunch of camel buggering primitives here. They
can adapt to these hurdles just like any other national
intelligence service would.

People are just trivializing the enemy if they think these
sorts of things will so easily stop them.

Re:OH NOES!!

[sconeu]

Is it perfect? No. Is it in the interest of civil liberties? Nope. Is it a good step in a world full of people who would love to see you and I dead simply because of the country we were born in? You betcha.

Congratulations. The terrorists have won.

Re:OH NOES!!

[DCTooTall]

Not neccessarily. How are the everyday businesses you visit going to verify that the ID is a Valid ID and not just a good-looking forgery, unless they too have scanners that have access to said national database to query the card against? Or is it going to be like the cards/scanners mentioned in yesterday's story on anonymous drinking (too lazy to link)? In that case the bar-code is a simple open format that is easy to crack, and a mag stripe you can always demagnetize.

And just like bars today that swipe ID's, instead of making it harder to create a fake ID, It makes the people checking the ID's less observant and allows them to easily just rely on the technology. IOW's... It's another great way for the public as a whole to pop their head in the sand and say we are secure when in reality we've not really improved anything and possibly even removed some of the accountability people once had in preventing the fraud.

In a related bit..... Think about this.. What do you need to get a state issued ID? Social Security Card? Birth Certificate? Well.... What do you need to get a replacement Social Security Card? Not much other than filling out some paperwork and your Birth Certificate. Soooooo, what do you need to get you birth certificate? In many areas, you just need to go down to the local dept of health and request a copy of it. Not very hard to do at all. Even easier, you could use a service like VitalChek and not even have to show up in person to request the Birth Certificate......And that's assuming that you are using a real Birth Certificate. There isn't really any system set up where the DMV can verify that the certificate your giving them is officially issued. The only thing on them that "proves" they are real is a simple notery-style Official Seal crimped in the paper.

An ID system is only as strong as it's weakest link. And right now we have a MASSIVELY weak link in the process for birth Certificates which this is not changing. All this does (not including potential privacy concerns) is give everybody a warm fuzzy cause they think they are doing something to better the situation.

Re:OH NOES!!

[Reece400]

I think the idea was that they had 'valid ids' plural, one of them had 4 from different states which I suppose somehow helped them with their terrorist activities. This will help to ensure you can only get one licence.

Re:OH NOES!!

[nmb3000]

The PEOPLE DON'T WANT Real ID.

The only bright side to this whole thing is that 6 years is plenty long enough for this to get repealed. We're due for a new president here fairly soon and with any luck it will be somebody who won't go along with this crap.

Re:OH NOES!!

[LWATCDR]

I did read it.
You asked what is the benefit. For 9/11 there would have been none that I know of.
But there is a real benefit to better ids that can be checked and trusted.
As I pointed out it could help with check fraud and any other crime that someone would commit using a fake idea. I didn't say it had any benefits at stopping a 9/11 copy cat attack.
You are making a common mistake. You are fighting the last war.
The benefits may have little to do with preventing terrorism but then it may. But a good secure id does have some benefits.
BTW a 9/11 copy cat attack is now pretty much impossible.
1. It is harder to sneak any weapon on a plane.
2. The cockpits are more secure.
3. Passengers will not just sit there any more.
So if you are worried about stopping 9/11 again don't. That is pretty well taken care of.

Re:OH NOES!!

[NullProg]

Seriously people, I'm all for civil liberties, but theres nothing wrong with have a solid method of making sure people are who they say they are and verifying they are allowed to get the identification they are allowed to get.

There are several things wrong with this,

- Adds another layer of unnecessary bureaucracy to the monstrosity that is the US federal government.
- 10 years down the road the Federal government (needing health care funds) will sell/lease the database to the highest bidder.
- The database is subject to abuse by Federal employees.
- The war on the Islamic radicals is supposed to be temporary. Why restrict what your citizens can do permanently?
- The Government workers will somehow screw up the identities of John Smith in Oregon and John Smith in Georgia. And neither John Smith will be able to clear his name.

I was born here, I pay taxes (property, sales, federal), I own a home, I have kids. I think thats proof enough that I'm not a radical bent on destroying the United States. I should be able to go/do what I God dammed like without further proof. The Feds can kiss my Ass.

Enjoy,

Re:OH NOES!!

[Shakrai]

I live in NY where our ID is already almost up to this new standard

As a fellow holder of a NYS license I don't generally have a problem with the way our license is designed -- we have 2D encrypted barcodes (similar the ones on our insurance cards, which I used to have the software to make when I worked in the business) that contain all of the information. No problem with that.

I do have a serious problem with the concept of centralizing all of this information, which is part of what REAL ID purports to do. This concept that all levels of Government need to share information and be totally integrated scares the hell out of me. It's supposed to be difficult for the various levels of Government (and even agencies within the same level of Government) to share information. Personally, I don't think the Feds should have a right to look at ANY of the information contained in my DMV file without due process of law (i.e: a warrant or an arrest for a crime committed).

I also have a problem with the mandate that all licenses display your home address. Mine currently has my PO Box on it. Why should it display my home address? DMV has my home address on file. Law enforcement can obtain it easily enough. I'm more comfortable using my license in day-to-day activities (businesses that want to see it) without my address being on it. The day they put my home address on my license is the day I stop carrying it. Hell, I'll use my fucking passport instead.

But some states are still issuing ID's that are literally little more than a laminated piece of paper

Hehe, does New Jersey still do that? We loved New Jersey IDs back in the day before any of us were 21......

Re:OH NOES!!

[stuntpope]

The 9/11 hijackers had multiple driver's licenses from multiple states, and multiple addresses within states (such as Virginia). ReadID is supposed to enforce "one person, one license", to prevent this. The hijacker's IDs may have been valid in that they were official, not forged, government documents, but they were obtained fraudulently (they had friends provide them with proof of address, etc).

Re:OH NOES!!

[alan_dershowitz]

Well, for one thing, some of the hijackers had driver's licenses for multiple states under multiple names. They were "valid" insofar as the hijackers were able to game the system to get the states to issue them IDs. Real-ID would have prevented them from doing that. I can't tell you that would have prevented 9/11, but obviously criminals can and do use weak state-issued IDs in commission of their crimes.

Re:OH NOES!!

[NickCatal]

Exactly... I am all for a set of design standards... a central DB is a bit much..

Although I do not like the idea of someone who had their license revoked (or almost did) or got caught drunk driving in another state getting a clean ID in a different state. Linking traffic violations/points between all 50 states would be a real advancement IMO

Re:OH NOES!!

[mmeister]

The real problem is that the benefits are vague at best. You want people to jump onto this system that pushes the boundaries of privacy and liberties against the individual.

Worse, ALL that data will be easier accessed. How many reports did I read just last year where government agencies "lost" millions of records on laptops. Just imagine ONE such failure with the REAL ID data and all the hope that it might prevent fraud goes right out the window.

I agree that the 9/11 scenario is taken care of -- which is why I'm tired of our HS folks using it to scare folks into this REAL ID thing.

My fear these days is corrupt and police-state like government agencies that will arrest you on rumor, hold you indefinitely without evidence or chance of trial and if you're lucky enough -- you won't get tortured while your held indefinitely. Basically, the protections of the Constitution are all but gone. And that means we'll head even faster to a fascist state.

Re:OH NOES!!

[Brad Eleven]

Perhaps it would have prevented them from having obtained valid licenses and/or other IDs from multiple states, but this has nothing to do with the discussion.

With their valid identification, they were able to receive pilot training. It has yet to be shown that the scheme being discussed could prevent the same exploit.

The larger discussion is the continuing distraction of the population of these United States by the federal government. Civil liberties are being removed in the name of security, with the flimsy justification of a straw man called The War On Terror, aided and abetted by the spectre of Identity Theft. Consider that both problems are caused by a lack of security on the part of entities in whom we naively trust: Corporations and Government. Notice how these entities take no responsibility for their laziness and mistakes--and how their solution is to demand more from the consumer/citizen. Credit issuers have successfully declaimed most, if not all responsibility for the security and accuracy of your credit records. Government agencies have simply demanded that we give up more rights in exchange for the continued illusion of security.

The problems with a National Identification Card far outnumber the petty advantages for citizens. There are major advantages for the federal government, and a few minor advantages for state governments. In general, the FBI was created to take care of this sort of interstate problem.

It is unfortunate that, in the presence of fear, urgency, and desperation, we human beings are all too willing to submit to authority. When the authority doesn't seem to exist, we tend to invent it, in order to submit to it.

The predictable future--the one without any change in direction--is that we will find ourselves with very few rights, and for those the records will be inaccurate or lost.

Re:OH NOES!!

[SpaceLifeForm]

They give you a piece of paper to carry around for two weeks while you wait for your new license to arrive in the mail.

Man, that, that is so ... 1984!

Re:OH NOES!!

[The One and Only]

You joke, but (from a story I've found many places, most recently here):

The campaign for a national ID card is not new. It first got serious consideration early in the Reagan administration, when Attorney General William French Smith suggested it during a Cabinet meeting. At first there were murmurs of assent. Then presidential assistant Martin Anderson (husband of Annelise) spoke up.

"Mr. President, I would like to suggest another way that I think is a lot better," he counseled. "It's a lot cheaper. It can't be counterfeited. It's very lightweight, and impossible to lose. It's even waterproof. All we have to do is tattoo an identification number on the inside of everybody's arm."

Reagan snorted. "Maybe we should just brand all the babies," he jibed. The idea was never again taken seriously. Until now.

For those who aren't aware, tattooing identification numbers on the inside of the arm was how prisoners were identified in the German concentration camps.

Re:OH NOES!!

[inertialmatrix]

I don't disagree that having a standardized security format for identification is a bad idea - Its a great idea. Having measures in place to prevent people from copying and counterfeiting ID cards is an obvious thing to do. However, my huge problem with REAL ID is that it would set in place a single database that would hold god knows what information about every single citizen of this country. It would be searched in secret without citizens knowledge and I am sure it would open up entirely new agencies and bureaucracies whose sole purpose is to create ways sift "bad" people out of that info. Ladies and gentlemen, this is a dangerous thing. Make no mistake, the government is already trying to do similar projects with existing info and people need to be aware of it, but this is simply another avenue for a group of people to realize their goal. But here is the thing, some will say that the govt can do this already with existing info/SS#'s/etc. And you're right, but in order to build it out extensively and most importantly, get funding for a nationwide system and bureaucracy, they need a reason. REAL ID could be that justification.

Here is a scenario for you. Such a database and any programs or efforts to extensively datamine the info is VERY likely to be secret. (Don't want the terrorist to know our methods!) So lets say that some new algorithms developed by DARPA single out Johnny as a potential threat due to his age, place of birth, credit and travel history, political affiliations, tax records/organizations he has donated to, military service and health records, or those of his friends. He can't very well be arrested on secret information... so what happens?? He gets detained indefinitely! But don't worry, we have a firewall protecting us against such actions by the state - Habeus Corpus - oh, wait a sec.

Brave new world indeed.

Re:OH NOES!!

[CyberLord Seven]

You are so right!

Case in point:

I was going to travel outside of the country in November 2005. I applied for my passport in September 2005.

No problem, right?

Wrong! I was born in Calcasieu Parish, Louisiana.

Katrina, for those that need the memory jog.

I had never needed my birth certificate before this. I had gone through school, joined and served in the military with only my California Drivers License prior to this. The Postal Service balked at first but eventually just caved in and granted me a Passport that is valid until 2010.

Now, let's say I'm Timothy McVeigh or your hypothetical Muhammed. I just need to wait for another disaster to strike some region of the U. S. and then declare that I was born there. Tornadoes, hurricanes, earthquakes and other fun stuff from Mother Nature is just what I want when I need a false ID or two.

Re:OH NOES!!

[LWATCDR]

No the benefits are real. You may feel that they are not worth the risk but that isn't the same thing.
The RealID from what I read just make sure that the information you give matches the truth. If you have a drivers license you already have given the information.
Did you read what they are going to do?
" Among other details of the REAL ID plan:

# The traditional driver's license photograph would be taken at the beginning of the application instead of the end so that should someone be rejected for failure to prove identity and citizenship, the applicant's photo would be kept on file and checked in the future if that person attempted to con the system again.

# The cards will have three layers of security measures but will not contain microchips as some had expected. States will be able to choose from a menu which security measures they will put in their cards.

# Over the next year, the government expects all states to begin checking both the Social Security numbers and immigration status of license applicants."

I just don't find this all that Orwellian. If you read the article it looks as if it has a lot more to do with preventing fraud than terrorism. And forcing states to fix their broken system.

I do think that a lot of the changes since 9/11 are not good and a lot of the powers do need to be rolled back. The problem is when you over react to something like this it makes all of your other arguments less convincing.

Re:OH NOES!!

[Dachannien]

Last I checked, I'm a person, and I want REAL ID (at least in the form proposed: sans RFID).

Re:OH NOES!!

[yndrd1984]

I'm all for rights and liberties, but you have none if you're dead.

It's "Give me liberty or give me death!" not "Do what you want, just don't hurt me!".

Seriously, how can the most powerful nation on earth be so full of pansies?

Headline/summary is slightly misleading

[ravenspear]

Under 50 is not a permanent exemption. After 2017, those over 50 will have to have a Real ID license as well. The additional 3 years for them was added so the states would have more time to issue everyone new licenses.

Regardless, if we don't want this then the states need to be firm in their opposition to it.

If every state (or nearly every one) opposes it, the DHS can't really do anything, unless they want to be the agent of the economy's collapse because no businesspeople can travel. If enough states do not oppose it strongly, then the ones who do will be forced to capitulate eventually, similar to the 21 drinking age.

Re:Headline/summary is slightly misleading

[Sierpinski]

Under 50 is not a permanent exemption. After 2017, those over 50 will have to have a Real ID license as well. The additional 3 years for them was added so the states would have more time to issue everyone new licenses.

They probably want to wait the extra time so more of the baby boomers will die off, thus saving them the extra expense of equipping them all with a Real ID. I can seriously see someone in the upper echelon of government suggesting that as a way of saving money.

I won't even bother quoting Ben Franklin's line here, you all have seen it too many times already. We're in trouble. That apartment in Canada is starting to look much better now.

Re:Headline/summary is slightly misleading

[Bud Dickman]

"That apartment in Canada is starting to look much better now."

Here's the thing, I hear this stuff all the time from people who may or may not disagree with my point of view. My issue is that rather than fight to fix things, you're ready to pack it in and leave the country. What happens when you get to Canada and it's not perfect and you don't like something there - what country will you flee to? Or is that where you make your stand and actually try to bring about change?

If someone tells me that they think the country is headed in the wrong direction and they're leaving, what reason do I have to listen to their thoughts on the matter? If they're so uncommitted to the country they're obviously not invested in the future of the country so their opinion means nothing to me.

If the Vietnam War had been protested by this generation, it seems that the country would have emptied out and the war would have continued. Enough with the mindless talk of leaving because you disagree with what's going on. Either leave or start to do something about it.

Re:Headline/summary is slightly misleading

[Andy Dodd]

"Regardless, if we don't want this then the states need to be firm in their opposition to it."
Some states are not going to bother opposing this at all.

The reason? It doesn't affect them in the slightest.

Why? Because they already implement all of the requirements the law will impose.

For example, apparently the only difference for California will be that the drivers' picture will be taken at the beginning of the license application process instead of at the end.

For NYS residents like myself, it will apparently change minimally if at all.

Re:Headline/summary is slightly misleading

[bogjobber]

If the Vietnam War had been protested by this generation, it seems that the country would have emptied out and the war would have continued.

That is ridiculous. Guess what? Between 50,000 and 125,000 people left the US for Canada alone because of opposition to the Vietnam War (source). Full-scale protests and majority opposition to the Vietnam War started in 1967, and the US withdrew in 1973. So looks like those protests did a hell of a lot of good.

I apologize in advance for the flame, but I am so sick of this nostalgic backwards-looking bullshit from the baby boomer generation. Just because your generation talked about free love and had some protests while they were in college doesn't mean a goddamn thing. Most of the people gave up trying to change things, took a job with a multinational, became a born-again Christian, voted for Reagan 15 years later, and fucking ruined everything. And now they're buying mutual funds. The only legitimately successful social change that came out of the 60's was the Civil Rights Movement. Everything else is self-congratulatory bullshit.

Great

[jameskojiro]

So my current license expired in 2015, but thansk to this I have to get a new one a year early....

sheeeesshhhh

What a pain.

sigh

[Joe the Lesser]

Germaine Greer:

        Security is when everything is settled. When nothing can happen to you. Security is the denial of life.

Re:sigh

[avandesande]

Here is the rest of the quote for those who care:

"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience."

    -- C.S. Lewis

The real question is ILLEGAL immigrants

[jameskojiro]

Will they find a way to get a super secret secure ID card with the rest of us due to legal loopholes?

Re:The real question is ILLEGAL immigrants

[Archangel Michael]

Actually, illegal aliens have more rights than citizens. I think I'm going to renounce my citizenship and declare myself to be an illegal alien just so I can have some of my rights restored.

Re:Tag this article 'showmeyourpapers'

[ravenspear]

Even more reason to get out and vote in November.

And BEFORE THEN. Vote now! Otherwise we usually get stuck with a lesser of two evils thing in the general election.

Three Cheers for Paranoia!!

[Foofoobar]

YAY! I for one welcome our new fascist state! I long for the day when I will feel safer because my every move is watched via sattelite and I am tracked like cattle from the moment I am born the the day the chip is burned out of by skull in an incinerator. God knows that at any moment even I too coud become a terrorist so its no wonder the state needs to watch me all the time and make sure I am a good consumer who does not question their motives.

Thank you George Orwe... I mean Bush and God Bless you.

Fun Fact: don't currently need an ID for domestic

[absorbr]

If you want to fly within the US, you don't really need any ID at all. They just stick you over to the side and give you the extra treatment. My friend lost his wallet and that's what happened. Internationally of course, you need a passport..

Enormous Security Hole

[edibleplastic]

I'm very much against Real ID for all of the reasons discussed here on Slashdot: the possibility for ID theft, the possibility for inappropriate use of personal information, the possibility of tracking our movements, etc.

But here's what's particularly egregious about this plan: nobody over 50 will have to get a Real ID for nearly 10 years! If Real ID is so unbelievably necessary to our national security, how can we allow this segment to not have an ID? Should we stop scanning older individuals at the airport because they are "less likely to be a terrorist"?

The Bush administration has repeatedly refused to comment on waterboarding because they say they do not want the terrorists to know which interrogation techniques we use. Well, DHS is telegraphing to the world what sort of security techniques we use: Pssst! We only check people less than 50!

Stupid stupid stupid! Hypocritical, hypocritical, hypocritical!

Re:Enormous Security Hole

[Osurak]

should we stop scanning older individuals at the airport because they are "less likely to be a terrorist"?
Actually, yes, in the article they do make the claim that older individuals are less likely to be terrorists.

From TFA:

The over-50 exemption was created to give states more time to get everyone new licenses, and officials say the risk of someone in that age group being a terrorist, illegal immigrant or con artist is much less. By 2017, even those over 50 must have a REAL ID-compliant card to board a plane.

Interestingly enough, Osama bin Laden is about to turn 51 in March (according to his wikipedia article.)

Re:Enormous Security Hole

[alan_dershowitz]

Look, the reason they gave is just a lie anyway. The real reason is that the farther back you go, the harder it is to prove the identity/citizenship of someone via birth records. They made the exemption because if they didn't, they would have IMMEDIATELY gotten a civil-rights challenge similar to what is being done to prevent picture-ID voting requirements in some states, they want this to go through with as few challenges as possible.

You can almost make a case for what the government is saying, there is a terrorist profile and it's not simple for hostile forces to adjust their demographics. Profiling didn't result in a spike in elderly Korean matron suicide bombers because terrorists don't have the same access to them as they do young disenfranchised Arabs. But it's not hard to see them working around an over-50 requirement. I don't believe this is the real reason, I believe they want to avoid a potential legal challenge.

"Who goes Nazi?" by Dorothy Thompson

[theGreater]

It may be Godwin, but it's also Harper's Magazine... from 1941.

http://harpers.org/archive/1941/08/0020122

-theGreater.

under 50

[Anonymous Coward]

So basically almost all politicians in the legislation will be exempt.
Nice...

Directions included

[dazedNconfuzed]

1984 was not supposed to be an instruction manual.

Actually, the appendex in "1984" IS an instruction manual.

ZOMG NINEELEVEN!!!!

[One Childish N00b]

From the article:

The September 11 attacks were the main motivation for the changes.

First of all, I'd be willing to bet most people who lost someone dear to them in the tragedy of 9/11 is downright insulted by the constant abuse of the memory of their loved one as a tool to cudgel the American public into accepting laws which have no point other than to increase the power and pervasiveness of the Federal government. The 9/11 attackers all had legitimate IDs, so what possible purpose would this have served back then? We might have known the names of the guys that did it sooner after the fact? Yeah, I'm sure that would have come in real handy.

Frankly, I know there's nothing anyone can do to stop the REAL-ID ball from rolling, so I'd just be happier if they came out and admitted they just want the power trip.

Re:ZOMG NINEELEVEN!!!!

[mjeffers]

Nine eleven nine eleven, nine eleven nine eleven; nine eleven nine eleven nine eleven. Nine eleven? Nine...eleven, nine eleven. Nine eleven, "Nine eleven! Nine eleven nine eleven (nine eleven) nine eleven."

Nine eleven: nine eleven nine eleven nine eleven, nine eleven! Nine elven nine eleven. Nine elven...

nine (eleven) {
        nine eleven;
        nine eleven;
        nine eleven (nine eleven) {
                nine eleven;
        }
        nine eleven {
                nine;
        eleven
                nine eleven;
        }
        nine eleven;
}

Nine eleven nine eleven, nine eleven. //Nine eleven

Hello Mayor Giuliani. Didn't figure you for a slashdot poster but welcome!

Re:Fake IDs

[Jaysyn]

Most politicians (& probably voters) are over 50, so it's not an inconvenience to them.

Re:Tag this article 'showmeyourpapers'

[JohnnyKrisma]

Great idea, but sadly this is probably one of those issues that both parties agree upon.

Re:Fake IDs

[zulater]

"Out of curiosity, why the over 50 exemption?" The article says that it's to give states time to play 'catchup' and that people over 50 are unlikely to be terrorists or con artists. They still, however, need to be 'randomly' stripped searched at the airport.

So foreigners not welcome?

[OzPeter]

By 2014, anyone seeking to board an airplane or enter a federal building would have to present a REAL ID-compliant driver's license, with the notable exception of those more than 50 years old, Homeland Security officials said

So how do you get on a plane or into a federal building if you don't have a REAL ID compliant license, like um ..

• people without drivers licenses? You know .. the ones who haven't had a need for a car
• Those pesky foreigners that keep visiting the US?

Wow

[Anonymous Coward]

When I got on the list for US citizenship (I'm a Brit with an American father) the US was a cool, open, free country that was somewhere that I couldn't wait to get too. In less time than it takes the INS to process a form, all of the above have been crapped on.

Mind you, I have been on the list for four years and in that time they have processed six months of applicants. Maybe by the time I get to the front of the queue the country will be cool again, who knows.

Done deal?

[DragonWriter]

Despite legislation passed in various states and objections by groups such as ACLU, this appears to be a done deal. You won't be able to board a plane after 2014 if you're under 50 without one.

An executive action (a set of regulations) that doesn't have its first deadline until near the end of the next presidential term, doesn't have its main effect until a year into the following term, and doesn't have its full effect until the end of that term is hardly a fait accompli.

There is plenty of time to push for executive modification of the regulations or legislative modification (or outright repeal) of the underlying law, and elections in between to focus that pressure around.

Outlaw ID, Say Swedish MPs

[hawks5999]

"In the past week, the civil liberties debate has exploded in Sweden, with numerous mainstream politicians finally having understood the issue. Last week, seven Swedish MPs wrote a prominent opinion piece saying that removing national ID is not just the best solution, it's the only solution. Now their number has increased to 13, and the issue continues to grow. Good summaries at www.aclu.org and ID Consortium. Original opinion piece in English here." One can dream, can't he?

Re:Tag this article 'showmeyourpapers'

[cayenne8]

"It won't make a blind bit of difference, but it might make you feel a little better about your friday.

Even more reason to get out and vote in November."

Why? Which candidate has come out against the Real ID act??

I'm pretty sure Ron Paul would be against it, but, who of the candidates with a realistic chance of being elected has come out against the Real ID act?

Anyone? Anyone? Bueller?

Why is this such a big deal?

[cashman73]

I really can't see why this is such a huge deal to some people. I mean, so what if you have to show an ID to board a plane, go to the bank, or whatever. We pretty much already do that anyway,... RealID seems to just try to apply uniform standards to all 50 licenses, which will make things easier. For example, I just moved from Arizona to Pennsylvania. Virtually everyone here double-checks my license when they ask me for it, mainly because 90% of them don't believe that it expires in like 2037 (gotta love Arizona ;-). Some of them even pull out that booklet of official license formats to check it. RealID would eliminate this necessity.

Plus, I'm not really buying the ACLU's arguments about losing civil liberties. Exactly what "civil liberties" are we losing here, anyway? I seriously doubt that, even with RealID, we're going to take a step back to the days of mid twentieth century Russia where they're going to throw you in the Gulag in Siberia for not being able to produce an ID when they ask you for it. In reality, chances are that they just won't let you on the plane, let you into the IRS building, or let you vote, or something like that,...

Re:Why is this such a big deal?

[mdmkolbe]

Besides the fact that the Real ID Act is a clear violation of the 10th amendment, I shouldn't have to prove who I am to board a plane (they aren't required for trains, cars, busses, subways, etc) and the bank should accept any reasonable proof that I am the owner of the account I am attempting to access (except for tax reasons they don't even need to know who I am, as long as they know I own the account).

If Social Security Numbers have tought us anything it is that any national means of identification will be abused until it is required for just about anything.

Re:Why is this such a big deal?

[cayenne8]

"I really can't see why this is such a huge deal to some people. I mean, so what if you have to show an ID to board a plane, go to the bank, or whatever. We pretty much already do that anyway,... RealID seems to just try to apply uniform standards to all 50 licenses, which will make things easier. For example, I just moved from Arizona to Pennsylvania. Virtually everyone here double-checks my license when they ask me for it, mainly because 90% of them don't believe that it expires in like 2037 (gotta love Arizona ;-). Some of them even pull out that booklet of official license formats to check it. RealID would eliminate this necessity.

Plus, I'm not really buying the ACLU's arguments about losing civil liberties. Exactly what "civil liberties" are we losing here, anyway? I seriously doubt that, even with RealID, we're going to take a step back to the days of mid twentieth century Russia where they're going to throw you in the Gulag in Siberia for not being able to produce an ID when they ask you for it. In reality, chances are that they just won't let you on the plane, let you into the IRS building, or let you vote, or something like that,..."

Wow...please tell me you aren't serious on all this??

Instead of asking why should we be concerned...like this is all good and normal, why aren't you asking WHY the govt. NEEDS to do this? Aside from knowing enough about you to collect taxes, what the hell does the govt. really need to know about you? What does anyone need to know about you in most cases? Nothing. Why would the govt. need to track your travels? What happened to the govt. not being able to deny your freedom to travel by any means you wish...without providing identity? It has never been needed in the past really. I remember flying without needing to show my ID at all. I remember not going through a security checkpoint. I remember being able to take people flying to the gate, or meeting them as they got off the plane.

I know there is an increased risk these days, and I don't really mind the security checkpoint. But, if I'm not carrying weapons, why the hell does the govt. need to know who I am or where I'm going? Hell, if a terrorist gets on a plane, with no weapons....what harm is he going to do??

And you example at the end of your post...they should answer your own question. Being barred from a public building where YOU pay taxes?? Not let you fly?

Ok..well, once they get you accepting that...when will you get mad? What will they have to prevent you from doing without a REAL ID before it bothers you?

What happens when this database gets cracked...and the 'definitive' ID system is broken, but, still depended upon? If you're ID gets messed up....you are screwed.

Re:Why is this such a big deal?

[balthan]

Would this have stopped the 9/11/2000 attacks?

Well, they weren't stopped, but they were postponed for a year.

Does this mean no flying for people under 16

[Egdiroh]

I know kids on an airplane can be annoying but to reform national ID law against the will of the states, and many of the people just to avoid that annoyance, seems a bit harsh.

It's your reality, not mine.

[postbigbang]

No, the US (United States Government) does not need a way to prove who you are. Your friend, the loan shark, gets defrauded for reasons that are his/her own policy.

Liberty is not having to prove who you are, unless faced with a probable-cause affidavit. We have an additional presumption of being not-guilty; having mandatory ID thwarts that presumption based on identity.

Your presumption that the world of liberty is dead because you feel there's a need to finger everyone is fallacious. You deserve what you get.

"Those who sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither" Ben Franklin. Fie on your suggestion.

They should do over-50 first as a means of testing

[FatSean]

If the tax-leeching baby boomers can figure it out, then the rest of the population will have no problems.

Internal passport, please

[davecb]

Hmmn, it says here your license was issued in
Georgia. What is your business here in Moscow?

--dave

Seriously.

[Irvu]

Yes actually there is a problem with having that if, it is mandatory. Therein lies the problem. If the government or indeed any twit in a uniform can demand your "RealID" and keep a log of it then your activities can be logged, your participation in, say, an anti-war demonstration can be cataloged and perhaps come back to haunt you. Ditto for your other unpopular views or activities.

The theory of valid ID may perhaps be arguable but the practice of what is done with it is very very different.

Post 9-11 there was a push both for RealID and the idea that "for our protection" police should be able to demand id at all times. The place where this and other activities has been exploited the most is in watching anti-war groups. Google it and you'll find a host of nonviolent noncriminal groups that have been catalogued, followed, identified, simply because they oppose the war. I myself have watched the (not so subtle) undercover cops infiltrate gatherings I was at and have probably been videotaped a few times. Add to this the "right" for them to demand my papers at all times and all of a sudden we have national tracking that does nothing to actually protect us.

This may sound like ranting to you but I assure you that it is not. The simple fact of the matter is that if the information is being gathered then it can be used against us by anyone in power or anyone with access. Leaving aside the fact that the biometric requirements of "RealID" are an invitation to identity theft (all info in one handy place).

Let us not also forget that on 9-11 the hijackers had valid ID. Not forged, not illicit, they had the real thing and they would have easily qualified for RealID. When boarding the planes they took their ID, the made no attempt to hide themselves under false names. They were not on the "no fly" lists. They simply walked through security with real drivers licenses and killed thousands. No "beefed up" card will change that.

Oh , the irony.

[Bill, Shooter of Bul]

Airport Security : Id Sir?

Me: Here you go

Airport Security : This is not a real ID, sir

Me: But I'm over 50.

Airport Security : No, you're not. You look like you are 15, not 50.

Me: But, my Id says I'm 50.

Airport Security : But its not a Real ID, could be a fake we only trust Real IDs.

Me: So I need to get a Real Id saying I'm 50 in order to prove to you that i don't need a Real Id?

Airport Security : Please Sir, step into this room and remove all clothing.

even better - an actual working solution

[poetmatt]

but of course, why not just have EVERYONE be required to have passports and accept that as ID like the rest of the world? It's not like the rest of the world does that or something.

Who cares

[jmdc]

I honestly don't understand what the problem is. There seems to be a hysterical "Show me your papers! OMG 1984!" knee jerk reaction whenever federal laws about driver's licenses are discussed. Why? Licenses exist in all states already. The set of things that licenses are required for is not changing. The states are just agreeing to make their licenses more similar. What's wrong with that?

Re:Who cares

[arbitraryaardvark]

I honestly don't understand what the problem is.
OK.
The set of things that licenses are required for is not changing.
Well, yes, it is.
Once upon a time, driver's licenses were for driving (and social security numbers were for social security.)
In Hiibel v Nevada, Hiibel was arrested for not showing his standing-by-the-side-of-the-road license.
In Indianapolis, they won't let me vote anymore, because I won't show my voting license until they get a warrant.
They like to pretend that you need an airline passenger license, although you really don't.
Gilmore v Gonzales, papersplease,org.
In Indiana, they are trying to say that my right to drink expires every 4 years; that I can't go into the bar till I renew my going into the bar license.
In Denver, some lady was asked for her bus-riding license.
In Chicago, I wasn't allowed to go up to Judge Posner's office because I didn't have a going-up-to-judge-Posner's-office license. (I paid some guy $20 to run the paperwork upstairs for me.)

I'm not sure we have the right take on what this item of news is about. Here's the wall street journal TFA
TFA.
I'm not sure I'm reading it right, but it looks like the feds semi-caved,and are putting off till tomorrow what they can't get away with today. But they are tricky, and we should look for analysis from somebody who knows this stuff - maybe EFF or EPIC.

Above post is insightful and informative.

Re:And if you DON'T have a driver's license...????

[Nyeerrmm]

I'd assume they do the same thing they do now. Either they go without, which prevents them from getting on an aircraft anyway as far as I know, or they get a non-driver ID, which at least in Oklahoma are exactly like the DL only with a 'Not a Valid Driver's License' or something similar printed on it.

Not a whole lot different from the current state of things as far as I know.

Give it time

[RingDev]

First you get an ID.

Then you need that ID to fly.

Then you need that ID to leave the country.

Then you need that ID to get into the country.

Then you need that ID to vote.

Then you need that ID to cross state borders.

Then you need that ID to buy gas.

Then you need that ID to be a legal citizen.

Slowly but surely, it will become a 'Show me your papers' issue. Imagine just walking down the street, a cop sees you, maybe he's having a bad day, maybe you roughly match the description of a wanted criminal, he approaches you and asks for you national ID. You don't have it though, because you were just going for a walk. Next thing you know, you're heading down town, handcuffed in the back of a crown vic. Sure, they'll let you out, once you can get a friend to bring your ID in, or go through the red tape to get the State to produce the paper work, but by that point you've been printed, your arrest has been recorded, and you're out a few hours to a few days getting everything straightened out.

Fear mongers will use it as a tool against illegal immigrants first. By requiring the national ID to be able to do the most mundane of things, they'll push aliens further out of the legal realm. Then all it would take is another attack to spur off a series of knee jerk reactions that lead to certain racial/ethnic groups having their cards pulled, leaving them as 2nd class citizens, virtually outlaws because they have no ID to prove their legitimacy in the US.

Yes, it's a paranoid delusion. But so was the idea that the US would use black site prisons, suspend habeas corpus, and invade a sovereign nation on manufactured intelligence. Given enough time, the system will be abused, and civil liberties will be eroded.

And the whole time, this card will do nothing to make our country more secure.

-Rick

Re:Give it time

[HomelessInLaJolla]

Imagine just walking down the street, a cop sees you, maybe he's having a bad day, maybe you roughly match the description of a wanted criminal, he approaches you and asks for you national ID. You don't have it though, because you were just going for a walk. Next thing you know, you're heading down town, handcuffed in the back of a crown vic.
...
Yes, it's a paranoid delusion. Sadly it's not. It's happened to me. When I lost my temper over the abuse of power and began demanding that the officer observe the most basic concept of rights (eg. not be detained indefinitely on the sidewalk just for his personal chat) he cuffed me and sent me for a 3-day psyche eval, and the city put the bill for the ambulance transport on my credit record. There's also the issue of prospective employers, when going through the standard background check, inquiring,"What's this?" Try pursuing a professional career after explaining that to the hiring HR rep. On the job advancement opportunity, if you get hired, just went to zero, for life.

Five years later, it's still there, and there isn't an attorney alive who will bother with the case pro bono, they've all said,"For a $5000 retainer fee I can begin looking into the relevant laws."

Re:Give it time

[origamy]

You already need an ID to:
- buy liquor or cigarettes
- fly
- cross the border to other countries
- prove you are a citizen and can be employed

What's wrong with having a single ID system that matches all states? I live in CA and I've seen IDs from Hawaii, New York and Florida. To me they're all "nicely laminated pieces of plastic or paper", as good as IDs from a college, library, etc.

- How is someone supposed to know if a state ID is true, or forgery? Especially an out-of-state one?
- Should a business keep a book with all 50 different state licenses in order to find out if they're valid?

And, honestly, people should be asked to present an ID to vote, because if not, how would I know someone voted saying they were me? Sure we should trust each other, but these things happen because people abuse the system, and rules are created to avoid that.

Honestly, all they're saying is that all IDs should "look the same" and contain the same set of information. You can be paranoid and say you don't want one, but then you cannot enjoy of the "freedoms" you'd want to, mainly because there would be no way for anyone to prove that you are who you say you are.

I personally never understood how such a developed country could not have a simple unified ID system.

Misleading Title

[ArcherB]

The title states:

National ID Cards Mandated in the US, If You're Under 50 But the summary states:

US Homeland Security Department has mandated Real ID for drivers licenses. While a driver's license is an ID, an ID is not necessarily a driver's license. Will they mandate Real ID for passports? Passports are ID. Will they mandate it for library cards? Those can also act as ID.

Nowhere does this plan call for citizens to carry ID, nor does it affect anything other than driver's licenses.

Two out of three...

[Roger W Moore]

War is Peace,
Freedom is Slavery,
Ignorance is Strength

Well thanks to Mr. Bush the US has managed to achieve 2 out of 3 so I guess now he's working on the 'freedom' angle...

Read it again

[dazedNconfuzed]

Go re-read the appendix to "1984".

Yes, it's written in a past-tense explanatory manner.
However, it is so thorough and detailed and systematic as to be, for most practical purposes, an instruction manual.

The difference between "how did you do X" vs. "how should you do X" is often negligible.

(And as for "-1 Wrong": sometimes the facts presented in a post are, objectively, wrong. A moderator should be able to facilitate downplaying factually erronious material, rather than having to shout among the masses. The whole POINT of a -1 moderation, whatever the reason, is to prevent crap from floating to the top.)

First they came for the Jews, but I was not a Jew

[megaditto]

Who else liked internal paper control? Hitler, Stalin, Mao... (and the Neocons/Neolibs now, apparently)

Part of the problem is that NI really is a nice tool in shutting out the undesirables (you can't get a job, you can't travel, you can't use banks, can't rent or even pay a lot of your bills unless the Govt says you can).

So yes, unfortunately National ID really does work against criminals. The question we should be asking is who decides who is a criminal (and can they be trusted).

That's a relief

[lewp]

Fortunately the calendar stops at 2012.

Too much emotion, not enough logic

[guinzuz]

People are getting WAY too knee-jerk emotional about this rather than taking the time to read and understand what the regulations say. Statements "Without one of the new IDs you will be unable to board a plane after 2014 if you are under 50" aren't factually accurate: you can continue to use a passport or other federal ID as well.

People hear the term "National ID" (which Real ID is not) and instantly think Nazi Germany or Stalinist Russia and throw up their hands in disgust rather than trying to actually understand what Real ID actually is(which admittedly does take more effort).

Myth: This will be a National ID that all citizens will be required to obtain.
Fact: Each state will continue to issue IDs. There will be little if any change in the actual card itself in most states. No one will be required to obtain a Real ID.

Myth: The card will contain a "chip" that will allow the govt. to track individuals.
Fact: The Act calls for a "machine readable" technology. DHS has explicitly ruled out RFID tags and other chips in favor of 2D barcodes.

Myth: The MRZ on the card will not be encrypted and susceptible to skimming.
Fact: 46 states currently use the 2D barcodes. None are encrypted. The information on the MRZ is exactly the same information found unencrypted on the front of the card (It's even readable by people!).

Myth: All DL information will be housed in one giant database which will make it easier for identity thieves to steal your identity
Fact: Each state will continue to operate independent databases. States will be required to check with other states to ensure that a person only has one valid ID at a time.

No

[Unlikely_Hero]

I will not get one. I will continue leading my regular life. I will avoid airplanes if I must and get to my destination some other way.
I will never carry one of these things. Their intent is evil.
I would rather be dead than live my life as a slave, even a tiny bit.

Give up much?

[Sylver Dragon]

So, the nose of the camel is already in the tent, so there is no point trying to stop it now? If anything we need to start the push the other direction and start trying to wake people up to the problems of 24/7 monitoring, before it becomes a reality.

Pull your heads out of your asses you fucking Yanks.

Yup, us Yanks have done a pretty good job of planting our heads up our collective asses recently. Sometime back after WWII we just sort of gave up on personal responsibility, we gave up on taking care of ourselves, we gave up on trying to keep our republic. And look where it has gotten us. We decided that we didn't want to be responsible for ourselves anymore, and we asked the government to do it for us. And, as is its nature, the government was willing to do anything to allow itself to expand.

It has been a death spiral ever since. The more bad things which happen, the more we run to the government to fix it; the government expands to try and do so, and fails because the solutions for most of our problems can only come from the people themselves taking responsibility for themselves and their communities. Undeterred by the continuous failure of government to actually solve social problems, the people keep running back to it and screaming, "fix it!" And the government continues to grow. Eventually, this will come back to haunt us. Eventually, the next step in government growth will be a police state and actual tyranny, and the US people will cheer its coming. It will be to later generations to suffer and die to throw it off again, but at least those with their heads up their asses will have a few brief days of serenity, believing that they are safe. Until the jackbooted thugs show up at their door in the night for thinking the wrong things.

We have a chance to stop this, and the time is now. It will be far easier to stop the growth of a police state, and deflate the government and put it back in its little box before it reaches the critical mass of tyranny. Right now, we still have some dregs of liberty left. We can still dissent, we can still speak our minds and we can still try and change things without the jackbooted thugs arriving in the night. How much longer that will last no one rightly knows; but, the time to fight is not when the boot is on your neck, the time to fight is when you are still on your feet and have a chance.

RealID is not, by itself, much of a threat. It is, though, a small piece in a much larger puzzle of out of control government tyranny. We don't resist it, deride it and try to stop it just because of itself. We do so because we can step back and see the much larger picture which is coming together, and it scares us. Stopping RealID won't stop that picture altogether either, but it will make it harder, it will create a disruption and that is good. Keeping our republic is not a matter of winning any one fight, it is a matter of a continuous struggle against anything which threatens any small piece of it. It is exhausting and will only end when we give up and let our republic die.

"Well Doctor, what have we got, a republic or a monarchy?"
"A republic if you can keep it." --- Benjamin Franklin

No problem

[hawk]

I'll just show my ID showing that I don't need to show my realid . ..

hawk

Baby Boomer Tyranny

[Doc Ruby]

What is it about being 50+ in 2014 that makes you a security nonrisk? Well... it makes you a Baby Boomer, since you'd have to be born before 1964, and since the life expectancy is about 75, probably dead if you're from the previous generation.

This fake Terror War is really just Baby Boomers attacking the next generation even harder than they did the previous generation when they first started to grab power in the 1960s. Now that they've got all the power, they're the worst tyrants the country has ever had.

If they're so afraid, they should just stay home.

And let's stick to flea bites, shall we?

[alexhmit01]

Look 9/11 was a frightening day, because 30 minutes later and 50 stories lower and 50,000 people died. For the first time since the War of 1812, the US Mainland was hit in war. We were all generally terrified of becoming like Israel in the early 1990s at the beginning of the upswing that followed Oslo.

It's not the fear of a 3000 casualty hit and loss of buildings... it's the fear of something bigger.

The fact is Al Qaeda is relatively overblown. They may be the only group with a global reach, but their global reach isn't that significant. Think about it, they got 19 guys in to hijack planes when the assumption was don't fight hijackers, they generally let everything go peacefully. They hit two buildings, but before they were supposed to (they obviously wanted to simultaneously hit them after 9 AM to maximize damage), 30 minutes apart, and too high to maximize damage.

The fact is, for all the bluster of Islamic Terrorists, they haven't done anything impressive. The most impressive operation was Hezbollah's holding off of Israel, and even that was a joke. They claimed a military victory, but only in the Arab world can your land be occupied by a foreign power, you hold none of their territory, and your roads and bridges are destroyed yet you are victorious because it took more than a week to wipe you out. That, like 9/11, is overplayed. Israel retooled their military once they had a reminder that "surrounded by enemies" isn't just PR, it's real and requires your military be prepared for an actual war, not just policing malcontents in disputed land, and by the time people heard on the 4th plane that they weren't negotiating, they were blowing things up, the people on the plane took it over and ended the issue.

That said, we should keep an eye on things, because these people do just want to inflict lots of damage... fortunately they aren't that bright. If you haven't noticed, every middle eastern "nuclear weapons program," despite years of effort, somehow is always X years/months away, where X is always longer than the Manhattan project. I have no doubt that the Arab world has it's share of brilliant minds (they were the scientific leaders for centuries), but in the Arab world, decades of oppressive dictatorships have managed to kill or exile every independent thinker, and now they seem incapable of anything impressive, and their government projects are run by total morons.

If Al Qaeda had their act together, 9/11 would have been a start to a wave. Hitting soft targets every week would have caused massive financial collapse in America... if everyone was scared to go to shopping malls because bombs were going off weekly, consumer spending would have contracted and US economic might would have fell apart. Fortunately, the Islamic terrorists aren't that bright, and are more interested in big flashy things to make recruiting videos, not about actually waging war with the US. These movements need a steady supply of naive, bored young teenagers and 20 somethings, so their goal is projects that would be exciting to an upper middle class Arab youth that is bored with life.

Instead of living on daddies money and getting stoned in college while talking up socialism over the pizza put on the Gold Card, like their American counterparts, they can convinced to blow themselves up to fight the US/Israel/Zionism and martyr themselves. The terrorists #1 goal is recruiting more foot soldiers, actually hurting us is a distant second.

Part of it makes sense...

[vanyel]

...it's perfectly reasonable to set a standard for how id is verified and secured. The only part that is unreasonable is anything that causes the info to get moved up to the federal level. Though even that's really a lost cause: ssn already provides that, and with the requirement to have passports even to go to canada and mexico, the vast majority of us already have our "papers".

I wonder if it would be possible to do a physical equivalent to openid?

CNN says that 17 states have refused to do this

[WillAffleckUW]

According to the current CNN article, 17 US states have either State Constitutions that legally override this non-interstate commerce regulation or have otherwise sued on behalf of the legal State Privacy rights of their citizens.

You can read about the legal suits by 17 states and decide if this is just Big Brother, or a bunch of privacy-hating anti-American bureaucratic incompetents who hate our values.

But it should be noted that the 17 states represent more than 50 percent of the US economy, and most legal jurists agree that it is unlikely that the US Supreme Court will strike down the states legal objections. Unless they want us to activate our state militias - and considering we control most of the armed forces, that might not be such a great concept.

Chicken Run

[smoker2]

While I'm not a US citizen, the situation is similar in the UK. I am against any form of all pervasive ID monitoring system. Many people cannot see the reasoning behind it, but freedom is not just the ability to go about your life in peace and do what you want, but also to do things that others don't want.

Why would I want to commit criminal acts ? Well, I don't know, *yet*. What is criminal tomorrow may be something that is perfectly legal to do today. Even if it is illegal today, I may find myself in a situation where I am compelled to commit a criminal act, for whatever reason, be it for my own safety or liberty. Laws, after all, are formulated for the masses, they are not suitable for imposing on 100% of the people 100% of the time. That sounds elitist, but every person is an elite of one.

Take drugs for instance. (I don't want to get into specific examples, because they detract from the main principle, but)- If I grow and smoke my own cannabis, who exactly am I harming ? I am not financing terrorists, I am not financing columbian warlords or the Taliban, and as I consume all I grow, I am not corrupting schoolkids, by hanging around the playground trying to push it on others. The only "crime" is that I am not paying tax on my pleasure. But because the law works in respect of the masses, I am penalised for a purely personal action, because you can't trust everybody to be so honest and responsible. Why should I suffer the loss of my freedom because others can't be trusted ? (This is why I don't want to get into examples, there will be loads of posts spouting crap about we all have to give up certain freedoms for the good of society).

To get back to the main point, my ability to break the law. Freedom includes the ability to break the law, if I so choose. If we are to have a moral society, it must be at the choice of that society, not imposed upon it. I don't murder, steal, rape etc, not because they are illegal, but because I have no inner drive compelling me to do so. I don't need a law to tell me not to do these things. The law is not designed to prevent me from doing these things either, it exists to provide a framework in which those who do commit such acts can be punished. Remember that part, it's important - Law provides a framework for punishment.
Now while I may not commit murder, I do quite often break the speed limit, or watch a downloaded movie. These are not unspeakably evil acts, but they are breaking the law. There are other situations in which I could conceive of breaking more serious laws. The point is, until I reach a situation, I have no way of knowing what I might have to do. To voluntarily submit to laws which restrict my freedom of action now, without knowing how that will affect my future freedom would be dumb.
I use Linux. One of the main reason for that choice is, Linux is not Microsoft. If there were a law passed which made the use of unauthorised operating systems illegal, then you can bet MS would be the legal choice. Windows is already one of the most controlling environments available, so if it were influenced by govt. then all sorts of horrible scenarios present themselves. Under such a system, Linux (or another free OS) would be the only sane choice. But of course it would be illegal. Oh dear, I'm a criminal.

Now we come to REAL ID and other such governmental record keeping. This kind of lawmaking serves no purpose other than to make the lives of those in power easier. That is to say, they get to consolidate their power over the rest of us, by closing off all avenues of escape or evasion. Well if you haven't paid taxes for 5 years and the govt. is chasing you, then the law makes sense. But if you just want to remain quietly anonymous, the the law works against you. You are part of the system, whether you are a criminal or not. And don't give me any of that "if you've got nothing to hide" crap. That's a childs argument to trick you into showing your hand. How many people who use that argument walk around naked ?

Maybe I'm getting old, but