Slashdot Mirror


TSA Moves Closer To Rejecting Some State Driver's Licenses For Airline Travel (nytimes.com)

HughPickens.com writes: Jad Mouawad writes at the NYT that a driver's license may no longer be enough for airline passengers to clear security in some states, if the Department of Homeland Security has its way the Department of Transportation will start enforcing the Real ID Act, which was enacted by Congress in 2005 following the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission. Homeland Security officials insist there will be no more delays. In recent months, federal officials have visited Minnesota and other states to stress that the clock was ticking. The message was that while participation was voluntary, there would be consequences for failing to comply. "The federal government has quietly gone around and clubbed states into submission," says Warren Limmer, a state senator in Minnesota and one of the authors of a 2009 state law that prohibits local officials from complying with the federal law. "That's a pretty heavy club."

Privacy experts, civil liberty organizations and libertarian groups fear the law would create something like a national identification card. Presently twenty-nine states are not in compliance with the act and more than a dozen have passed laws barring their motor vehicle departments from complying with the law, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. The new standards require more stringent proof of identity and will eventually allow users' information to be shared more easily in a national database. Marc Rotenberg, the president of the Electronic Privacy Information Center,says he is concerned with all the information being available on the cards in a way that makes it more shareable and notes that the recent theft of millions of private records from the Office of Personnel Management did not inspire confidence in the government's ability to maintain secure databases. "You create more risk when you connect databases,"says Rotenberg. "One vulnerability becomes multiple vulnerabilities."

9 of 428 comments (clear)

  1. Voluntary? by NoKaOi · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The message was that while participation was voluntary, there would be consequences for failing to comply.

    If there are consequences, I'm pretty sure that's the opposite of voluntary.

  2. Anonymous travel by mi · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Why can't I travel anonymously? In addition to airlines, Amtrak already requires ID as well. Buses are supposed to check it too, although they don't (yet?). Hitchhiking is illegal, while driving is a personal car requires a registered vehicle with license-plate scanners keeping records.

    Why can I not travel anonymously, exactly? How did we allow the Statists to play us so?

    --
    In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    1. Re: Anonymous travel by schnell · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Why can I not travel anonymously, exactly? How did we allow the Statists to play us so?

      Welcome to Nazi Germany.

      Oh fucking PLEASE. Godwin-ing this does nothing to improve the quality of discourse.

      Look, I am no fan of the TSA and the Security Theater bullshit apparatus they have set up. But it's not unreasonable to understand that your ability to travel anonymously is correlated to the vehicle you are traveling on and its ability to be hijacked and used as a weapon.

      You want to walk or bicycle, coast to coast, anonymously? Fine. Go right ahead.

      You want to drive a car? I think most of us can agree that you can do enough damage to lives and property with two+ tons of vehicle that the government should be able to 1.) minimally verify that you know how to drive one; 2.) know who you are in case you break the rules and need to be fined or punished; and 3.) have that driver's license revoked if you show you can't operate that vehicle responsibly. But if you want to drive coast to coast anonymously, you can do that. Stay within the speed limit and don't have any malfunctioning vehicle parts, and you have given no one Probable Cause to see you and your license. Avoid those particular toll roads where your license plate is photographed for billing purposes. (You may run into DUI checkpoints, which I think are of dubious constitutionality, but those are comparatively rare.) You can easily go anywhere in the US without anyone knowing who you are, where you're going or why.

      You want to travel by train or aircraft? Okay, nobody has hijacked a train in the US (AFAIK) in many decades, but at least for airplanes I think there's a generally understood common good in preventing those people who may pose a risk to a flying WMD from getting on board the aircraft. Is that really hard to understand? It's unlikely but not totally beyond the pale either that a train hijacking could kill everyone on board the train, let alone any bystanders. (Positive Train Control, which could avoid this, has yet to be implemented on Amtrak, sadly.)

      Long story short, the US Security Theater apparatus is bloated, inefficient, ineffective and overly intrusive. But to suggest that either 1.) it is impossible to travel across the US anonymously, or that 2.) the government doesn't have a reasonable right to know who is traveling on certain conveyances, is doctrinaire and unrealistic.

      --
      "95% of all Slashdot .sig quotes are incorrect or completely fabricated." -Benjamin Franklin
    2. Re: Anonymous travel by Will_Malverson · · Score: 3, Insightful

      But if you want to drive coast to coast anonymously, you can do that. Stay within the speed limit and don't have any malfunctioning vehicle parts, and you have given no one Probable Cause to see you and your license. Avoid those particular toll roads where your license plate is photographed for billing purposes.

      License plate scanners are everywhere.

  3. More Security Theater by the Gestapo TSA by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Yet more security theater from the Gestapo or Stasi like TSA.

    We're Americans. Traveling in our own country.

    None of your security measures are effective, and you know it.

    Stop helping the terrorists by making Americans live in Fear, and stop this farce.

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  4. Fuck the Patriot Act by AndyKron · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Fuck the Patriot Act. Anyone who flies buys into the bullshit that's killing this country.

  5. Re:National ID - what's wrong with it? by stomv · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It's one thing for Mickey Mouse to be registered. That action has no specific, direct outcome on an election. It's quite another for Mickey Mouse to vote.

    You've presented examples of voter registration fraud, not voter fraud.

  6. Whatever TSA - YOUR FIRED! by gabrieltss · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The states have a simple solution - KICK the TSA out of the state. 10th Amendment baby! Tell the TSA to allow people on the plane - or LEAVE the state.

    Real ID is unconstitutional as all HELL!! It IS a national "ID card" - which is ILLEGAL under the constitution. Those that see terrorists around every corner are weak paranoid LEMMINGS! And have been FULLY brainwashed by the government!

    Just remember the U.S. Government FUNDED and TRAINED Al Qada! Don't believe me - try reading your history! The CIA funded and trained the Mujahideen during the 80's to fight Russia in Afganastan. Who was the head of the Mujahideen? Osama Bin Laden! Where di Al Qada come from? The Mujahideen! Oh and while we are at it where did ISIS come from? Al Qada. Who the HELL do you think is behind all the "terrorism"? Your GOVERNMENT of course! Why would they do it? Look at all the TYRANNY that they have put into place in the name of "saving us from terrorists".

    Madison's statement IS coming true!
    "If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy."
    - James Madison

    --
    The Truth is a Virus!!!
  7. Not the best examples by mx+b · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The boiled frogs weren't paying attention — that's how. Smooth-talking lawmakers were introducing these "common sense" laws, while the objections from the disheveled principled ones were dismissed as "extreme" and "partisan".

    Or, you can cause a lot more damage to people and property with a motorvehicle compared to a bike or a horse, so it needed to be more regulated. People involved in car accidents likely appreciate the fact that cars are registered; remember the license plate and tell the authorities, even if they drive off, and we know who's responsible.

    I imagine that trains and planes have more regulation for similar reasons; as we now know, you could potentially cause a plane to crash into a building, for example. A train derailed can hurt lots of people and destroy lots of cargo. There's large responsibility again, so we do extra checks. If something goes wrong, we now have a shortlist of people to investigate.

    Not saying the system is perfect. I worry about the surveillance state too, and am not a fan of the TSA's decisions lately. But we must acknowledge that the current system evolved for reasons (like safety and responsibility) that need to be carefully balanced with our liberties. Don't "throw the baby out with the bathwater" as they say. But definitely voice concerns to your congresscritters, and keep it in mind in upcoming elections.

    The official right to keep and bear arms is another — and even more painful — example. You don't need a Wikipedia article — it is right there in the Bill of Rights. And yet, even the most liberal parts of the country consider it a mere privilege...

    Let me quote the 2nd Amendment for you:

    A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

    Note that phrase "well regulated" in the actual literal text of the Bill of Rights. Very very few people say that all guns should be taken away; instead, the argument is that we should actually follow the constitution and regulate guns. This probably includes at a minimum some mandatory training in proper usage and storage of guns and related equipment (note that "regulated" in this context was decided by the Supreme Court to mean "training"), as well as proper background checks (which effectively is a check that a person has the appropriate training and discipline, and hasn't violated such discipline and laws in the past). The free-for-all we currently have, particularly in the form of gun show loopholes, is the opposite of "well regulated" and should be fixed.

    People tend to forget the first half of the 2nd Amendment about the regulated militia, but it is important.

    Also, I dislike the generalizations and use of the word "liberal" as if its always a negative thing. It is fine to say you have a disagreement with a stance, but let's please not demonize groups of people and pretend that we aren't what we are -- a country with a diverse set of beliefs that really isn't easily categorized.

    As an aside, If you want your freedoms and the constitution respected more, vote for Bernie Sanders. He has said no to surveillance state, no to perpetual war, no to corporate control of the economy and elections, and coming from a small state, he is very moderate on gun regulation. Let's all agree to stop voting for the typical establishment candidates and vote for candidates like Bernie if we want to see real results.