National ID Card Rules Unveiled

Ryan Singel - 03.01.07 2:00 PM

Homeland Security officials released long-delayed guidelines that turn state-issued identification cards into de facto internal passports Thursday, estimating the changes will cost states and individuals $23 billion over 10 years.

The move prompted a new round of protest from civil libertarians and security experts, who called on Congress to repeal the 2005 law known as the Real ID Act that mandates the changes.
Critics, such as American Civil Liberties Union attorney Tim Sparapani, charge that the bill increases government access to data on Americans and amplifies the risk of identity theft, without providing significant security benefits.

"Real ID creates the largest single database about U.S. people that has ever been created," Sparapani said. "This is the people who brought you long lines at the DMV marrying the people at DHS who brought us Katrina. It's a marriage we need to break up."

Homeland Security officials point to the 9/11 hijackers' ability to get driver's licenses in Virginia using false information as justification for the sweeping changes.

"Raising the security standards on driver's licenses establishes another layer of protection to prevent terrorists from obtaining and using fake documents to plan or carry out an attack," Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said in a press release.

The 162 pages of proposed rules (.pdf) require:

Applicants must present a valid passport, certified birth certificate, green card or other valid visa documents to get a license and states must check all other states' databases to ensure the person doesn't have a license from another state.

States must use a card stock that glows under ultraviolet light, and check digits, hologramlike images and secret markers.

Identity documents must expire before eight years and must include legal name, date of birth, gender, digital photo, home address and a signature. States can propose ways to let judges, police officers and victims of domestic violence keep their addresses off the cards. There are no religious exemptions for veils or scarves for photos.

States must keep copies of all documents, such as birth certificates, Social Security cards and utility bills, for seven to 10 years.

However, many difficult questions, such as how state databases will be linked or how homeless people can get identity documents, were left unanswered by the proposed rules. Citizens of states that don't abide by the guidelines will not be able to enter federal courthouses or use their identity cards to board a commercial flight.

Sophia Cope, a staff attorney at the centrist Center for Democracy and Technology, says the rules only mention privacy once.

"The Real ID Act does not include language that lets DHS prescribe privacy requirements, so there are no privacy regulations related to exchange of personal information between the states, none about skimming of the data on the magnetic stripe, and no limits on use of information by the feds," Cope said.

The Real ID Act, slipped into an emergency federal funding bill without hearings, originally required states to begin issuing the ID documents by May 2008. The proposed rules allow states to ask for an extension until Jan. 1, 2010.

Cope wants Congress to step in and rewrite the rules. The ACLU and Jim Harper, a libertarian policy analyst at the Cato Institute who specializes in identity and homeland security issues, agree.

"With five-plus years behind us, now is the time to be looking at what works and what doesn't work," Harper said. "Students of identification know that a national ID does not help with security."

Maine has already declared it will not follow the rules, and other states are close to joining that rebellion. In Congress, a bipartisan coalition is forming around bills that would repeal portions of the Real ID Act, but it is unclear if today's rules will slow or accelerate these efforts.

Article Link
_____________________

I think the idea of a national ID card only looks good on paper. This would work if ALL people would cooperate - which they won't. That translates only law abiding citizens will abide by the law. Those are the people that will actually be tracked and their privacy invaded.

Now how do you convince criminals, law breakers or those who think the law is inconvenient to go along with the rules of obtaining a legitimate ID card? How would you convince those working under the table that they need an ID card to work? (That means those who are mowing lawns, busing tables, doing landscaping, housekeepers, building houses in developments, and working in fields, etc.)

I've worked under the table in the past for extra money. I know a lot of people who have. Who I worked for would not have needed for me to have any kind of ID card.

Americans are hiring illegals to save money, get work done, and/or to possibly be shifty on their taxes. These Americans know that they are in the wrong.

An ID card will not change this attitude. Saving money will always win out most of the time. And FYI people are being overtaxed anyway.

What about 'plants' in our nation that live here, possibly born here, keep their nose clean and obtain a national ID card? Believe it or not, people can be recruited in hometown USA - or anywhere else for that matter.

Will the rest of the world go along with a world ID card? Would that be next? Do we stop all travel in and out of the U.S. to keep those out who do NOT have an acceptable ID card, because their nation doesn't feel that they should go along with it.

We don't need or want the New World Order. Even though it might seem like a good idea in how to deal with criminals, law breakers, and those who act as if the law is inconvenient.

I believe most American's will not wish to live in a fascist state - unless of course you might possibly be Michael Moore.
~
An open letter to Michael Moore
28 September 2004 - World Socialist Web Site
~
American ideals are not compatable with Socialism or Fascism.

There is a cost to this, and this does not equate a free society.

There are also costs to having a truly free society.

I don't think that this ID card will help with terrorism or illegal immigration.

The bureaucrats in Washington are clearly out of touch with the people. I'm seeing, of late, we have an emperor with no clothes.

An idea that I have is that everyone who is really bold could decide to disconnect from these two out of touch main parties, and become an independent.

( We did in my house last year. Now I feel free to look at all my options. It's a good feeling too. My dad read me the riot act when he found out I had the nerve to be a republican. I actually finally changed my mind on being a republican once I started to sense deception on the part of the administration. I didn't like the idea of the Port's being under foreign control or helping in this push for nuclear power. I will not be convinced that it is a good idea.

I'm not going to be disrespectful or bash the President however. I don't always agree with him on what he decides to do, however. I believe in a united front and focus for our nation. )

It's easy to do to change party affiliation. If enough people do that the republican and democratic party might get a bit nervous. It would mean that they would lose some of their expected base, and maybe would have to look at what the people might actually be interested in - and in their actual opinion.

- -Think about it.

If the government gets used to routinely passing laws to force people to live in a 'right' or government approved way, they get to like it. It also might be more difficult to turn back the tide back once it's figured out how it's not a good idea for the government to obtain so much control in the first place.

The government can overtake the people, and then can become powerless to change it.

Look around the world and to history. There are plenty of examples.

I learned this recently, now I'm becoming like my Dad. He's been saying stuff like this for I don't know how long, and I didn't really pay enough attention to stuff he was saying - No I'm not being disrespectful. ( Some of the stuff he had to say wasn't always so good.) I listened to him though.

I've been finding him to be more right than not at times.