New Drivers License

[rickjump1 0]

Got this off Excite.com....New Security Rules for Driver's License

Jan 10, 9:18 PM (ET)

By DEVLIN BARRETT


WASHINGTON (AP) - Americans born after Dec. 1, 1964, will have to get more secure driver's licenses in the next six years under ambitious post-9/11 security rules to be unveiled Friday by federal officials.

The Homeland Security Department has spent years crafting the final regulations for the REAL ID Act, a law designed to make it harder for terrorists, illegal immigrants and con artists to get government-issued identification. The effort once envisioned to take effect in 2008 has been pushed back in the hopes of winning over skeptical state officials.

Even with more time, more federal help and technical advances, REAL ID still faces stiff opposition from civil liberties groups.

To address some of those concerns, the government now plans to phase in a secure ID initiative that Congress passed into law in 2005. Now, DHS plans a key deadline in 2011, and then further measures to be enacted three years later, according to congressional staffers who spoke to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity because an announcement had not yet been made. DHS officials briefed legislative aides on the details late Thursday.


Without discussing details, Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff promoted the final rules for REAL ID during a meeting Thursday with an advisory council.

"We worked very closely with the states in terms of developing a plan that I think will be inexpensive, reasonable to implement and produce the results," he said. "This is a win-win. As long as people use driver's licenses to identify themselves for whatever reason there's no reason for those licenses to be easily counterfeited or tampered with."

In order to make the plan more appealing to cost-conscious states, federal authorities drastically reduced the expected cost from $14.6 billion to $3.9 billion, a 73 percent decline, according to Homeland Security officials familiar with the plan.

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; critics like the ACLU say that creates a system that is more likely to be infiltrated and have its personal data pilfered.

In its written objection to the law, the ACLU claims REAL ID amounts to the "first-ever national identity card system," which "would irreparably damage the fabric of American life."

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

The hijacker-pilot who flew into the Pentagon, Hani Hanjour, had a total of four driver's licenses and ID cards from three states. The DHS, which was created in response to the attacks, has created a slogan for REAL ID: "One driver, one license."

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.

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.

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.

Most states currently check Social Security numbers and about half check immigration status. Some, like New York, Virginia, North Carolina and California, already have implemented many of the security measures envisioned in REAL ID. In California, for example, officials expect the only major change to adopt the first phase would be to take the photograph at the beginning of the application process instead of the end.

After the Social Security and immigration status checks become nationwide practice, officials plan to move on to more expansive security checks, including state DMV offices checking with the State Department to verify those applicants who use passports to get a driver's license, verifying birth certificates and checking with other states to ensure an applicant doesn't have more than one license.

A handful of states have already signed written agreements indicating plans to comply with REAL ID. Seventeen others, though, have passed legislation or resolutions objecting to it, often based on concerns about the billions of dollars such extra security is expected to cost.

---_

Associated Press writer Eileen Sullivan contributed to this report.


Terrorists over 50 not a threat. Sure.

Do your part for global warming: ban beans and hold all popcorn farts.

[1969912 0]

Yeah, that sentence (...officials say the risk of someone [over 50 yo] being a terrorist... is much less.) is pretty stupid.

Hopefully, Real ID will never happen. Maine has passed a law prohibiting the state from participating, and another 20 states have passed bills opposing it. Another 20 have similar bills pending:

http://www.realnightmare.org/news/105/

Thanks for posting. I didn't know Real ID had become law.

"Once we got to the point where twenty/something's needed a place on the corner that changed the oil in their cars we were doomed . . ."
-NickDG

[Andrewwhyte 1]

Why are the states against it?
The second entry in the list on that link says:
SM 1003, urging the Congress to correct the unfunded mandate of the Real ID Act of 2005. (Passed Senate 29-0 on 2/19/07)
It looks like Arizona at least is not philosophically opposed; rather it the same old "unfunded mandate" turf war we see in so much legislation.

[Zipp0 1]

If they can make a REAL ID, crooks and terrorists can fake one. This is just fucking stupid. Improve physical security where it needs to be and this shit can be forgotten.

Note to terrorists: Recruit a few 50 year olds to carry your bombs and you are fine.

I mean seriously - how stupid ARE these fucking people???

--------------------------
Chuck Norris doesn't do push-ups, he pushes the Earth down.

[rickjump1 0]

Why have passports? They can be faked. New ID's, like a new weapon system, can buy time until your opponent can come up with a counter-measure.

Do your part for global warming: ban beans and hold all popcorn farts.

[Amazon 7]

You veal show me your papers...jah

[Zipp0 1]

Quote

Why have passports? They can be faked.

And they ARE faked. I think they sell them on street corners in Columbia. Anyway, those are for an international traveller.

The REAL ID is for American citizens. I HAVE a real ID. Several, actually. If my PA driver's license isn't good enough, in combiation with my Soc Sec card, too damn bad.

--------------------------
Chuck Norris doesn't do push-ups, he pushes the Earth down.

[Amazon 7]

Quote

If my PA driver's license isn't good enough, in combiation with my Soc Sec card, too damn bad.

You would think that as important as the SS card is they could come up with something that looks a LITTLE more professional...that has got to be one of the easist things in the world to fake.. sheesh.

[pirana 0]

I see nothing wrong with a difficult to fake, high tech, federally mandated ID that would be required for certain activities. If a person wanted to engage in the activities that require that ID, then they have to get one. It would be a choice.

As far as government agencies sharing data; I don't get why they already don't. They certainly collect a lot of it, and what is the point of collecting and holding a lot of the same information in a whole bunch of different places? Terribly inefficient. A central database would be good, and harm nobody (IMO having government agencies know who you are where you are, and when you engage in certain specific activities is not harmful). If that were to be abused, heavy punishment for the abusers.

If someone wants to void their social contract because their paranoid concerns outweigh the benefits society would derive from such a system, they are free to go live in cave or deep in the wilderness so they can bask in privacy. Unless a person is already doing that, their information is very easy to get for anybody who REALLY wants to get it anyway.

Imagine if every arrest warrant in the country were available to every government agency in the country at the cost of a couple keystrokes. Any interaction of any kind with the government, as well as engaging in certain select business activities would be impossible for these people. It would seem that a high tech society, with freely available information, and a 100% identifiable population, would make being a career criminal extremely difficult.

I know some disagree with that, but it's just a matter of where you are on the spectrum of what you think government should be allowed to do to carry out their charge. In today's world, a common form of highly secure personal identification would seem to be a very valuable tool; so valuable that it seems silly we are not there already.

" . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

[livendive 8]

The majority of pussies in this country will accept it with the standard "if you have nothing to hide..." rationale. The people who think the government should have full access to our lives to "protect us" are the flip side of the "Welfare is my right!" coin.

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[Zipp0 1]

Ah bullshit. We have had no attacks after 9/11, so obviously we don't need this shit. This is just nore crap to pay taxes on. This will create an entire government agency.

We don't need a Big Brother state. That is not America, and I will not allow it to become my America.

--------------------------
Chuck Norris doesn't do push-ups, he pushes the Earth down.

[wmw999 2,589]

Right now I'm just glad I'm over 50, and my passport doesn't need renewing for a number of years.

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[rickjump1 0]

Oh yeah? My brother can beat up your brother with you kicking and screaming.

Do your part for global warming: ban beans and hold all popcorn farts.

[rickjump1 0]

Quote

The majority of pussies in this country will accept it with the standard "if you have nothing to hide..." rationale. The people who think the government should have full access to our lives to "protect us" are the flip side of the "Welfare is my right!" coin.

Blues,
Dave

They already have full access to our lives. Now they want to fill in the cracks.

Do your part for global warming: ban beans and hold all popcorn farts.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Why are the states against it?

The primary reason is that is has been a huge unfunded mandate withouth the details spelled out yet. It's impossible to figure out how to get every single citizen in CA to show up physically to do this renewal when you don't have the full requirements.

fortunately the feds have dicked around long enough that I just got my renewal done. Otherwise, I was in month one of the new process. Somehow I don't think that would have been fun, like getting my passport renewed last year when the new regs for the Caribbean sort of kicked in.

[pirana 0]

Quote

The majority of pussies in this country will accept it with the standard "if you have nothing to hide..." rationale. The people who think the government should have full access to our lives to "protect us" are the flip side of the "Welfare is my right!" coin.

Blues,
Dave

Full access to our lives isn't the proposal. Just some basic information such as who you are, where you live, prior criminal history, outstanding warrants, in the explosives business, licensed to fly, etc. I'd bet it's all stuff that is stored somewhere already; just not in a manner that makes using it efficient or effective.

I see lots of folks blasting the government for lack of efficiency (myself included). Well, here is a chance to improve that by simply using existing information effectively.

I look forward to a Star Trek form of technology and the philosophy of it's use that preserves individuality while making it incredibly difficult to engage in illegal behavior. Between voice recognition, speech recognition, DNA reading, retinal scans, and the like; most of the pieces are already in place. Just a matter of time before criminals are forced so far underground they will probably just voluntarily surrender themselves to a penal colony.

Thowing that topic on the table will finally give the ACLU something to REALLY whine about.

" . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

If my PA driver's license isn't good enough, in combiation with my Soc Sec card, too damn bad.

You would think that as important as the SS card is they could come up with something that looks a LITTLE more professional...that has got to be one of the easist things in the world to fake.. sheesh.

Right!! When the SS program was started, people were assured that it was NOT for identification purposes.... try and get something done without it, today!!

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[Zipp0 1]

Quote

information such as who you are, where you live, prior criminal history, outstanding warrants, in the explosives business, licensed to fly, etc.

Why do they need that info about me in a central database?

The only reason is that they want to data mine the info to find potential criminals. That goes against everything this country stands for. A computer will spit out a guess, and then the feds come to do a 'sneak and peek' to see if you might be a crook. Sorry, no.

You want to stop hijackings? Secure the cockpit. You want to stop criminals from making bombs? Go for it. But the properly licensed people are not likely to be involved.

The next thing you know, they will want to control the thermostat in out homes.

--------------------------
Chuck Norris doesn't do push-ups, he pushes the Earth down.

[georgerussia 0]

Quote

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.

Yeah, those guys definitely know their job.
For example, Osama Bin Laden is celebrating his 51st birthday in 2008.

Quote

The hijacker-pilot who flew into the Pentagon, Hani Hanjour, had a total of four driver's licenses and ID cards from three states.

lol, I have four driving licenses from four countries. And three passports.

* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

[billvon 3,119]

>Yeah, those guys definitely know their job. For example, Osama Bin
>Laden is celebrating his 51st birthday in 2008.

Good point. We should put a special sticker on his driver's license so everyone knows he's a terrorist. Make sure he gets that extra screening at airports and whatnot.

[georgerussia 0]

Quote

Good point. We should put a special sticker on his driver's license so everyone knows he's a terrorist.

As well as Khaled Mashaal, and Ayman Al-Zawahiri.

* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

[Gene03 0]

Quote

I look forward to a Star Trek form of technology and the philosophy of it's use that preserves individuality...

And therein lies the rub.

“The only fool bigger than the person who knows it all is the person who argues with him.

Stanislaw Jerzy Lec quotes (Polish writer, poet and satirist 1906-1966)

[Amazon 7]

Quote

As well as Khaled Mashaal, and Ayman Al-Zawahiri.

Actually I worry more about the unknown converts like the Belgian girl who martyred herself in Iraq... and all of those who are like minded that are already here in this country... just waiting for their chance at the 72 virgins.... if the whole martyrdom thing is such a great deal... perhaps we can get the Imams and Ayatollahs.. and the leaders of those groups to go get their virgins before they run out of virgins.

[georgerussia 0]

Quote

Actually I worry more about the unknown converts like the Belgian girl who martyred herself in Iraq... and all of those who are like minded that are already here in this country... just waiting for their chance at the 72 virgins....

They do not have to wait for their virgins. It's old age stuff, and GOP should work more on that, utilizing Larry Craig and others' skills.

* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Good point. We should put a special sticker on his driver's license so everyone knows he's a terrorist. Make sure he gets that extra screening at airports and whatnot.

well, thanks to that totally random selection process, he was already getting searched at the airports.