Good News: Over 25 States in Legal Opposition of Real ID Act

One Federalized ID going down: here, and here.

Other like measures are sure to rear their ugly heads.

Vigilance in a day of Statism (both Republican and Democrat.)

Virginia’s General Assembly rejects REAL ID provisions

Very good news here.

"You're ID, Please." -- Required at a County Dump Site

Yes. It actually happened.

I was with my family on a short vacation in Florida. We had accumulated some garbage in one large bag. So I took a trip to the county dump. (We call them "convenience centers" where I live.)

The lady working there noticed that I wasn't from "around" there. She came out to see who dared to throw a bag of trash in the bin.

She asked me for ID.

I said, "You've got to be kidding."

She wasn't. Apparently there was a problem with people from other counties throwing there trash away there.

Thank goodness I passed muster and was "allowed" to throw away my trash--at a DUMP.

It's getting to be crazy out there.

If we have to show ID in order to throw away our trash, you can bet that society will ask for ID for just about anything.

We have survived as a society without this ID obsession for many years. We don't need to lose our minds (or our freedom) now.

This is just sheer lunacy.

Good for Sarah Palin!

A short comment embedded in this article reveals that Sarah Palin signed a law against the REAL ID Act.

Good for Sarah Palin.

These are interesting political times.

Family Security Matters: REAL ID = National ID

Jim Harper of the Cato Institute has written a post entitled Family Security Matters: REAL ID = National ID.

There is a lot of back and forth about REAL ID that goes like this:

"It's a National Id Card!"
"No, it's not!"
"Yes, it is!"
"Is not!"
"Is too!"
"Is not!"

But Harper's post reminds us that the argument ends up on "Is too!"

Governor signs bill to keep Arizona out of `Real ID'

Arizona stands against the REAL ID Act: For more, go here.

Missouri also joins the fray.

Anyone in Washington listening?

What Say Ye, Arizona?

State of Arizona
House of Representatives
Forty-eighth Legislature
Second Regular Session
2008


HOUSE BILL 2677



AN ACT

AMENDING TITLE 28, CHAPTER 2, ARTICLE 2, ARIZONA REVISED STATUTES, BY ADDING SECTION 28-336; RELATING TO THE REAL ID ACT OF 2005.

Be it enacted by the Legislature of the State of Arizona:
Section 1. Title 28, chapter 2, article 2, Arizona Revised Statutes, is amended by adding section 28-336, to read:
28-336. REAL ID act; implementation prohibited without legislative authorization

A. THIS STATE SHALL NOT PARTICIPATE IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE REAL ID ACT OF 2005 (P.L. 109-13, DIVISION B; 119 STAT. 302) UNLESS AUTHORIZED BY AN ACT OF THE LEGISLATURE. THE DEPARTMENT SHALL NOT IMPLEMENT THE REAL ID ACT OF 2005 UNLESS AUTHORIZED BY AN ACT OF THE LEGISLATURE AND SHALL REPORT TO THE GOVERNOR AND THE LEGISLATURE ANY ATTEMPT BY AGENCIES OR AGENTS OF THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY TO SECURE THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE REAL ID ACT OF 2005 THROUGH THE OPERATIONS OF THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY.

B. THIS SECTION DOES NOT PROHIBIT THIS STATE FROM ESTABLISHING A STATE SECURE IDENTIFICATION SYSTEM USING APPROPRIATE TECHNOLOGY AND STATE DATABASES.

Sometimes standing for freedom can be simple, straightforward, and free from fanfare.

All you have to have is courage, clarity, and will--every day.

For more, go here and here. (Tucson Citizen news story.)

National Security Presidential Directive and Homeland Security Presidential Directive

I've always been a Republican because I believe in limited government, freedom of the individual, the Bill of Rights (all 10 of them--the 2nd along with the 4th...and especially the forgotten 10th), and the Constitution (the spirit and the letter).

So when Republicans morph into another big-government, big-brother party, I have to cry foul. I never would have voted for Al Gore or John Kerry, but I have to say that George Bush has been a major disappointment in several key issues. (He's been strong on several key issues as well--for which I am grateful, but he's certainly a mixed bag. The net result is disappointment.)

A key disappointment is his support for surveillance over American citizens and control structures like the national id card called The REAL ID Act.

This link also shows his misplaced obsession with biometrics and the collection of personal information of innocent citizens.

When the Republicans undermine the nature of America by these kinds of measures, I wonder why I should be a Republican.

I've heard talk about smaller government all my life from this party.

The Republicans may have slowed down the rate of growth from time to time, but I've never seen the government become smaller.

Obviously, its all talk.

I guess George Bush's conservatism is "big hat, few cattle."

Debate Looks at Immigration Laws and Citizenship

PBS has posted a debate sponsored by the Miller Center of Public Affairs at the University of Virginia. Robert MacNeil was the moderator. The introduction says the debate "examined the current laws dealing with immigration and the possible plans to address the twelve million illegal immigrants currently living in the U.S."

One of the participants of the debate, Vernon Briggs said:

Well, I think, ultimately, we're going to have to get a counterfeit-proof identification card of some sort to be used in -- and hopefully it will be partially the Social Security card, but it's going to have to have biometric identifiers. It's going to be a transition that will require people to have photographs.

I mean, I have in my pocket a card, a Cornell faculty card. And the back of it, it says I am required to carry that card at all times when I'm on the campus of Cornell University. Every student carries that card.

So this idea that somehow I.D. cards are a big attack on civil liberties is a pure myth. But that's what's holding it up right now.

I am always amazed at how people do not discern things that are different.

Cornell University is not the federal government. No elaboration on this point should be necessary.

In traditional, freedom-oriented thinking, the expansion of the size and power of government necessarily entails a decrease in individual liberty.

The very existence of a national id card (a biometric-plus Social Security Card or REAL ID Card) is a violation of civil liberties. America is supposed to be different. It is supposed to be a free country.

Has Mr. Briggs asked the following questions?

1. Who owns the biometrics of a person? The individual or the government?

2. Should citizens be required, by legislative force, to carry around such a card? If so, why? To be scanned at a policeman's request on a moment's notice?

3. How many applications for this technology is Mr. Briggs willing to stomach?

4. Are our rights God-given or electronically doled out by the central government?

5. If the government "needs to know" something about a citizen, shouldn't 4th Amendment issues be raised?

6. Isn't a national id card simply the obtaining of real-time and continuous permission from the federal government just to function in society? Is such "permission" a Constitutional value? Why do free people need so much permission from the government?

7. Shouldn't we reduce or eliminate the number of government "services" that require so much ID?

8. Isn't such a card a massive empowerment of government? It reduces the individual to a string of digits to be electronically manipulated and recorded by powerful politicians and bureaucrats.

9. Shouldn't the power of government be continually pushed "down the ladder" to state and local governments, thereby making communities more personal, human, and accessible? Haven't we had enough of impersonal and dehumanizing expansion of government?

For more on this debate, go here.

Sensenbrenner: "We need to act like Republicans and vote like Republicans."

John Nichols reports that Sensenbrenner's outburst on Real ID sours GOP lovefest. He notes that the U.S. Rep. James Sensenbrenner from Wisconsin remarked, "We need to act like Republicans and vote like Republicans."

My point exactly!



I've not been a Republican all my life simply to see Orwellian measures like the REAL ID Act made into law--by so-called "conservatives" no less... I thought that fighting this kind of stuff was part of what the Cold War was all about.

I can only hope that Mr. Sensenbrenner can rethink his pet surveillance mandate (REAL ID)--and act like a Republican.

Read the opinion piece Sensenbrenner's real wrong to attack Huebsch on Real ID.

Read 'The Sensenbrenner Tax' abandons true conservatism.

Policy Forum: The REAL ID Rebellion: Whither the National ID Law?

From the Cato Institute:

POLICY FORUM
Wednesday, May 7, 2008
12:00 PM (Luncheon to Follow)

Featuring Mark Sanford, Republican Governor of South Carolina and Jon Tester, Democratic U.S. Senator from Montana. Moderated by Jim Harper, Cato Institute.

The Cato Institute
1000 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20001

Watch the Event Live in RealVideo
Listen to the Event in RealAudio (Audio Only)

On May 11, 2008, the statutory deadline for compliance with the REAL ID Act will pass without a single state meeting its requirements. Indeed, more than 17 states have passed legislation objecting to or outright refusing to implement this national ID law. Earlier this year, the Department of Homeland Security handed out extensions of the compliance deadline just for the asking, but state leaders from across the ideological spectrum refused even this small gesture of acquiescence. A REAL ID rebellion is underway, and it has ushered in a debate on whether the United States should have a national ID system. The debate didn’t happen when the law passed because Congress held no hearings, and there was no up-or-down vote on REAL ID in the Senate. Votes this year on REAL ID funding, or perhaps repeal of the national ID law, will reveal where Members of Congress stand on the question whether law-abiding American citizens should be practically or legally required to carry a national ID. Please join us to hear two prominent leaders present their distinct perspectives on REAL ID, identification policy, national and individual security, identity fraud, and privacy.

Cato events, unless otherwise noted, are free of charge. To register for this event, please fill out the form below and click submit or email events@cato.org, fax (202) 371-0841, or call (202) 789-5229 by noon, Tuesday, May 6, 2008. Please arrive early. Seating is limited and not guaranteed. News media inquiries only (no registrations), please call (202) 789-5200.

If you can't make it to the Cato Institute, watch this forum live online.

Be sure to check it out.

Administration Set to Use New Spy Program in U.S.

A Washingtonpost.com story reports:

The Bush administration said yesterday that it plans to start using the nation's most advanced spy technology for domestic purposes soon, rebuffing challenges by House Democrats over the idea's legal authority.

Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said his department will activate his department's new domestic satellite surveillance office in stages, starting as soon as possible with traditional scientific and homeland security activities -- such as tracking hurricane damage, monitoring climate change and creating terrain maps.

Sophisticated overhead sensor data will be used for law enforcement once privacy and civil rights concerns are resolved, he said. The department has previously said the program will not intercept communications.

"There is no basis to suggest that this process is in any way insufficient to protect the privacy and civil liberties of Americans," Chertoff wrote to Reps. Bennie G. Thompson (D-Miss.) and Jane Harman (D-Calif.), chairmen of the House Homeland Security Committee and its intelligence subcommittee, respectively, in letters released yesterday.

The reason Mr. Chertoff can say things like this is that DHS--led by Republicans--has abandoned any thought whatsoever about our Constitutional heritage of freedom.

People who cannot see the massive increase in government desire, capability, and will to abandon any vestiges of freedom need to be jolted from their stupor. REAL ID is just one expression of this trend.

The Republicans have lost their minds.

Where are conservatives to go?

HT: Drudge

A "Must Read" Post by Jim Harper on REAL ID

Jim Harper posted "Some Myth-Busting Is Quite Revealing"

After DHS Secretary Chertoff’s testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee this week (at which he was apparently rebuked for “bullying” states on REAL ID compliance) he sat down with a group of bloggers to discuss things.

Harper gives Secretary Chertoff points for making himself available for discussion but goes on to reveal why--in spite of DHS's "myth-busting"--REAL ID is still a problem for American-style freedom.

It is very hard to design information technology systems that do not collect and retain information. The current secretary’s personal opinion about databases just isn’t good evidence of whether or not there will be databases of information about the comings and goings of law-abiding Americans. Chances are very good if REAL ID is implemented that there will be.

My only thought is, "There's no chance about it. There will be."

For the "why's" and "wherefore's" of Jim's helpful insights, read more here.

Also, check out "Chertoff’s Defense of REAL ID is “Dead Wrong.”"

Eagle Forum Seems Confused about Freedom and REAL ID

In 1998, the Eagle Forum posted Liberty vs. Totalitarianism, Clinton-Style: Monitoring by I.D. and Database. The article rightly said:

Two of the principal mechanisms by which the rulers of 20th century police states maintained their control over their people were the file and the internal passport....

Unknown to most Americans, coordinated plans are well underway to give the Federal Government the power to input personal information on all Americans onto a government database. The computer will record our school, business, medical, financial, and personal activities, and track our movements as we travel about the United States.

These plans were authorized by the so-called conservative Congress and are eagerly implemented and expanded by the Clinton Administration liberals.

The law orders "consultation" with the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators. AAMVA, a pseudo-private, quasi-government organization, has long urged using driver's licenses, with Social Security numbers and digital fingerprinting, as a de facto national I.D. card that would enable the government to track everyone's movements throughout North America.

That was 1998.

The striking--and confusing--point is that Phyllis Schlafly supports the REAL ID Act. The REAL ID Act may not contain all the measures the frightening legislation of 1998 had (REAL ID is "optional" to carry--optional, but required if you want to live and function in the U.S. Nor does it--as yet--require biometrics...), but REAL ID is very much the kind of scheme that was proposed in 1998!

1. REAL ID networks all 50 state databases into one. Technically, this is "not a national database." But networking makes such a technicality meaningless. It is one network government can access through a computer. To say this is not a national database is serious confusion.

2. REAL ID requires "machine readable technology." The REAL ID cards can be scanned anywhere, anytime by the government for identification purposes. Sound American? DHS Secretary Chertoff has said that REAL ID can be used for "countless other activities." Sound minimal?

3. REAL ID effectively turns the driver's license into an internal passport for flying, banking, working, and soon to be for "countless other activities."--as Mr. Chertoff has said.

4. REAL ID is a power-play where Washington forces states to do its job and bidding. Sound Constitutional?

In all of this, the Eagle Forum sounds really confusing. Phyllis Schlafly wrote in 2005:

The open-borders lobby is crying that the REAL ID Act would give us a national ID card, something that sounds un-American. The truth is that requiring the states to stop issuing driver's licenses to illegals is the best way to prevent the demand for a national ID card, which might prove irresistible if we suffer another terrorist attack on our own soil.

As stated above, REAL ID does a lot more than force us to stop giving driver's licenses to illegal aliens. It sets up a massive system for future regulation. It is indeed a national id card.

1. REAL ID has requirements demanded by the NATIONAL government.

2. REAL ID is for the purpose of IDENTIFICATION.

3. REAL ID is on a CARD.

1+2+3= National ID Card. (Nobody has refuted this.)

Phyllis Schlafly essentially promotes in 2005 what Eagle Forum resisted in 1998.

There's not enough difference to resist one and support the other.

Let's fight terrorism.
Let's stop illegal immigration.

But lets not make a National ID Card to do it.
Let's not quit being America in order to save America.

And, conservatives, let's not quit being conservative.

California deems REAL ID Act unnecessary

Theresa Wray reports:

Mike Marando, Deputy Director of Communications at California DMV, said that the state is already using holograms, fingerprinting and other security protections. The extra effort to work within the federal system and with other states would present an unnecessary burden.

We should have a debate on who owns the biometrics of individuals: the individuals or the government? How one answers this question reveals how one thinks about government and freedom. Sounds like California disregards REAL ID for all the wrong reasons...

And here is an excellent example of a bureaucrat's ability to contradict one's self in the same sentence (emphasis mine):

REAL ID does not establish a national database for storing information, according to Kudwa [spokesperson for the DHS Office of Public Affairs]. It will provide a central location that will drive a state's query to other state's databases, the immigration database and other agencies to verify information before a license is approved.

Surely the reader can see the problem "on the face of it."

So, DHS likes to say that there is not a national database.

So what?

It is a national network that connects the databases into one--and the results are the same!

DHS also likes to say that REAL ID is not a national id card.

Yet, REAL ID is demanded by the national government, for identification at the national level--banking, federal buildings, and flying... in addition to "countless other activities," according to Mr. Chertoff....

And it is all put on a card.

Sounds amazingly close to a national id card...

The Lesson?

Beware of bureaucrat's speaking...

Read more here.

Why REAL ID Is Not "Just a Secure Driver's License."

*****UPDATE***** THE COURAGEOUS GOVERNOR SANFORD OF SOUTH CAROLINA
-------------------
REAL ID is a lot more than "just a secure card."

It is an entire system of card, scanners, records, and access by government officials. In short, it is a platform for increasing control and regulation over the individual. Such schemes would be used by politicians for an avalanche of regulation.

Some bureaucrats are trying to convince us that REAL ID is a simple change with no long term affects. They blogand say things like:

"Is REAL ID a threat to privacy? There are critics who will say so. But, these same critics can’t and won’t tell you precisely how REAL ID threatens privacy. There’s a reason for that. They have no evidence."

So I left a comment at this blog and said the following:


-------------------------------------


I have reason and evidence to oppose REAL ID.

I find it ironic for some to say that the government can protect our records without incident. Our presidential candidates may have something contrary to say, having had their passport records hacked by people contracted to work for the government. “But,” I hear proponents of REAL ID saying, “we’ll be really, really good at it, ok? Just trust us.”

This is not very reassuring.

Concerning identity theft... Have we ever stopped to think that maybe--just maybe--we should not have reduced our lives to a nine-digit number? We created the problem and then howl about it. Surely we can put our American ingenuity to work and think of ways to empower the individual’s control over his person and papers. That would be better than reducing our rights and identities to a card--which is then placed squarely in the hands of bureaucrats.

This power play leaves the government holding all the cards... with the citizen risking all the bets.

We have the evidence of what our leaders are actually saying about REAL ID. One leader has said there can be “countless other uses” for REAL ID.

Countless other uses.

Countless times to be scanned by “machine-readable technology” in the transactions of our daily lives. Scanned and recorded for the benefit of government. Living in a REAL ID maze of red light-green light is not freedom.

Why shouldn’t we be concerned about this?

REAL ID creates an infrastructure for increasing regulation. The problem isn’t just the collection of inert information. It’s about the real-time, digital use of that information by the government over against the individual citizen.

As a conservative, I also happen to believe in the 4th Amendment. We ought not let the government make the 4th Amendment obsolete through “countless” scannings of citizens by “machine readable technology” every time we turn around. If the government needs to search a citizen’s person or papers, let it get a search warrant. Otherwise, the government should leave free citizens alone. REAL ID proponents essentially want to skirt the inconvenience of probable cause and search warrants. Instead, we get to hear “Your REAL ID, please” for countless other purposes.

You see, the privacy we need is privacy from the government--until and unless there is probable cause of wrongdoing. It’s called playing by the Constitutional rules. I know it sounds strange.

True, we cannot “go back to a simpler day.” But we are creative and smart enough to carry our heritage of freedom with us--even as technology advances. Technological advances are no excuse to abandon the Constitutional concept of limited government. Technology does not require statism.

History provides evidence. Programs like REAL ID never remain “minimal.” For example, Social Security cards were introduced with the promise that they would not be used for identification purposes. Wow.

REAL ID “security” standards will not remain “minimal” either. We are putting all our identity eggs into one federal basket. How long until we see the inherent “risks” of this and then “require” the use of biometrics--for our “protection” and “convenience?” How long before DHS or Congress can no longer resist the lobbying of biometrics companies?

And who owns the biometrics of the individual anyway? The citizen or the government? We haven’t even had that debate.

There is a lot to discuss about this road called REAL ID... before we jump over the edge like lemmings.

An Internet Round-Up on REAL ID

Here are a variety to "To Reads" concerning REAL ID:

* States Challenge Homeland Security's ID Deadline (National Public Radio)

* States get breathing room on Real ID

* California Backs Off Real ID - Update

* Homeland Security's Own Privacy Panel Declines to Endorse License Rules

* Ariz. lawmakers balk at new driver’s licenses

* US government cools on Real ID threats

* Lamar seeing chance to nix Real ID Act

Where Do You Place Your Distrust?

In the debate over national id cards (REAL ID), I often hear people say, “Well, if you’ve got nothing to hide, what does it matter if the government knows everything about you?”

The underlying assumption for saying such a thing is twofold:

1) The Individual Should Be Distrusted.
2) The Government Should Be Trusted.

The question really is “Where do you place your distrust?”

Secretaries and Bureaucrats have the job of wielding government power. It is a necessary job because government is needed. It’s a fallen world after all. So Secretaries and Bureaucrats (and Presidents and Congresses) ask themselves, “How Can I Make My Job Easier?” It is human nature to ask, and it is usually a good question.

But when Secretaries and Bureaucrats want to expand their space, they must contract the individual’s space. That’s just the way the world works. So government officials have to “sell” their increased powers to the voters by telling the voters how good (convenient) the expansion of government power will be for them.

And here’s the rub.

The Framers of the Constitution had an up-close-and-personal understanding of tyranny. They knew that government power must be minimized and individual freedom must be maximized. To achieve this, they separated the powers of government into three branches and into a federal system. They also shackled the government with checks and balances. The whole Constitution screams, “Limited Government!”

The Framers placed their distrust in government. It’s the American way.

But modern day leaders distrust the individual, disregard the Constitution, and love government. And Secretaries and Bureaucrats chafe under limitations. Their easy way out is to override the individual.

With the rise of technology and the war on terrorism, we can easily forget the threat of tyranny. National ID Cards (i.e. REAL ID) enable the government to track individuals through their daily lives. Secretary Chertoff has already talked about “countless other uses” for REAL ID. So the citizen is subject to being conveniently scanned for “countless other uses” by “machine readable technology.”

Knowledge is power. If the government knows everything, it has all the power. To digitally track the individual in real-time makes the 4th Amendment obsolete and grants the government massive power. It’s a zero-sum game.

One might say, “The government knows everything about you anyway. What’s it matter?” It matters for two reasons:

1) Such talk says, “Let’s capitulate.” It is a fallacy that says, “It’s already bad, so let’s make it worse.” Hope for reform withers under that kind of resignation.

2) REAL ID layers on more real-time capability of surveillance. If it weren’t a significant change that increased government’s power, the government wouldn’t be pushing for it.

The proliferation of scanners will have the citizen scanning-in with the government every time he turns around. Mr. Chertoff has already mentioned using REAL ID to buy cold medicine!

Instead of asking the individual, “What do you have to hide?” we should be asking bureaucrats, secretaries, Presidents and Congresses “Why do you want so much power at my expense?”

Where should we place our distrust?

I stand with the Constitution’s Framers. The threat of tyranny has never gone away. I simply can’t believe our only choices are statism or terrorism.

If we sell out our freedoms in order to fight terrorism (which we should fight hammer-and-tong) how can we say “We are defending America?”

Surely we can do better.

REAL ID Plain and Simple

Assistant Secretary for DHS, Stewart A. Baker, posted an article entitled "Real ID Plain and Simple." He writes for the Homeland Security Leadership Journal. In his post, he promotes what he thinks are the virtues of REAL ID.

I'm am convinced that people like Mr. Baker are trying to do their jobs with the best of motives. However, we have a right to disagree strongly with those in leadership--and express our concerns. Mr. Baker notes:

As I write, four states have yet to commit to secure licenses for their citizens. The good news for these state leaders is that there’s still time to get on board. I’ll have more to say about this in the coming days. In the meantime, thanks for reading and I look forward to your comments.

So I left a comment.

Mr. Baker's job is to cast REAL ID in the best light possible. Read his article and ask yourself if a national id card (REAL ID) is really the best solution for our problems. Then check out Jim Harper's article Collins and Chertoff Fight to Save the National ID--and see if you agree with Mr. Harper's conclusion:

Implementing REAL ID would burden the country with wasteful spending and needlessly undermine Americans' freedom and privacy without adding to our protections.

Federal buildings become Real ID zones

Declan McCullagh and Anne Broache at CNet News discuss the implementation and problems of the REAL ID Act.

Editor's note: A May deadline looms as just one flash point in a political showdown between Homeland Security and states that oppose Real ID demands. This is the second in a four-part series examining the confrontation.

The nation's capital attracts more than 15 million visitors a year, mostly leisure travelers who often make their way to the city's official visitor center, which is conveniently located downtown in a corner of the Ronald Reagan building.

Or was that inconveniently located? Starting May 11, Americans living in states that don't comply with new federal regulations could be barred from entering Washington D.C.'s visitor center and collecting the complimentary maps and brochures--unless they happen to bring a U.S. passport or military ID with them.

How many more REAL ID zones will there be?

Read more here.