Homeland Security Offers Details on Real ID 227
pr0nqu33n writes "C|Net is running an article on the DHS's requirements for the Real ID system. Thursday members of the Bush administration finally unveiled details of the anticipated national identification program. Millions of Americans will have until 2013 to register for the system, which will (some would argue) constitute a national ID. RFID trackers for the cards are under consideration, as is a cohesive nation-wide design for the card. States must submit a proposal for how they'll adopt the system by early October of this year. If they don't, come May of next year their residents will see their licenses unable to gain them access to federal buildings and airplanes. The full regulations for the system are available online in PDF format. Likewise, the DHS has a Questions and Answers style FAQ available to explain the program to the curious."
Gettng Godwin's law over with (appropriately!) (Score:5, Insightful)
"Where are your papers?"
Land of the free^wregistered, home of the brave^wslave.
I hope this falls flat (Score:5, Insightful)
States must submit a proposal for how they'll adopt the system by early October of this year. If they don't, come May of next year their residents will see their licenses unable to gain them access to federal buildings and airplanes.
I hope that enough states refuse [wikipedia.org] to participate that it makes the federal legistlature repeal the law. Of course, congress will likely do as they've always done and threaten to pull federal highway funding or education funding until the states in question comply.
Smoke and mirrors (Score:5, Insightful)
All 19 of the 9/11 hijackers had valid photo ID and a valid boarding pass.
Re:Smoke and mirrors (Score:2, Insightful)
Troll? Fucking troll? For crying out loud, mods, fix this - that is anything but a troll comment! It is topical, relevant, true and thought provoking. /P.
Your papers, please. (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent is not trolling (Score:2, Insightful)
How is that a "Troll"? (Score:3, Insightful)
So pointing out that the terrorists had authentic identification does contradict the premise of Real ID.
Do not confuse terrorism with identification. These cards will NOT carry the "may be a terrorist" stamp when they are issued.
Re:Profit (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Smoke and mirrors (Score:5, Insightful)
This is absolutely true and D.C. is trying to get the rest of the people to become sheep and give up their rights. If no new information is being collected, no new requirements are being mandated, then exactly why is this necessary?
9-11 was cited as the reason for this in the FAQ (for those who RTFAQ) and it is complete and utter bull.
States that are trying to reject this (so far) include:
Maine (passed)
Georgia, Massachusetts, Montana, Washington, California, and Texas)
This is EXACTLY a national ID card, and we already have the right to board aircraft. The problem is that we LET D.C. regulate states! Mod parent up - this is "national security" at its worst.
Re:Profit (Score:2, Insightful)
It's worse than that. (Score:5, Insightful)
Actually, most terrorists in the US have had authentic identification issued by the US government (or accepted by it).
The real terrorists will have no problem complying with this law.
Not only that, but it will be run by people. And people can be corrupted. A single ID card that is accepted as valid anywhere in the US becomes very valuable. So some low grade government paper pusher decides that he can make a bit of money on the side by approving fake requests. So the illegals in Texas are getting ID cards issued by a corrupt guy in New York.
Yeah, if you wanted to help crime NATIONWIDE, you really couldn't come up with a better plan than this.
Mod him up ? (Score:5, Insightful)
I mean, it's true : those terrorist had valid non-counterfeit IDs, linking them to the identities they used in the states and with which they didn't have any problem. Serious terrorist are supposed to keep low profile until last moment and ID linking to central database will be no help having a centralized national database won't bring any new information. (Except if "Al Qaida" provides a database of all identity of their terrorist. But as Al Qaida is more a "franchise" used by small groups [and used by the media to scare people] rather than a real well organised corporation, that not possible even in theory...)
Politicians should stop pretending that the ID is some magical problem that'll definitely fix the terrorism problem for sure. Here in Europe, almost every country has ID, but *that* isn't what will stop some of them of being targeted by attacks.
An ID card is just a convenient and standardized way for quickly showing who you are, for all those moments where you need it (before entering in nightclubs. while buying alcohol, when going to the administration, to prove you are the owner when using credit card). And that is the only thing politician should ever pretend. All the rest are lies. An ID card will never show what people *intend to do* and will never ever stop terrorists.
Re:Gettng Godwin's law over with (appropriately!) (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:How is that a "Troll"? (Score:2, Insightful)
Good luck with that (Score:5, Insightful)
It will go down the same way with Real ID, just watch. It might be the Mormons or some blue state that stands up but they'll be told fine, pay for your own highways (though we'll still take your tax money) and good luck to any of your citizens who want to fly. And conversations will be had behind closed doors about the way things have to be and it will be done.
zero to lawsuit (Score:5, Insightful)
Air travel? (Score:3, Insightful)
I'd be curious to know exactly what law gives the federal government control over who can fly, instead of the airlines or the airport. If there is such a law, is it constitutional? Interstate commerce is the only federal juristiction I can think of that's close - but that doesn't apply to civilian passengers with nothing to sell...
Re:How is that a "Fake ID"? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Gettng Godwin's law over with (appropriately!) (Score:2, Insightful)
a) Why cant they do that right now?
b) How does a national ID help them track you?
Re:How is that a "Troll"? (Score:3, Insightful)
In the wake of 9/11, the people at the DHS are under enormous pressure to do something about security.
What's been lost is the difference between doing something about it is and doing anything about it. Read ID is the later.
Re:Profit (Score:3, Insightful)
You can comply with RealID and argue until you're blue in the face, but the fact is, once it's a reality, it's NOT going to go away. You've just surrendered another small portion of your rights. What happens next time? When you need to show your new ID to get into ANY building, or swipe your ID to get into your car? Or get a tracking chip? Are you going to comply? Or are you going to resist? Somewhere there needs to be a line and the fact that a few states are resisting is heartening, because maybe more can be persuaded to resist this power grab.
I disagree (Score:5, Insightful)
With a national ID, ideally it would have the resources behind it to be stronger than any single state ID. However, any fraud protection is useless when you can just pay off a DMV employee, again as some of the hijackers did. The problem with national ID is not that it's in any way worse at IDing people. It's not. The problem is that is does nothing to deter or hinder terrorists, and that trying to know who everyone is at all times (and where they are if you are checked frequently enough) is extremely unamerican. It's a papers-please society, and its very bad. But it _is_ efficient, and that's unfortunately not an argument against it.
Re:Gettng Godwin's law over with (appropriately!) (Score:3, Insightful)
You know what bothers me the most? Not that you asked the question, but that you asked it as if you really thought it was a reasonable one. I am not often actually stunned by ignorance, but in this case, I admit it. I am floored.
All those things were possible in my lifetime. All of them. I've been into Canada without ID; for Expo 67 (the world's fair), specifically, so that was 1967. I've been into and back out of Mexico without ID. I've been in and out of the Bahamas without ID. I've been on many aircraft without ID, both as passenger and as pilot. I've never had to show ID at a school, and I have been to many of them, and I also have three grown children, all of whom are college graduates, which adds quite a few more schools to the list. I've never had to show ID at a courthouse, and the last time I was in one was last Thursday.
And you are just as happy as a pig in shit with the idea of having to show ID in all those places. Amazing.
Simply. Fucking. Amazing.
Re:Gettng Godwin's law over with (appropriately!) (Score:5, Insightful)
You're in danger of losing your geek card here. RFID means you don't have to show the card; it means that it can be read if you're within a few meters without you having to take it out of your wallet. Very... convenient. Old tech ID in another country has no relevance to the RealID program getting under way here; RealID mandates biometric identification details (retina scan, something along those lines) as well as photo and statistical data (height, age, etc.), and most importantly "undisclosed additional technologies." With RFID, if I am standing at a checkout or a toll booth, and you approach, everything on your RealID card will pop up on my display I need to verify you, including the biometric data, arrest history, and anything else they deem interesting (perhaps the prescriptions you take, or your tendency to stutter. Your location and activity can then (still automatically) be passed along to a larger network for use in tracking, privacy invasion, feedforward to entities like insurance providers, banks, various police agencies, and so forth. No one need lift a finger. You just buy your booze or copy of playboy (you filthy bastard!) and go on your way. Later, when they make a law against playboy, they'll just come and get your ass. They already have numerous "punish previous legal behavior with new law" programs running, as well as numerous "add to your sentence after conviction" programs, both the very definition of ex post facto law, which are forbidden by the constitution. Of course, they're not paying any attention to the constitution any longer; another reason to compound our worries.
In the US - traditionally - we have held that our privacy is something we hold dear. This program can erode privacy significantly; that's the general basis for resisting it. But there are others. I don't want my insurance agency to be deciding to change my insurance rates if they find that I am out in the woods from time to time (I collect rocks.) They may decide I am in the same group with hunters or dirt bikers and so pose a higher risk, when in fact, I don't. This is the kind of thing where information about you can be used against you; and like "no-fly" lists, once someone has made a decision that you are an undesirable, they are not generally going to turn around and reverse that decision without a lot of work on your part; work that would be unnecessary if they had simply kept their nose out of your business.