A thread on this started and died long ago. I just wanted to add an article posted in google news today, I bold faced the most interesting part (to me)....

Quote :

"New Driver's License Rules Are Issued By JUNE KRONHOLZ January 12, 2008; Page A4 WASHINGTON -- The Department of Homeland Security released regulations Friday that may mute the states' opposition to driver's-license security requirements under the Real ID law but aren't likely to satisfy civil-liberties groups and others that see the license as a first step toward a national identification card. [Michael Chertoff] The new regulations give the states until 2014 to issue tamper-proof licenses to drivers born after 1964, and the rules give them until 2017 -- a nine-year extension -- for drivers born before 1964. That longer phase-in will cut states' costs to $3.9 billion, or $8 per license, from an earlier $14 billion, Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said in an interview. The licenses will include a digital photograph and a filament or some other security device that counterfeiters can't reproduce, but not a controversial radio-controlled computer chip, Mr. Chertoff said. States will be required to verify each applicant's personal information, including his or her legal status in the country, by comparing it against federal Social Security and passport databases, or against state vital-statistics databases. State workers will "ping" those databases for specific information but won't have open access to them, a concern among civil libertarians, he said. The regulations may satisfy many states' complaints that the new licenses are a costly burden, but Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy (D., Vt.) immediately announced he would push legislation to strip the driver's license provisions from Real ID, which also addresses broader security issues. "It is difficult to think this is anything but the first, big step toward a national identification card that so many Americans oppose," Mr. Leahy said in a statement. But Mr. Chertoff disputed that. "Most people accept that you need to identify yourself," he said, and "I see no argument in favor of making it easier to pony up fake identity." Congress passed Real ID in 2005 in response to security concerns after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, but it also is central to any administration attempts to exclude illegal immigrants from the work force. Federal law requires employers to ask new hires for proof of their legal status and allows them to accept a driver's license or a state-issued identification card that is Real ID-compliant. But current licenses are easily forged. That has enabled millions of illegal immigrants to get jobs and, in turn, has fueled public anger that is playing out in the presidential campaign. States have rebelled, saying the federal plan would require them to reissue and verify the information on millions of licenses. The National Conference of State Legislatures says that legislators in 29 states have introduced bills refusing to comply, and that legislation has passed in six states including New Hampshire, which calls Real ID "repugnant" to the state and U.S. constitutions. Opponents also argue that federal databases, and especially Social Security, are full of errors and out-of-date information that could deny lawful residents their right to a driver's license. Mr. Chertoff said states "have been coming aboard" since their complaints about the cost and speed of the program have been addressed. But Homeland Security also has let the states know that licenses from states that opt out of Real ID won't be accepted as identification from anyone wanting to fly on or enter a commercial aircraft beginning this spring. "

My thoughts: This seems like a move in the direction of a national ID card. The federal government threatening to remove access to commercial aircrafts for citizens of states who don't agree to relinquish their constitutional freedom to issue driver's licenses as they see fit seems like a scary prospect to me.

On NBC this evening the proposed benefits of the program were outlined as follows: 1) Reduce the number of illegals using fraudulent drivers licenses to get jobs; 2) Prevent terrorists from using commercial aircrafts; 3) Cut down on con artists/identity theft.

I fail to see how federally-regulated ID cards will effectively handle all three of theses things. 1) Illegals will drive with or without a license and they will get jobs without one too... its been going on for more than several decades now. 2) Is it really worth investing billions more taxpayer dollars in an unconstitutional ID-Card program to prevent these terrorists from using our commercial aircrafts. Shouldn't we be calling "foul"-- isn't that what the so-called Dept. of Homeland Security and the zillion dollars poured into that whole bit was supposed to accomplish? 3) I was under the impression that identity theft is more common on the information highway, where drivers licenses are not currently required.


More thoughts?

1/12/2008 2:10:40 AM

hopefully it gets stalled long enough for some democrat to cancel this fucking shit

1. This is s a stupid concern and will have a more dangerous unintended consequence -- unlicensed people driving and running from cops, accidents, etc. More importantly, most people are too fucking dumb to realize that illegals are a net benefit for the country.

But hey, it's an election year, the economy is down, the country is becoming too brown, and lazy slobs always want to blame others for their life's ills.

2. 911 terrorists got valid IDs through legal means. In the future, see 3

3. This shit is only a speed bump in identity theft. It may even make it easier since you have a monolithic, single point of failure. Counterfeiters will definitely figure out how to copy the card. People have been counterfeiting more complicated smart cards for years. As long as the financial incentive is there, thieves are going to figure out a way.

[Edited on January 12, 2008 at 3:09 AM. Reason : .]

1/12/2008 2:58:09 AM

Also, http://www.thewolfweb.com/message_topic.aspx?topic=509690

1/12/2008 3:32:06 AM

locking. the other thread has pretty much eclipsed this one.

1/12/2008 3:58:55 AM