Posted on 04/30/2007 5:49:49 AM PDT by kerryusama04
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is going to have a Town Hall Meeting in California on Tuesday, May 1st, 2007. This meeting is scheduled for 10AM to 2PM PDT, which is 12PM to 4PM CDT. It will broadcast over TV, radio and the Internet. State Rep. Jim Guest of Missouri , is the head of a 32 state coalition to stop REAL ID. DHS’s purpose of this meeting is to stop the growing opposition to the REAL ID ACT of 2005. We believe that DHS will GLUT the audience, phone lines and emails with “favorable questions” about REAL ID. We have other plans!
There are four ways you can help. 1. If in California , attend the meeting with questions Ready
2. Email questions, REPEATEDLY
3. Call with questions, REPEATEDLY
4. Send questions to Rep. Guest and have his office send your questions on your behalf
Even if you are unavailable during the meeting hours, you can still help. We want to OVERWHELM their email servers and phone lines with questions from REAL PEOPLE WHO LOVE THEIR FREEDOM AND REFUSE TO ACCEPT A BIG BROTHER SYSTEM.
Rep. Guest will have a list of “REAL questions” about religious freedom, privacy, states’ rights, international ID, or Animal ID, etc. if you need some assistance in that area. The times for calling and emails, as well as the phone numbers and email addresses are being put together by Rep. Jim Guest’s office Sunday PM. So, CALL MONDAY or EMAIL and tell them you will help.
Toll Free - 866-596-1645 Jim.Guest@house.mo.gov
The importance our collective response cannot be exaggerated. DHS needs to hear from freedom loving people. REAL ID threatens RELIGIOUS FREEDOM, PRIVACY, STATES’ RIGHTS and our nation’s sovereignty by enrolling U.S. citizens in an international ID system.
As you may know, REAL ID is international ID. REAL ID will establish a biometric facial image standard for all state ID’s and require states to collect huge amounts of personal information and then link state databases. Homeland Security has been bragging about SMASHING privacy rights and implementing this system, even sharing our personal-biometric information with other nations and corporations.
If REAL ID goes into effect, states lose power over the document that often controls our ability to buy, sell and move. Control will be in the hands of the international organizations and nations in charge of this international ID system. Those who oppose biometric ID, database linking on religious grounds will find themselves permanently enrolled in this system if REAL ID goes into effect. Everyone’s privacy is at risk. Our nation will potentially face an ID theft epidemic and international organizations, not the people or the states, will decide how we buy, sell or move. REAL ID undermines our constitutional way of life and violates the First, Fourth and Tenth Amendments.
CALL Rep. Jim Guest’s office and see how you can help. A phone call or an email is little to ask so that we, and our children, can continue to enjoy our God-given freedoms.
Excerpt:
Sacramento -The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) will conduct a national Town Hall meeting from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m., Tuesday, May 1, 2007 on the federal REAL ID Act, at Freeborn Hall on the campus of the University of California, Davis. The meeting is being facilitated by the state Department of Motor Vehicles at DHS’ request, and is scheduled to be the nation’s only open meeting on REAL ID.
Thanks for posting this. If I were near this meeting, there would be a grilling. Unbelievably, there are a lot of uninformed folks roaming around here that are actually pro-REAL ID.
If any Freepers can go, please check my links and ask important questions.
Unless you can tell me a better way to root out illegals and get them out of our country, you can count me as one of the “uninformed folks” who support this initiative. All our freedoms are moot without security.
I was with you until my A+ NRA rated conservative Republican State Representative educated me. This thing is REAL bad. The key is, just like gun laws, this is only really targetted at those of us who actually follow the law.
The Real Id Act places requirements on the States to have reliable forms of identification that can be used to accurately identify the citizens of the United States.
That is within the constitutional authority of the federal government. It is not a violation of the First, Fourth and Tenth Amendments.
The arguments I have heard against the Real Id Act are a bunch of conspiracy theories about how it might be extended and abused.
If you want my support in changing it, give me facts and details, not conspiracy theories and hyperbole.
Illegal immigration and the lack of real border security is slowly destroying our country. It is a real threat to the integrity of our nation.
In order to combat that threat, our government needs a way to properly identify who is and who is not a citizen. We as citizens of the United States need a way to show that we are citizens.
The one issue I have with the act is that it appears to require the checking of social security numbers. Social Security numbers are not to be used for identification, and state agencies should not be required or permitted to require a social security number be presented in order to attain an Id.
The Real Id act doesn't seem to require that the Social Security number be part of the database, or be included on the Id, but since Social Security numbers aren't to be used for identification purposes, there is no reason to have the states verify that the applicant has a valid social security number when applying for a Id.
Employers should be required to supply social security numbers for their applicants, and the Social Security administration should be required to report invalid or duplicate SSNs. There is no need to pass that duty off on the states. The federal government simply needs to do its job, which it is currently not doing.
Perhaps you could follow some of the links in this thread or visit JimGuest.com
The info is out there and basically, it just goes too far.
I find it amusing that someone who is arguing against giving out personal information would send someone to a site requiring registration, but that really isn't that pertinent.
Even if I could read the article, I don't put much faith in what the media tells me anyway, so let me direct you to what the law says instead.
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=109_cong_public_laws&docid=f:publ013.109
Search on that page for "Minimum Issuance Standards".
Here is the DHS proposed rule making for Real Id. It sure sounds like there are provisions to prevent illegal immigrants from getting an Id to me.
http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/01jan20071800/edocket.access.gpo.gov/2007/07-1009.htm
I can't read what details the SacBee takes issue with, but after reading the proposed rules, it sure sounds like that Real Id is going to make it significantly harder in many states get an driver's license if you aren't a citizen.
You mean like the link to the SacBee article that claims that the proposed rules by the DHS does nothing about illegal immigrants attaining Driver's licenses.
Well reading the article requires registration, so I can't tell exactly what they are complaining about, but I've read the actual DHS proposed rules, and there definitely are provisions that will make it harder for illegal immigrants to get driver's licenses.
The link you gave me to JimGuest.com simply goes to his home page which says nothing about illegal immigration. The "LINKS" link on his web page just points to web pages about Missouri's government, and the "Capital Reports" link is broken. I found nothing on his web page about Real Id.
I ask for details, and you reply it's "out there". Well, a lot of what I've read "out there" is either wrong, or a bunch of conspiracy theories about how this might become a national Id and somehow be used to infringe upon our rights.
So once again, give me details on what you object to, and why. If you feel that this is such an important issue I would think that you would be able to describe what you find objectionable, and maybe even be able to point it out in the law or the DHS proposed rules.
Full text of SacBee article posted below.
As I said - The National ID will do NOTHING to stop states who are intent on giving illegals drivers licenses. The law does not mandate that you *can’t* give them licenses. This was the jist of the SacBee article.
Feds release ID standards
But they do little to resolve the state’s long-standing dispute over driver’s licenses for illegal immigrants.
By Aurelio Rojas - Bee Capitol Bureau
Published 12:00 am PDT Tuesday, March 13, 2007
The federal government has released long-awaited draft regulations creating a national standard for driver’s licenses, but left California and other states to deal with the emotional issue of illegal immigrants.
The Real ID Act regulations — which will require all 23 million California drivers to go in person to Department of Motor Vehicles offices — do not prohibit states from issuing licenses to illegal immigrants.
But Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who previously said the state would wait until the regulations were issued before grappling with the issue, now wants to wait until the federal government enacts an immigration overhaul.
The release earlier this month of the regulations, expected to be finalized this fall, is likely to reignite debate in the Legislature over illegal immigrants.
For the ninth consecutive year, state Sen. Gil Cedillo, D-Los Angeles, has introduced legislation — Senate Bill 60 — that would allow illegal immigrants to obtain driver’s licenses.
The legislation is likely to collide with a bill by Assemblyman Bob Huff, R-Diamond Bar, whose Assembly Bill 1433 is the Schwarzenegger administration’s vehicle for conforming with the Real ID Act.
Huff said he isn’t “interested in legitimizing” driving by people who are in the country illegally. But Cedillo predicted the Democratic-controlled Legislature will block any bill that doesn’t allow driver’s licenses for undocumented immigrants.
“The governor will never see a bill for Real ID that doesn’t have (illegal) immigrants in it,” Cedillo said.
Huff dismissed Cedillo’s scenario as “part of the legislative process,” and quipped “the governor has a little bit to say about what’s signed into law.”
“And so far, in working with the administration, (allowing illegal immigrants to drive) is not something that has been calculated into this,” Huff said.
Unless California conforms its licensing procedure to the federal standards, the state’s licenses will not be accepted for federal purposes, such as entering government buildings or boarding airplanes.
Upon his election in 2003, Schwarzenegger persuaded Democratic legislators to repeal a bill signed by Gov. Gray Davis that would have allowed illegal immigrants to obtain licenses.
Sabrina Lockhart, a spokeswoman for Schwarzenegger, said the governor will not revisit the issue until the federal government enacts both the Real ID regulations and “comprehensive immigration reform.”
“He wants to wait until we can verify that people are who they say they are,” Lockhart said. “He also wants comprehensive immigration reform.”
She noted that in vetoing Cedillo’s bill last year, the Republican governor said it would be premature for California to allow illegal immigrants to apply for driver’s licenses without an immigration overhaul.
Schwarzenegger had previously cited only the Real ID regulations.
Prospects for immigration-law changes have increased since Democrats took over Congress last year. But Cedillo said “it will take years” for the process to play itself out, and hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants are already driving in California.
The Real ID Act was signed in 2005 by President Bush as a response to the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. Eighteen of the 19 hijackers obtained fraudulent identification, including driver’s licenses, from California and other states.
The act attempts to prevent this by requiring verification and adding electronic security features. Beginning in May 2008, states will have to begin scanning identity documents into computers and maintaining records for up to 10 years.
In California, where applicants now have to provide only a Social Security number and birth certificate to apply for licenses, they will also have to show proof of residency, said Mike Marando, a spokesman for the state DMV.
For residents who now can get a license renewal twice by mail — and theoretically put off a trip to the DMV for 15 years — renewals will require DMV office visits.
Marando estimated that it will cost California $500 million over five years to comply with Real ID regulations, which are undergoing a 60-day public comment period.
Cedillo has crafted his current bill to comply with the act, requiring that licenses granted to illegal immigrants be distinct in appearance. They could be used for driving only and not as a form of national identification. Under SB 60, applicants would have to submit identification documents from their native countries and be photographed and fingerprinted. Anyone with a criminal conviction would have been ineligible.
Cedillo noted the federal Transportation Security Administration, which sets airline security requirements, accepts identification issued by foreign governments, including the Mexican card known as “matricula consular.”
He also noted the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco has ruled police cannot impound vehicles solely because they belong to unlicensed drivers who are in the country illegally.
Cedillo argues that with the Real ID Act about to be enacted, granting driver’s licenses can no longer be dismissed as a national security issue.
“It’s a highway safety issue,” he said. “Now that the (regulations) are out, we’ve run out of excuses.”
Nothing will stop illegal immigration sans real border control and immigration law enforcement - ie: going after companies that knowingly hire illegals.
Illegals are not going to rush out and try to get one of these ID’s. They’ll simply do the same things to subvert the system they’ve been doing for the last 40 years.
The only thing this does is give the Federal Government the ability to track *legal* citizens purchases, movements, etc.
Imagine having a small transgression such as an unpaid parking ticket, maybe in a state you don’t even live in. You pass a cop on the street of your hometown. Well, said cop now has a device that can detect that little RFID chip inside the National ID card in your wallet. You’re instantly stopped and accosted to pay the fine on the spot, or face arrest. Maybe they’ll just go ahead and book you.
Sound far fetched? Imagine this type of power in the hands of Government. And then take note of the stark reality that a party non-friendly to your political views, morals, financial goals, etc. might someday be in power. Still want a Real ID?
Nothing will stop illegal immigration sans real border control and immigration law enforcement - ie: going after companies that knowingly hire illegals.
Illegals are not going to rush out and try to get one of these ID’s. They’ll simply do the same things to subvert the system they’ve been doing for the last 40 years.
The only thing this does is give the Federal Government the ability to track *legal* citizens purchases, movements, etc.
Imagine having a small transgression such as an unpaid parking ticket, maybe in a state you don’t even live in. You pass a cop on the street of your hometown. Well, said cop now has a device that can detect that little RFID chip inside the National ID card in your wallet. You’re instantly stopped and accosted to pay the fine on the spot, or face arrest. Maybe they’ll just go ahead and book you.
Sound far fetched? Imagine this type of power in the hands of Government. And then take note of the stark reality that a party non-friendly to your political views, morals, financial goals, etc. might someday be in power. Still want a Real ID?
However, despite the article's claims that the Real Id Act does prohibit issuing drivers licenses to illegal aliens.
Section 202(b)(2)(B)
Evidence of lawful status.--A State shall require, before issuing a driver's license or identification card to a person, valid documentary evidence that the person--
The law goes on to describe what can be used to verify lawful status. Search for "Minimum Issuance Standards" in this link to easily find that part of the law.
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=109_cong_public_laws&docid=f:publ013.109
The proposed rules by the DHS also have a section on the verification of lawful status. Search this link for "Verification of Lawful Status".
http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/01jan20071800/edocket.access.gpo.gov/2007/07-1009.htm
Read it for yourself. I don't know where the SacBee is coming up with the idea that the law and the DHS aren't requiring the verification that someone is not an illegal immigrant, but it is very clear that the requirements are there.
My guess is that Sen. Gil Cedillo is simply ignoring the federal law and proposing legislation to issue drivers licenses to illegal immigrants anyway, which should result in California drivers licenses not being accepted as a valid Id for any purposes that the federal government has authority over, such as boarding an airplane.
The state of California has the authority to do that. It's just going to mean that a lot of Californians are going to need to get Passports, and a California drivers license won't be accepted for many purposes.
However, the saying that Real Id and the DHS rules aren't requiring proof of legal status is B. S.
Conceded. But do you not agree that it will do little to stop the flow of illegals across the border? It’s not like they’re showing ID’s to get in.
The most it will do is stop illegals from getting on an airplane. The employers who are hiring them, are still gonna hire them, because they obviously don’t put much weight behind ‘documentation’ even now.
All of the states that are lining up against it have other motives than California’s opposition. For many, it’s financial, but some also have serious concerns with the privacy issues. Especially when it’s realized that this does nothing to help the problem it’s supposed to fix.
On that note, I’ll ‘reword’ my hyperlinks on that SacBee article to better reflect what it really communicates.
How do you have good immigration law enforcement without reliable Ids?
Having reasonable requirement on issuing of such Ids is necessary to be able to enforce immigration laws.
Illegals are not going to rush out and try to get one of these ID’s.
Of course they aren't. It's also going to take time before other Ids expire and the Real Id act really takes full effect. Just because it doesn't provide instant gratification isn't a reason not to implement it. It does mean this isn't enough by itself, but that should be obvious. We aren't going to get all the tools we need in place in one bill through the liberals in Congress and the illegal immigration lobby.
We are instead going to have to focus on improving our ability to enforce our immigration laws and secure our border one step at a time.
The only thing this does is give the Federal Government the ability to track *legal* citizens purchases, movements, etc.
Nice conspiracy theory. Care to give some details? What information does this act give our government that they don't already have? What provisions in this law enable the government to more easily "track" citizens.
Well, said cop now has a device that can detect that little RFID chip inside the National ID card in your wallet.
Neither the Real Id Act or the DHS' proposed rules require a RFID chip.
States may optionally choose to produce WHTI compliant IDs (Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative). A WHTI compliant Id would allow someone to travel in among nations in the Western Hemisphere that are part of that initiative with that Id instead of a passport.
I'm definitely against using RFIDs on passports, driver's licenses, or any other form of ID. There is no need to use such a technology, and the opportunity for abuse seem obvious.
However, the Real Id Act doesn't require RFIDs, and isn't part of that problem. State's choosing to have WHTI compliant IDs would have to implement those "features" in addition to the Real Id requirements. They aren't part of Real Id.
Yes, I agree that it will do nothing to prevent people form illegally crossing the border. At most it will possibly make it harder for illegal aliens that are caught shortly after crossing the border from providing a fake Id and claiming that they are there legally.
We need a border fence to slow illegal border crossers down at the border.
We need more and better surveillance of the border to detect those illegally crossing the border.
We need more border patrol agents, and we need those agents to be directed to actually go after and detain illegal immigrants instead of just chasing them back towards the border.
We need to prosecute illegal border crossers.
We need jail space to detain illegal border crossers.
We need a complete overhaul of how we currently enforce our immigration laws, because our current enforcement is a pathetic joke.
We need to fire DHS officials that aren't enforcing immigration laws, and who are actively undermining those laws.
The employers who are hiring them, are still gonna hire them, because they obviously don’t put much weight behind ‘documentation’ even now.
A better Id is only one small part of the equation.
However, if you have an Id that shows legal status, it becomes much easier to require employers to verify such status. It also becomes reasonable to require companies that hire contractors to verify that the contractors are supplying legal workers.
Too many companies in the construction industry get around the issue of verifying immigration status by hiring workers on as independent contractors rather than employees. Basically the workers are self employed, and are contracting out their services.
All of the states that are lining up against it have other motives than California’s opposition. For many, it’s financial, but some also have serious concerns with the privacy issues.
Well, there is a lot of blatant B. S. floating around regarding the "privacy issues".
I hear all these arguments against using RFIDs, but neither the Real Id act or the proposed DHS regulations require RFIDs.
I have an issue with requiring the states to verify that applicants have a valid SSN or are prohibited from having a SSN. However, the States aren't required to put SSNs on the IDs or enter them into a database. It even requires that the States do not use a person's SSN as their driver's license number.
What information is on the Real ID that isn't on your current Driver's License. It seems to me that the difference is that it is in a machine readable format, and that the States are required to d a better job of verifying the information is correct, and make driver's licenses that are harder to forge.
Since identity theft is a serious privacy issue, I would think that better requirements on attaining a driver's license would reduce a lot of threats to our privacy.
The problem with listening to politicians complain about privacy issues is that politicians lie. They seem to tell more lies than they tell the truth.
So politicians making claims doesn't mean anything to me until I see that those claims are really backed up by the law itself, or at least the proposed rules by the DHS. I've posted links to where both can be found on this thread.
So far all I'm hearing is a bunch of conspiracy theories that don't appear to have a solid basis in fact.
I'm not one to blindly trust our government, but I've found myself being mislead by people who claim to be trying to protect my rights far too many times to blindly buy into conspiracy theories either.
The wording of the proposed regulations didn't seem broad to me. Did you actually read the proposed regulation, or just the summary from that site?
The only section where RFID is specifically mentioned mentioned is where they are asking for comments on how states might add WHTI features to a Real Id card.
However a contactless integrated circuit, such as a RFID is mentioned as one of the possible methods of storing data on the Id. Here is what the proposed rules say about it.
The integrated contactless chip was not deemed an appropriate technology for this particular document, as there is not an identifiable need for driver’s licenses and identification cards to be routinely read at a distance.
I definitely oppose making our driver's licenses WHTI compliant. However, that doesn't mean I oppose Real Id.
I don't like the idea of leaving the discretion to require RFID tags on drivers licenses in the future with the DHS, even though they currently are advising against them.
Fortunately, once the rules go into effect, changing them to require RFIDs in the future will be extremely difficult since the states will have already invested in the equipment to make the Ids without them. Because of the implementation costs (even to just change the IDs to add RFIDs) it will be very difficult to revise the requirements in the future.
What's even worse is that the proposed 2D stripe, won't even be encrypted. Which means images of your birth certificate, your SSN, and tons of other personal data will be readily available to anyone with a scanner. No thanks.
There's no requirement to put your SSN on the Id in any format, nor digital images of your birth certificate. A 2D bar code is going to allow them to encode a little more that 1 kilobyte of data, and they are proposing leaving some of that for State specific data. They aren't going to be storing much data. More specifically:
DHS proposes that States consider storing in the machine-readable zone (MRZ) only the minimum data elements necessary for the purpose for which the REAL IDs will be used.
Encryption would also be somewhat pointless. Since people know what data is encrypted on their Id cards, and it is the nature of hackers to hack any encryption, it is likely that tools to decrypt the data would be developed and easily available on the Internet within a matter of days from when Ids start getting issued.
Why waste money implementing encryption that you know won't remain secure.
I keep hearing all these stories about the Real Id containing huge amounts of data all about people in an easily readable format. So what does the proposed DHS rules require?
For the machine readable portion of the REAL ID driver’s license or identification card, States must use PDF417 2D bar code standard, with the following defined minimum data elements:
(a) Expiration date.
(b) Holder’s name. The machine readable portion of the card must have at least 125 characters to permit capture of the full name history, including full legal name and all name changes.
(c) Issue date.
(d) Date of birth.
(e) Gender.
(f) Address.
(g) Unique identification number.
(h) Revision date, indicating the most recent change or modification to the visible format of the driver’s license or identification card.
(i) Inventory control number of the physical document. § 37.21 Temporary driver’s licenses and identification cards.
So the big risk of someone reading the machine readable information is that they might find out your age and your address.
How do the DHS rules address this?
They suggest that the States, which have the appropriate legislative authority, pass laws prohibiting the collection and retention of such data electronically. They point out that several states already have such information since states already put unencrypted data on Ids in machine readable formats. This is not a new issue.
My threat level remains elevated on this.
Nothing wrong with that, especially while this is going these regulations are being proposed and aren't in their final form. However, you don't appear to know much about the actual proposed rules and are arguing against things that aren't even being proposed.
This is why I've been asking people for specifics on what the disagree with, because from what I've seen most people objecting to it simply haven't read the proposed rules and don't know what they are talking about.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.