Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

Prepare for extra hassles when you try to fly after May 1 - your states haven't given in to the Fatherland Security Administration's edicts on Driver's Licences.

Skeletor is pissed at you!!

WASHINGTON -- Homeland Security officials are pushing recalcitrant states to adopt stricter driver's license standards to end a standoff that could disrupt domestic air travel.
States have less than a month to send a letter to the Homeland Security Department seeking an extension to comply with the Real ID law passed following the 2001 terror attacks. Some states have resisted, saying it is costly, impractical and an invasion of privacy.

Four states - Maine, Montana, New Hampshire and South Carolina - have yet to seek an extension.

Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff argues that the law fixes a critical gap in security identified by the commission that investigated the 9/11 attacks: the ease of obtaining government-issued ID. It will also hinder would-be con artists and illegal immigrants, he said.

Real ID-compliant driver's licenses would have several layers of new security features to prevent forgery. They would also be issued after a number of ID checks, including verification of birth certificates, Social Security numbers and immigration status. Officials acknowledge it will take years to phase in all the different security measures.

To bring the states in line, Chertoff warned that any state that does not seek an extension by the end of March will find that, come May, their residents will not be able to use their licenses to board domestic flights.
http://www.thenewstribune.com/tacoma/24 ... 99610.html

OK, clue me in, dback. According to what I read on Wiki...this is principally about security features in the lic to prevent fraud and forgery. Some of the other elements were...

The REAL ID Act Driver's License Summary[10] details the following provisions of the Act's driver's license title:

Repeal of 9/11 Commission Implementation Act DL/ID Provisions
Minimum Standards for Federal Use
DL/ID Document Standards
Minimum DL/ID Issuance Standards
Verification of Documents
Immigration Requirements
Security and Fraud Prevention Standards
Data Retention and Storage
Linking of Databases
Grants to States
Authority

You know I'm not a "Big Brother" kinda guy, but w/exception of the immigration and sharing of data with other states, I don't see anything controversial about this. (Did I miss the fine print about the "brains implanted with chip by 2010" requirement?)

travelinman67 wrote:OK, clue me in, dback. According to what I read on Wiki...this is principally about security features in the lic to prevent fraud and forgery. Some of the other elements were...

The REAL ID Act Driver's License Summary[10] details the following provisions of the Act's driver's license title:

Repeal of 9/11 Commission Implementation Act DL/ID Provisions
Minimum Standards for Federal Use
DL/ID Document Standards
Minimum DL/ID Issuance Standards
Verification of Documents
Immigration Requirements
Security and Fraud Prevention Standards
Data Retention and Storage
Linking of Databases
Grants to States
Authority

You know I'm not a "Big Brother" kinda guy, but w/exception of the immigration and sharing of data with other states, I don't see anything controversial about this. (Did I miss the fine print about the "brains implanted with chip by 2010" requirement?)

Some I think is just the thought of the Government telling the states how to do their job (i.e. issue licences). I need to do some more research on why the states are objecting. The other states didn't seem to object, so it can't be that bad.

dbackjon wrote:

travelinman67 wrote:OK, clue me in, dback. According to what I read on Wiki...this is principally about security features in the lic to prevent fraud and forgery. Some of the other elements were...
You know I'm not a "Big Brother" kinda guy, but w/exception of the immigration and sharing of data with other states, I don't see anything controversial about this. (Did I miss the fine print about the "brains implanted with chip by 2010" requirement?)

Some I think is just the thought of the Government telling the states how to do their job (i.e. issue licences). I need to do some more research on why the states are objecting. The other states didn't seem to object, so it can't be that bad.

Kinda my thought too... I can see where "re-tooling" an entire state's DL system in only 3 yrs (looked like the enforcing legislation was actually passed in 2005) can be a daunting project, but those state's govt. had to know Homeland Security doesn't function like other govt. agencies...they've been pretty rigid in enforcement.
Anyway, getting out of those state's airports can be a PITA now, I don't look forward to the next couple of years...

Here's a couple of articles on the subject for you guys...
http://www.theledger.com/apps/pbcs.dll/ ... 70455/1036

http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2 ... al_id.html

I don't really know how I feel about all of this but it does seem to me that we keep letting the federal government put their hands more firmly around our throats and keep doing it willingly. I think we keep letting the government herd us into a more manageable group to control us while we pay for it. Is this the best way to be spending our money?

Thanks for the articles - very informative.

Ursus A. Horribilis wrote:Here's a couple of articles on the subject for you guys...
http://www.theledger.com/apps/pbcs.dll/ ... 70455/1036

http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2 ... al_id.html

I don't really know how I feel about all of this but it does seem to me that we keep letting the federal government put their hands more firmly around our throats and keep doing it willingly. I think we keep letting the government herd us into a more manageable group to control us while we pay for it. Is this the best way to be spending our money?

It'll be gradual...it takes place word by word, minute by minute, law by law. CA is the laboratory. Govt. taking away liberty (sovereignty) in minute steps. Rather ironic that the stereotypical fear is a loss of liberty by "catastrophic" event (war, etc..), yet the reality is it will occur from within, with our government eventually losing it's own sovereignty through economic subjugation.

Most major U.S. cities already have a camera system to monitor major road traffic, and there are more and more buildings being setup/monitored remotely by security systems. One of my clients even specializes in remote environmental monitoring of commercial structures, which includes their ability to adjust temperature and humidity, open and close/lock and unlock doors and windows, adjust lighting, turn water and sewer on/off, ALL REMOTE VIA A WEB BASED SOFTWARE they developed. (The owner also owns a winery and has set up his primary fermentation apparatus on similar system allowing him to monitor and regulate the fermentation process (pump over, temperature, SO2 injection) all remotely from his residence/office 70 miles away.)

Point is, freedom of movement (anonymity) is already a myth. The next step is conditioning everyone to accept limitations to their movements without the "proper" documentation (again, to a certain degree, already in effect), then having to obtain permission prior to moving around within their own country, and finally, not having any sovereign movement/thought unless it has been requested by the government.



(No "...Lithium musta ran out." jokes, folks. Just food for thought.)

MAYBE IF THE FED. GOV'T WOULD WORK ON KEEPING THE FUCKERS OUT AND DO A BETTER JOB AT FIGHTING CRIME.....AHH WHAT'S THE USE!!

NPR interview with Montana Governor: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/stor ... d=87991791

Would anyone care to explain what the cr@p a freaking driver's license has to do with someone getting on a plane? This is almost tantamount to placing all the residents of said state on the "no-fly" list just because their legislatures have screwed up. And we all know about the problems with the "no-fly" list....

SuperHornet wrote:Would anyone care to explain what the cr@p a freaking driver's license has to do with someone getting on a plane? This is almost tantamount to placing all the residents of said state on the "no-fly" list just because their legislatures have screwed up. And we all know about the problems with the "no-fly" list....

I don't see it as the legislatures "screwing up". I think they were the only states with the gumption to stand up to the feds...

See, the Constitution outlines what is the federal government's responsibility...and clearly says if it isn't in that list...it's a state's responsibility...

Well, drivers licenses isn't on that list...the feds have no right telling states what to do or not do with their drivers licenses...

But as long as the majority of the states allow the feds to usurp their power...it will continue to happen...

Montana (and a couple others) are always the last to bow down to what the Federal Government wants. The feds always start withholding highway money or some other federally controlled funds to get our state government to follow what the feds want and not what the people of the state want or vote into law. The same thing will happen here.

Col Hogan wrote:

SuperHornet wrote:Would anyone care to explain what the cr@p a freaking driver's license has to do with someone getting on a plane? This is almost tantamount to placing all the residents of said state on the "no-fly" list just because their legislatures have screwed up. And we all know about the problems with the "no-fly" list....

I don't see it as the legislatures "screwing up". I think they were the only states with the gumption to stand up to the feds...

See, the Constitution outlines what is the federal government's responsibility...and clearly says if it isn't in that list...it's a state's responsibility...

Well, drivers licenses isn't on that list...the feds have no right telling states what to do or not do with their drivers licenses...

But as long as the majority of the states allow the feds to usurp their power...it will continue to happen...

I meant "screwing up" as in the Fed's INTERPRETATION of what happened....