Dump Real ID now (Baltimore Sun)

[struggle4progress]

Originally published February 1, 2007

... Mainers went first, with the state legislature voting nearly unanimously last week to call for the federal Real ID law's repeal. Montana, Hawaii, Georgia, Massachusetts, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Vermont and Washington are not far behind. As many as 30 states, possibly including Maryland, are expected to join the cause. Once America's 245 million drivers discover the cost and inconvenience in store for them, the bellowing could be deafening.

Congress should not wait that long, though, to drive a stake through the heart of an absurd proposition that won't advance its goals of curbing illegal immigration and making the nation safer - and could well undermine both objectives. State transportation officials burdened with this $11 billion nightmare, including $100 million for Maryland alone, need to be let off the hook right away ...

Immigration control is not a state responsibility, though, nor has the federal government come through with money to pay for it. What's more, people living and working in this country who are denied driver's licenses will drive anyway - but without the insurance they need a driver's license to buy. The Maryland legislature has repeatedly refused to limit driving privileges to legal residents.

Further, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security has not yet produced regulations directing states how to set up the program, including the onerous task of verifying birth certificates and other documents. Time is quickly running out ...

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/bal-ed.license01feb01,0,6834259.story?coll=bal-opinion-headlines

[Solo_in_MD]

1. Damn silly of the Sun...clearly none of them have applied for a new MD drivers license for a while

The requirements are very similar to Real ID. I also do not have a philosopical problem with an ID system that is verified and interoperable nationally.

I find it amusing from a historical perspective that the opposition is based on costs to implement and not some form of states rights. The witholding of Federal funding over non-complaince is a standard Federal move for just about anything. This is no different than the mandate for seatbelts, 21 years old for alcohol, NCLB, and the 55 MPH national speed limit. If it goes to court and is struck down, much of the blackmail done to the states by the Federal government would go away. However, that tool is used for both good and evil.

Additional thought: If the Feds have so much money that they can fund/starve what is clearly state and local programs, why not lower the Fed tax rates and raise the state ones, losing one layer of overheads. Careful how you answer this one...

[struggle4progress]

3. Why the "Real ID" Act, Which Requires National Identity Cards, is a Real Mess

By ANITA RAMASASTRY
Wednesday, Aug. 10, 2005

... No wonder, then, that more than 600 organizations have expressed concern over the Real ID Act. Organizations such as the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators, the American Library Association the Association for Computing Machinery, the National Council of State Legislatures, the American Immigration Lawyers Association and the National Governors Association are among them.

The Real ID Act's identity cards will be required not only if one wants to drive, but also if one seeks to visit a federal government building, collect Social Security, access a federal government service, or use the services of a private entity (such as a bank or an airline) that is required under federal law to verify customer identity ...

Finally, the IDs must include a "common machine-readable technology" that must meet requirements set out by the Department of Homeland Security. And, somewhat ominously, Homeland Security is permitted to add additional requirements--which could include "biometric identifiers" such as our fingerprints or a retinal scan ...

Many commentators predict that believe radio frequency identification (RFID) tags will be placed in our licenses. (Other alternatives include a magnetic strip or enhanced bar code). In the past, the Department of Homeland Security has indicated it likes the concept of RFID chips ...

http://writ.lp.findlaw.com/ramasastry/20050810.html

[Solo_in_MD]

5. Again, objection to cost and technology, not based on rights

Which should be the key concern. Engineers can fix the technology to address privacy issues and reduce costs.

The article is also incorrect in the claimed impact of not having a compliant drivers licenser. A passport is satisfactory. Also the linking of licenses to illegals to them having insurance is fraudulent.

[struggle4progress]

8. Those who can't get a drivers licenses or state IDs should use passports? Uh, let them eat cake?

[Solo_in_MD]

9. Not what I said...

The article inferred that without a Real ID compliant license you could not get on an airplane, enter Federal buildings etc. I was pointing out that was untrue. Overall the article was pretty weak. There are legitimate issues with Real ID, but the author could not seem to find one...

Again, the only argument the states are pushing back on is cost...though there is a real opportunity to have either the Federal funding blackmail be declared illegal (a mixed blessing IMO).

On edit: I am referring to the findlaw article referenced up thread.

[struggle4progress]

13. Perhaps you should read some more: here's the legal text as a pdf file:

http://www.epic.org/privacy/id_cards/real_id_act.pdf

202(a)(1) says "... Beginning 3 years after .. enactment .. a Federal agency may not accept, for any official purpose, a .. license or .. card issued by a State .. unless the State is meeting the requirements of this section ..." According to 202(d)(11)(A) noncompliant licenses and cards must be clearly so labelled.

Official purpose is defined in 201(3): "... accessing Federal facilities, boarding federally regulated commercial aircraft ... and any other purposes that the Secretary shall determine ..."

Your claims to the contrary, that does say that "without Real ID compliant licesne you could not get on an airplane, enter Federal buildings etc"

[Solo_in_MD]

14. I suggest that to you...

And the text you quote says that a not approved license will indeed be turned down. What it does not say is that only Real ID licenses would be accepted. Other forms of ID are going to be acceptable, including passports. If you think about it for a femtosecond, you would see why.

[struggle4progress]

16. So we're right back to: who can't get a license or state ID should use a passport

Apparently, that is what you are saying

[Solo_in_MD]

19. I am saying that there are alternatives for those whose states opt out

and claims to the contrary are wrong.

Some naively claim that the role of state DMVs is not immigration policy, but to license drivers. That is incorrect. It is to raise money. Vehicle related fees and taxes are a major contributor to every state budget.

The states (the only ones with real standing to challenge this) are not doing it effectively, citing only cost and not the myriad of other issues, which is a mistake. They will lose unless they change the approach.

I am not a supporter of Real ID as it stands now due to a number of flaws in how it is being run and legal challenges to it may upset a major tool that the Feds use to coerce behavior of the states.

I fully expect the deadlines to be revamped and requirements standardized. That will allow industry to be able to reduce cost and eventually all the states will comply. Look at all the other areas where the Feds have successfully blackmailed states into compliance.

[struggle4progress]

22. And the alternative is -- a passport? Which is even more difficult to obtain than a license.

[Solo_in_MD]

26. Based on my recent experience, its easier to get a passport than a license in MD and cheaper

Passport: Get the application online, get the docs, make appt, go to the post office, no line. Costs $97 for the first one, $67 to renew. Good for 10 years (http://travel.state.gov/passport/get/fees/fees_837.html)

MD Licesne: Get the same docs as a passport, go to MVA, get forms, fill them out, get a number, wait around 1/2 day. MD license is $45 for the first two years, $30 every two years after that. 10 years = $165 (http://www.marylandmva.com/AboutMVA/FEE/default.htm#anchor1)

Passport is always cheaper, espcially for renewal

[struggle4progress]

29. Thanks. Should I ever need reliable info on renewing a MD license, I won't be asking you:

I'm quite certain the good people of Maryland would riot if required to renew their drivers licenses every two years, as you claim

:eyes:

[Solo_in_MD]

30. Follow the link, that is why it is there

Renewals can be done by mail, but the Maryland MVA makes the California DMV look like a well run place.

[struggle4progress]

31. Reread my post, then scout around website you linked: your post contains bad info

[struggle4progress]

10. <edit>: You think insurance companies will sell policies covering unlicensed drivers?

It's illegal to drive without a license: what insurance company will deliberately insure against damages caused by an act the policy-holder performed knowingly in violation of law?

[Solo_in_MD]

12. More accurately, will the insurance companies knowlingly sell to illegal aliens

The insurance is carried on the car and its primary drivers. I can get a license without a vehicle or insurance easily. I can own a car witohout a licenses or insurance but can not register it/get plates without insurance. MD in particular is down right nasty about that.

[struggle4progress]

15. Perhaps the now-repaired typo in my post explains your strange response

to the question I intended to ask

[Solo_in_MD]

17. It does...

Insurance companies insure cars not drivers. It is perfectly fine to own a car and purchase insurance for it and not have a license. An example is elderly people who can no longer drive but own a car for family/care provder to drive them.

[struggle4progress]

21. Once again -- no license, no insurance:

No. 2--02--0047
IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS SECOND DISTRICT

... We agree with the trial court's decision granting summary judgment. Although factors such as ownership are relevant, the trial court was correct in holding that, without a valid driver's license, an individual cannot reasonably believe that he or she is entitled to use a motor vehicle in Illinois. Here, James did not possess a valid license at the time of the accident. In fact, he had not possessed a valid license for 14 years. Furthermore, he had been arrested several times for driving with a suspended license. Finally, the agent who prepared the insurance application told James that he would not be covered by the policy. Under these facts, James could not have reasonably believed that he was entitled to drive the pickup. Accordingly, the exclusion applies and James is not covered by the policy ... http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=il&vol=app/2003/2020047&invol=3

[Solo_in_MD]

25. I disagree...

You can not have an appropriate licence, own the vehicle, insure it for certain drivers without any issue whatsoever. You can not operate the vehicle without a license and if you do, you would not be covered. What I am saying is in perfect agreement with what you are posting.


Let me give you a couple of examples:

Teenage son buys a used motorcycle, but since he is under 18, it is registered in the name of his parents. The teenager is the only person with a license, the adults do not have motorcycle endorsements. It is on the famliy auto insurance policy with him listed as the only rider. The son will have coverage when he rides, should the either of the parents ride it, they would not.

Elderly person has a stroke and can no longer drive. However there are family members and caregivers who drive the car for them (errands, medical appts, etc). The stroke victim turns in their license but continues to own the car, and insures it appropriately. If they ever drive it, they would be uninsured.

I buy a commercial truck for my small business. I hire a driver and insure it appropriately. He is covered while drving the truck, I am not, even though it is in my name.


I do not see why you are hammering on a non-issue

[struggle4progress]

33. Apparently we've finally established that insurance companies don't cover unlicensed drivers

[struggle4progress]

18. What insurance company will cover anyone as an unlicensed driver?

<edit typo>: Whatever mechanism the states try to ensure that the driver and vehicle are covered, the insurance companies themselves do not cover unlicensed drivers

Get a quote
Take out your current insurance policy. You will need to reference information such as your existing coverage and current policy limits and deductibles, vehicle identification numbers and driver's license numbers ...
http://www.worthcasualty.com/WorthCasualty/get-a-quote.html

Multiple Automobile Insurance Quote Request
... Primary Driver Of Vehicle 1 ...
Please Provide the Following Information Regarding Vehicle 1's Primary Driver ...
Drivers License Information:
Drivers License # ... http://www.mcdole.com/provbank/automobile.htm

Alternate Driver Application
... 7. Agreements of Alternate Driver. Driver agrees that: (a) they will maintain an appropriate, valid driver's license to operate the Vehicle and they will at all times comply with all applicable restrictions contained in their license; ...
https://www.vanpool.com/myvanpool-alternate_form.html

[Solo_in_MD]

20. See post 17

Its fine to be an unlicensed owner, as long as you do not drive.

[struggle4progress]

23. So people having difficulty with real ID should buy cars and hire others to drive?

It won't happen.

Just about anybody, who has trouble getting a drivers license and therefore chooses to drive unlicensed, will almost certainly be driving uninsured as well -- because even if they purchase a policy, it won't cover them. In accidents involving such drivers, whether the vehicle is insured or not, the other party's uninsured motorist coverage will pay -- and that raises insurance rates.

[Solo_in_MD]

28. If an individual can not get a license under Real ID, why do you think they could get one anyway?

[struggle4progress]

32. (1) Cost. The National Governor's Association Estimate of $11 billion in 5 years

works out around $40-50 dollars per US driver. We're talking about doubling the cost of drivers licenses, since the Feds aren't funding the operation. That means -- poor folk are more likely to drive unlicensed.

(2) Requiring states to verify that applicants are in the country legally will encourage a number of people to drive without licenses -- and hence without insurance coverage. This potentially affects not only people who have not regularized their immigration status but also persons legally in the country who have difficulty obtaining records

[struggle4progress]

4. ... The REAL ID Act of 2005 creates a de facto national identification ..

.. card. Ostensibly voluntary, it would become mandatory as those without the card would face suspicion and increased scrutiny. It is a law imposing federal technological standards and verification procedures on state driver's licenses and identification cards, many of which are beyond the current capacity of the federal government, and mandating state compliance by May 2008. In fact, REAL ID turns state DMV workers into federal immigration officials, as they must verify the citizenship status of all those who want a REAL ID-approved state driver's license or identification cards. State DMVs would far move away from their core mission -- to license drivers.

REAL ID was appended to a bill providing tsunami relief and military appropriations, and passed with little debate and no hearings. The REAL ID Act repealed provisions in the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004, which contained "carefully crafted language -- bipartisan language -- to establish standards for States issuing driver's licenses," according to Sen. Richard Durbin. The states await the issuance of guidelines on how to meet these standards; the Department of Homeland Security has yet to issue them though the compliance date remains May 2008 ...

http://www.epic.org/privacy/id_cards/

[struggle4progress]

6. ... The ALA has expressed concern about the move to standardized machine-readable driver's licenses

and personal identification cards because of the potential privacy implications for library users ... http://www.ala.org/ala/washoff/WOissues/civilliberties/privacy/privacyrelated.htm#hr418

[struggle4progress]

7. Perhaps you should read more carefully? The piece cites several

issues.

One of these is cost -- and it is not a silly issue: real ID imposes a substantial unfunded mandate, which is driven by the threat of loss of federal funding in the case of noncompliance, not by actual offsets for the cost of compliance.

In a manner now too familiar, the chaotic Administration has not produced final regulations: this creates uncertainty, regarding not only what compliance means today but also what compliance will mean in the future (retinal scans? RFID?).

Noncompliant licenses will produce substantial inconvenience. The article cites air travel, but of course there are other aspects as well: the cost or inconvenience of obtaining compliant licenses will effectively create a new underclass unable to use bank services and other basic amenities and will increase the number of unlicensed and uninsured drivers on the road.

[Solo_in_MD]

11. The piece is weak and inaccurate...

There are real issues with Real ID, but this article was weak and the findlaw articel was worse
- National ID card issues. Your average American has no idea why that might be a problem
- That this fight could bring down the entire Federal funding blackmail process, an major risk in many areas
- Privacy is not really an issue. Openess of records is...
- That clear and coherent requirements and standards were not promulgated early enough to work out kinks and get into place to allow timely compliance.

[struggle4progress]

24. At this point, you have provided zip evidence for any of your claims.

It's unclear to me why you think national ID cards are not an issue to most Americans: historically, the topic has been important politically a number of times. Nor is it at all clear why you think privacy is "not really an issue." &c&c

[Solo_in_MD]

27. Actually some of the stuff at EPIC clearly supports my concerns

The real issue is that the states who are the only groups with standing to push back effectively are focused purely on costs. ALA and others are not relevant.

[Davis_X_Machina]

2. State gov't here in ME...

...is opting out.