U.S. I.D. card -- Is it time?

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
I thought it was called a Driver's License.

It is. We have been forced to have ID for a long time. This is so silly.

[-Jrabbit]

Rufus has it right. We will be assimilated.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by -Jrabbit
Rufus has it right. We will be assimilated.

We already are assimilated.

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Originally posted by Lord Avalon


Perhaps because it's not imminent? Is it really a done deal if they keep pushing back the deadline?

Edit: To clarify, Real ID is not a national ID like some have talked about - there will still be state IDs, they'll just have to meet some minimum federal standards.

Given how much hue and cry there would be about an actual national ID -- and given how much of that noise would come from the GOP base -- Real ID (a Bush Admin proposal passed by a still-GOP congress) was a rather brilliant way to sneak a national ID through the back door.

The function of Real ID is to provide a common standard for the inclusion of biometric data that will be stored in Fedaral databases as well as individual state databases. The data that authenticate identity will be determined by the federal government and kept by the federal government; the state will still determine whether you live there and are allowed to drive, but identity and the monitoring thereof will fall to the feds -- turning state drivers licences into federal IDs for all intent and purposes.

I doubt teh delays are signs that the ID will be scuttled. DHS has egg on its face from fubarring the timeline on two similar documentary mandates: biometric passports for Visa Waiver countries and US passports for North American travel (State rightly gets most of the blame for the latter fiasco, but DHS had a hand there too). the delay is so they can try to get something right for once.

Oh, and a work on the "we already have driver's licenses argument. Indeed we do -- but they rarely have significant security features and have no common standard, which is why they're so easy to fake. Faking a US passport -- which is the level of tech we're talking about here -- is much, much harder. The Fed position is, basically, if you go ahead and use the driver's license as an ID, you have to make it a robustly secure ID, and not something a kid could make in his dorm room.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by OneFootInTheGrave
communism might be mostly dead, but communist ideas are well and truly alive

State IDs well predate communism. Don't blame us for what kings did.

[Kuciwalker]

Link?

[SlowwHand]

WTF difference does it make if it's State or Federal?
Get a grip. Like the State won't identify you to the Feds?

Besides that, it won't affect Texas, once we leave.

[Kuciwalker]

That didn't work so well last time.

[SlowwHand]

That's because we weren't really that interested. We had Indians after us, too, you know.

[Rufus T. Firefly]

I don't think of y'all as leaving; more like returning to your home country.

[SlowwHand]

That's right, of 1836.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
South Dakota v. Dole seems to argue in my favor if I'm reading the case right.

Only to a point:

Our decisions have recognized that, in some circumstances, the financial inducement offered by Congress might be so coercive as to pass the point at which "pressure turns into compulsion." Steward Machine Co. v. Davis, supra, at 301 U. S. 590. Here, however, Congress has directed only that a State desiring to establish a minimum drinking age lower than 21 lose a relatively small percentage of certain federal highway funds.

http://supreme.justia.com/us/483/203/case.html

[DinoDoc]

Considering the fact that the Court allowed Congress to bully its way into an area given to it by the Constitution by the 21st Amendment, I fail to see at what point the Court might call it coercion.

[Imran Siddiqui]

When we consider, for a moment, that all South Dakota would lose if she adheres to her chosen course as to a suitable minimum drinking age is 5% of the funds otherwise obtainable under specified highway grant programs, the argument as to coercion is shown to be more rhetoric than fact.

483 U. S. 211

http://supreme.justia.com/us/483/203/case.html

[DinoDoc]

Subjective measures don't really cut it for me and only serves to bolster the point I made that the Feds have the club in the form of the Highway funds to force itself into other Constitutional State powers as laid out by snoopy.