How Real ID will affect you

[Martin Blank]

[quote="nukethewhalesagain";p="492669"]Here is the problem with the part that deports immigrants based on them being in an organization defined as a terrorist organization.

this is a direct quote from the part of the bill that defines a terrorist group:

<snip>

basically this can be taken to describe any member of the muslim church.[/quote]
No, the Muslim religion is not targeted here. What is targeted is anyone who, organized or not, that as a person or group that "engage[s] in a terrorist activity." This is defined to mean:

(I) to commit or to incite to commit, under circumstances indicating an intention to cause death or serious bodily injury, a terrorist activity;
(II) to prepare or plan a terrorist activity;
(III) to gather information on potential targets for terrorist activity;
(IV) to solicit funds or other things of value for--

• (aa) a terrorist activity;
  (bb) a terrorist organization described in clause (vi)(I) or (vi)(II); or
  (cc) a terrorist organization described in clause (vi)(III), unless the solicitor can demonstrate by clear and convincing evidence that he did not know, and should not reasonably have known, that the organization was a terrorist organization;

(V) to solicit any individual--

• (aa) to engage in conduct otherwise described in this subsection;
  (bb) for membership in a terrorist organization described in clause (vi)(I) or (vi)(II); or
  (cc) for membership in a terrorist organization described in clause (vi)(III) unless the solicitor can demonstrate by clear and convincing evidence that he did not know, and should not reasonably have known, that the organization was a terrorist organization; or

(VI) to commit an act that the actor knows, or reasonably should know, affords material support, including a safe house, transportation, communications, funds, transfer of funds or other material financial benefit, false documentation or identification, weapons (including chemical, biological, or radiological weapons), explosives, or training--

• (aa) for the commission of a terrorist activity;
  (bb) to any individual who the actor knows, or reasonably should know, has committed or plans to commit a terrorist activity;
  (cc) to a terrorist organization described in subclause (I) or (II) of clause (vi) or to any member of such an organization; or
  (dd) to a terrorist organization described in clause (vi)(III), or to any member of such an organization, unless the actor can demonstrate by clear and convincing evidence that the actor did not know, and should not reasonably have known, that the organization was a terrorist organization.

The Muslim religion is not defined by the US government as a terrorist organization (how some of the people feel about it may be different). These actions are clearly defined, and there's little gray area, unless there is a covert wing of a group that carries out plotting while maintaining a larger front as a legitimate, peaceful group that advocates the opposite.

[applekidjosh]

I'm all for it. The lack of a unifying system has totally screwed me. There was somebody born in California (I was born in Kentucky) the same day as me, and with the exact same name. And when, later in life, he committed a felony and got his license revoked, mine was revoked too. Apparently there is no fix for this sort of thing besides carrying a letter from California saying we're different people, and at any time throughout the rest of my life my license can get revoked again without my notice.

A central system would eliminate that...

[TopCat]

I think you just got lucky in finding your evil twin, applekidjosh, but I don't see how this helps you. A friend of mine whos never been to New Jersey is apparently wanted there (at least his name is).

Also, you have a different Social Security Number as this other fellow, so that should have made a difference. You losing your license because of him is rather sad, as his license has a different DLN (if they didn't use the SSN for the DLN) than yours. Thats the system being shit, and if you got fucked by the shit system which had a really good way to tell who's who already (SSN), then how will you not be fucked by a new shit system with a really good way to tell who's who that's not much better than SSN?

On a sidenote, it's passed through the senate.

Martin Blank, I'm glad you like the bill. I'm not glad you're not a bit peeved that it rode in on a much better and Guranteed To Pass bill (Money for Iraq and the Tsunami victims) just to get through. That should at least upset you a bit, that it 'snuck in'. I prefer bills that are pondered over.

Of course, they don't read any bills, and eventually, "Love and Kisses, Zaphod" will eventually appear on the one which is written to knock down your state for a hyperspace overpass to Hawaii.

[nukethewhalesagain]

Martin Blank, You seem to have snipped the important part of my argument. The bill says this applies to any organization or group of people "whether organized or not" that does one of those things or has a subgroup that does one of those things. As soon as you put in any group of people that has a subgroup then you can include the muslim church. The muslim church is not an official organization but it is an organized group of people. They have regular "meetings" as we might call them. There are subgroups in the muslim church that are real terrorists. Just like there are in the Catholic Church or just about any church. The bill is vague enopugh to apply and that is the problem. They might not have intended it that way but that is how it is written. And that is how it can be used.

[CyberEd]

DUDE !

christians have churches.
muslims mosques.
there's no such thing as a muslim church... you might mean muslim religion, muslim faith... whatever.
saying "muslim church" is like saying "Christian Synagogue". see ?

by subgroup I think it was meant for organisations such as the Hizbalah, which is a lebanese political organisation which started as and still has subgroups which are terrorists.

as I said we have that system of ID ever since we have a country (57 years tomorrow !!!!)... you can carry an ID card or use your drivers license or passport as one (both have that number imprinted on them).
when making a phone transaction using credit card that number can be used to identify you.
when tests are done or grades are published in the university your only identification is that number (so the prof won't know who you are and be biased). we use that system so much I REALLY thought the US had some similar database, and a similar ID number...
yes, someone COULD get hold of that number.... just as easily as someone could get my address, full name, or credit card number.

I fail to see what all the fuss is about...

[TopCat]

In the UK, many people choose to get the paper Drivers License instead of the nice photo-id one like we have here in the United States.

Food for thought?

(At least it used to be many people, a friend of mine is one with the paper license)

Random slashdot comments that appeal to my skim:

2) It's unfunded. The states are supposed to work out for themselves how to comply with these regulations with NO federal funding.

The real problem is that the people they're trying to stop, terrorists, will probably still be able to get them. If a DMV can create a the cards, then a terrorist who invests 100K in various equipment can make them as well. But you're going to stop poor college kids from making them.

You know what really ruffles my underwear? The fact that this was basically attached to legislation that would grant more money for the soldiers

That last one was a point I tried to make earlier about me being dissatisfied that it went through on a 'guranteed to pass' bill.

[Nekra]

In the UK, many people choose to get the paper Drivers License instead of the nice photo-id one like we have here in the United States.

no we dont. Theres no choice in it, you get both, and both are required to be on you when you drive. although i think you only get in toruble if you dont have the photocard, which can also be used as a proof of id. The only choice is if you have one of the old driving licenses your not required to pay for a replacement. but if you do replace you have to get the new type.

And MB i think the poster was saying that the bill seems abiguous enough that it could in theory cover anyone, which might give a government agency the encessary "legal" authority to start arresting people. Dont you have a bill or osmething that states that anyone who commits or is suspected of commiting a terrorist act can be arrested and held without trial indefinitely.

[Spongiform]

I really don't like the practice of attatching unrelated things to bills that have to be passed for a different reason. It's not just with the RealID issue, it happens all the time. There should be some sort of law about that.

[Metzgirl]

That law would probably have 20 riders itself.

[gravity]

The thing I find amusing is that this National ID has less proof of identification requirements than a Washington State Driver's License.

[TopCat]

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

a wealth of information there

[Martin Blank]

Looking over these requirements, it seems like Washington just meets the requirements, but doesn't exceed them, though it's unclear how far they go in validating the documents. Good for them. Less to have to do.

[quote="TopCat";p="493845"]Random slashdot comments that appeal to my skim:

2) It's unfunded. The states are supposed to work out for themselves how to comply with these regulations with NO federal funding.

The real problem is that the people they're trying to stop, terrorists, will probably still be able to get them. If a DMV can create a the cards, then a terrorist who invests 100K in various equipment can make them as well. But you're going to stop poor college kids from making them.

You know what really ruffles my underwear? The fact that this was basically attached to legislation that would grant more money for the soldiers

[/quote]
First of all, DHS is allowed under IRATPA2004 to provide grants to states to assist in implementation.

Second, terrorists aren't that well-funded that they can afford $100K for ID cards. A year or so ago, there was a release of some conversations al Qaeda's senior money manager and some underling, and the manager was freaking out over a few hundred dollars spent over the assigned budget, which was only a few tens of thousands of dollars to cover expenses for several people for a year or so. Money moves of this scale are too easily tracked these days, and since the system will be tied into a database for authentication, they'd have to get into that system as well.

I understand the issue of the rider, but this isn't something new. I'm all for a provision to be added to the Constitution to prevent non-related riders, as well as mandatory sunset provisions with analyses of laws at the end of the period to see whether and how well the law had served the country. But until you start complaining that something you agree with was passed as a rider without debate (and no one at all in this country does not have a pet cause that has been served by such), your complaints lose a great deal of legitimacy in my eyes.

[gravity]

[quote="Martin Blank";p="494264"]Looking over these requirements, it seems like Washington just meets the requirements, but doesn't exceed them, though it's unclear how far they go in validating the documents. Good for them. Less to have to do.
[/quote]

They go so far as to refuse to accept driver's permits, School ID's, birth certificates, or social security cards as proof of identification.

Gods I hope they don't have that sort of validation process for the National ID!

[Martin Blank]

There will be no 'National ID,' per se. However, for your state ID or DL, if your state takes part in this, you will be required to provide proof of your name, date of birth, SSN, current address (probably meaning a bank statement, utility bill, or similar document), and legal residency status (citizen or legal alien).

States will be free to require additional documentation.

[TopCat]

[quote="Martin Blank";p="494275"]There will be no 'National ID,' per se. However, for your state ID or DL, if your state takes part in this, you will be required to provide proof of your name, date of birth, SSN, current address (probably meaning a bank statement, utility bill, or similar document), and legal residency status (citizen or legal alien).

States will be free to require additional documentation.[/quote]

Thanks to the wonders of /., someone else has already replied for me.

I consider this to be strangely worded (from section 202):

...(omitted, click link)...

Subsection (e) is a bit vague to me. Subsection (b) states the required information that each ID will have. The bill mentions "design requirements" along with "requirements of subsection 202(b)". I'm not sure if "design requirements" means visual appearance (like section B above), or document requirements (as titled in the 202(b)). This could mean that the Secretary (Secretary of Homeland Security) has the power to prescribe how a driver's license will visually appear, or it could mean that the Secretary can (in his/her sole discretion, as dictated by "the national security interests of the United States") determine whatever documentation requirements they want to have.

Not that that really matters, because then there's also 202.b.4 - "identification number". So it doesn't even really matter what's on the card, so long as it has an ID number in a machine readable format (RFID?), tapped into a nice, large database is a bit interesting to say the least. I can think of really good things that could come of this, or really bad things.

This is a national ID, no question about it. It wouldn't worry me if our nation had an open discussion on that topic, but the fact that this is obfuscated as a rider on an appropriations bill bothers me.

For those who are a little daft, the reason I said "replied for me" is that it is in fact a reply to Martin's Post. Egads!

(Sidenote: Martin, why don't you link to RLF or something as your website?)