http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectID=14&articleID=20080316_1_A1_Oklah88657
Oklahoma is one of 16 states who are 'reluctant' to convert their driver licenses over to match the federal ID guidelines/requirements. Refusing to do so could cause problems for the card holder, especially for those who fly.
I'm not sure what the problem is, other then it will cost more then our current method of issuing driver licenses. Having to prove who you are and where you live before being handed a government issued/authorized ID card certainly seems reasonable to me.
Although, having to show a photo ID card in order to get a photo ID card seems a little catch-22.
I think the main objections to the Real ID act are the costs to state governments to implement, and the fact that it will basically impose a "national ID" card. Personally, I agree with the state of OK and its opposition to this act. It is just one more step towards "big brother" and federal government control of our activity. I don't think the benefits are worth the costs.
To me the main problem is that it gives the central gov. increased power to track who you are, where you go, and where you can go. I know in a perfect world we want to be able to keep track of anyone who could be a true threat down to the step, but in reality it means more pain, more control... Besides, it's a click away from getting a mandatory RFID (sp?) chip implanted - as cheesy as that may sound.
The last changes to the ok driver's license were a move towards RealID and a vast improvement. I'm not that afraid of "big brother" and believe that standardizing so it's harder to forge and easier for travel and law enforcement in other states.
It is another bastion of State control being surrendered to the Federal Government. We are a Republic of States with a guaranteed right of travel between them - the Federal government does not grant me permission to travel. Furthermore, the Federal government has no need to verify who I am unless I have committed a crime or am seeking some form of Federal Aid.
I don't think Big Brother is entirely interested in where my family may be at any given time, but since they have no real reason to know I'm happy to deprive them of that information as best I can.
Since we are talking about gov't ID's, I figured it's an appropriate time to pass along that passports are only 2.5 to 3 weeks at this point.
What is the difference between the OK lic. and what the gov't wants?
what we need to be fixing is not the card but the process to get one. I think Oklahoma has made it a little harder for illegals to get one but not by much. We essentially need the DMV to run a SSN check on everyone getting or renewwing a license.
(http://www.markmallett.com/blog/wp-images/Holocaust_tattoo.jpg)
quote:
Originally posted by inteller
what we need to be fixing is not the card but the process to get one. I think Oklahoma has made it a little harder for illegals to get one but not by much. We essentially need the DMV to run a SSN check on everyone getting or renewwing a license.
Getting a new license or renewing an expired one requires you to provide a valid US birth certificate.
quote:
Originally posted by Shavethewhales
To me the main problem is that it gives the central gov. increased power to track who you are....
But why is it asking too much for the government to issue you an ID card at YOUR request, which you will use in the future with other entities/companies as proof of your identity, but we don't want the government to ask you to prove your identity to be issued the card in the first place?
That doesn't make sense to me.
quote:
Originally posted by Wilbur
But why is it asking too much for the government to issue you an ID card at YOUR request, which you will use in the future with other entities/companies as proof of your identity, but we don't want the government to ask you to prove your identity to be issued the card in the first place?
That doesn't make sense to me.
What are the REAL ID cards going to solve?
They aren't going to stop terrorism.
Real ID is touted as a tool against terrorists and illegal immigration, but with a little scrutiny, these arguments quickly fall apart. In 2005, the act's sponsor, then-House Judiciary Committee Chairman James Sensenbrenner, inadvertently made the case against Real ID: "The 9/11 hijackers could have used their passports to board the planes, but only one did." The rest of the hijackers used driver's licenses and state ID cards instead.
http://www.denverpost.com/opinion/ci_4842099
I think the Big Brother element from the novel "1984" is the big overriding concern about these national IDs.
The fact the fed has been doing warrentless searches for a few years isn't giving any assurances, either.
Then there's the states' rights issues. States don't want the fed to tell them what to do.
I've heard a few evangelicals says that the national ID card is one way "The Beast" or "Mr. 666" will try to control all of us, and that Christians must resist. That sounds a little nutty, but I know this concern is out there with a few people.
The "real ID" cards are a rip off. I don't think I can re-new my drivers license when it expires in 2010. The Real ID law requires 5 pieces of ID I don't have 5 pieces of ID. Two or 3 of them have to have your picture on it, and two more have to proof of address. (or something like that). Illegal aliens will be able to get a regular driver license the old way I guess in states that give illegals a license. But they can't use it for flying.