by Becky Akers, LewRockwell.com

During its decline from a republic to a democracy, lying Leviathan prattled about being a “government of, by, and for the people.” But the beast increasingly forsakes that pretence as it continues sliding into tyranny.

One instance of the State’s new and brutal honesty came last fall when Congress bailed out billionaires despite our overwhelming opposition. Another around that same time saw the criminals running New York City overturn a law on term-limits that voters had twice upheld. More than ever, government is of, by and for Our Rulers.

And then there’s the Feds’ dogged quest for a national ID card. Four years ago, these bozos tried to turn your driver’s license into just such a monstrosity with their infamous REAL ID Act. This dictate required licenses to include “defined minimum data elements,” most likely biometric identifiers such as fingerprints or retinal scans and RFID tracking chips. It would also make even more of our business contingent on the State’s whims: before we entered a courthouse or opened a bank account, among other activities, we’d have to produce our REAL ID for a bureaucrat’s approval – or rejection. Continue Reading

by State Rep. Paul Opsommer (MI-93)

Regardless of whether you felt REAL ID represented critical improvements in security standards or a federal government ID system outsourced upon the states, Secretary Napolitano recently affirmed that, at least by name, that Title II of the Act was dead:

“By Dec 31st, no state will have issued a REAL ID compliant identification document.  We cannot have national standards for driver’s licenses when the states themselves refuse to participate.”

But, just how dead is it?  As politicians, we see firsthand how often things are simply retooled, renamed and resubmitted.  And in the case of REAL ID, which has its roots in failed attempts to implement AAMVA’s Driver’s License Agreement (DLA), it would not be the first time the concept behind a “one license, one record” national ID card was being repackaged. Continue Reading

An open letter to Arnold Schwarzenegger

Dear Governor Schwarzenegger:

As a constituent who cares deeply about privacy and national security, I urge you to oppose implementation of the REAL ID Act and support its immediate repeal.

The creation of a national identification card is not a power delegated to Congress under Article I, section 8 of the United States Constitution, and violates the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution which states, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.” Continue Reading

Guest Commentary by Brian Trent

There’s a lesson in the Aesopian tale of the man who wanted to cook a frog. When he tossed the amphibian into a pot of boiling water, it leapt out to safety. The thwarted cook then changed tactics. He placed the frog in cold water… and slowly brought up the heat.

In much the same way, American freedom is slowly being cooked away. When I was growing up, “Papers, please!” was once the bark of Communist soldiers patrolling state lines. It’s set now to become an American staple. Slipped insidiously into an $81 billion bill for “supporting troops” and “tsunami relief” was a tiny law - The Real ID Act of 2005 - which creates a de facto National ID card for Americans and requires it to be in place by 2008 (the Feds are now “allowing” an extension through 2009 for States that request it). Every driver’s license will be required to include “physical security features” and “a common machine readable technology.” The cultists who support this National ID card say that it’s all voluntary.

And it is. You can refuse to comply, in which case you won’t be able to open a bank account, enter a federal building, ride a plane or train, etc. Yes, quite voluntary. A nice card, containing all sorts of sensitive information about you, which can be scanned everywhere you go.

“This is almost a frontal assault on the freedoms of America when they require us to carry a national ID to monitor where we are,” railed Missouri state Representative James Guest, a Republican. “This does nothing to stop terrorism.”

One of only eight Republicans to oppose the measure, Representative Ron Paul of Texas added, “Supporters claim it is not a national ID because it is voluntary. However, any state that opts out will automatically make nonpersons out of its citizens.”

Today we face a thriving identity-theft market. National ID will be like adding chum to a sea of sharks; a veritable African diamond war for the digital age. Everyone’s value will be melted down to cold equations which will be stolen, which will be seen by people who have no business seeing it, and which will make it very hard to get your life back when this happens to you.

Let’s forget the cost to the states, which has been estimated at more than $14 billion. The ID card will, making use of RFID technology already discussed in another essay of mine, be able to show where you are at all times. Information ranging from mailing address to DNA can be encoded into this little spy.

Supporters of the card say it will help prevent terrorism. Not only do they fail at giving real examples of how this card can magically do this, they completely turn tail from the scores of problems - and yes, security problems - that this card will create.

For starters: The National ID card will eventually be forged. To whom do you protest when this happens? Roughly 20 percent of identity papers, cards, and documents are lost each year; what do you do when your digital self is misplaced? How do we hold the government, FBI, NSA, and president accountable for how they use this information? What magic firewall or force-field will be put into place to prevent hacking? And oh yeah… what happens when the database crashes?

Having all this information available on a database will result in a Golden Age for identity-theft, surveillance, and blackmail. It will make our lives less secure. And there’s something very suspicious in putting a system in place under the guise of “protecting us from terrorists” when all that system really does is staple a lab-tag onto American citizens.

Fortunately, a real civil war is heating up over this — though to what extent that protest will go remains to be seen. The current presidency is notoriously in support of gigantic government (yet another symptom of how the alleged “conservative party” has devolved like political Morlocks.)

Maine was the first state to rebel, passing a resolution to outright refuse implementation of the Real ID Act. Following this trailblazing defiance came Idaho, and a recent storm of protest from Arizona, Hawaii, Georgia, Massachusetts, Missouri, Montana, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Utah, Vermont, Washington, and Wyoming. For anyone keeping score, this is a coalition of states not often seen on the same side of an issue.

It shouldn’t come as a surprise. Historically, Americans have rejected any effort at mandating a National ID card. Sneaking this into law was the coward’s way of circumventing public debate; slipping it under our skin might be next. Or perhaps we’ll have a nice tattoo on our right hands and foreheads? Citizen John Valjean, 24601!

The debate will heat up in the next few months. Exactly how hot it’ll get is up to us.

The Aesopian frog, meanwhile, is cooking.

Brian Trent [send him email] is a professional essayist, screenwriter, and novelist; he is the author of “Remembering Hypatia” and the forthcoming “Never Grow Old: the Novel of Gilgamesh.” Brian is a contributor to American Chronicle and The Humanist Magazine. Visit his website at www.rememberinghypatia.com.

A Letter from a Reader:

Why this Conservative Tennessean Opposes REAL ID

1. REAL ID is a de facto national identification card. At least Lamar Alexander, in recent comments, was honest enough to admit this. Has America sacrificed so much for freedom only to create a “papers please” society?

2. REAL ID does an end-run around the 4h Amendment: “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

It is unreasonable to give the central government the power (potential) to track individuals in real-time. If the government needs to search a citizen, let it get a search warrant. We should not have to be monitered. Is not this the essence of freedom? REAL ID, and its future additions, will make life subject to the good-will of the government in a software maze of “red light, green light.” This is not freedom.

3. REAL ID reduces God-given rights of the individual to a string of digits, subject to the good-will of software and/or bureaucrats. It makes Americans get “permission” to live and move in the basic functions of society: banking and travel. The permission we need to do this (and more) is God-given. We shouldn’t have to ask permission to be functioning citizens within our own country.

4. REAL ID may require biometrics at the state level or at the federal level. Why should Americans be “booked” like criminals even if they’ve committed no crime?

5. REAL ID compiles much personal information into one place. With the ease of internet access, this information is vulnerable to anyone on the globe with the ability hack.

6. REAL ID is a move towards the centalization of more power. In an age of terror, the country should operate on a philosophy of de-centralizing as much of our lives as possible–so that if an attack handicaps one part of the country, the rest of the country can still function.

7. The burden of proof lies on promoters of REAL ID. Show us exactly HOW this significantly new and immense power to the government is NOT a threat to freedom. FREEDOMS ARE LOST IN THEORY/PHILOSOPHY LONG BEFORE THEY’RE LOST IN PRACTICE. Conservatives are threatening freedom and promoting “big government” with the REAL ID Act.

8. We should be moving away from an identification society. This kind of atmosphere promotes suspicion and fear. Are Americans innocent until proven guilty or are we suspicious until properly identified?

9. Programs like REAL ID never remain static. The private sector will seek to use this identification system as well. One bad application will lead to others. How can we remain an “open” society with this kind of philosophy?

10. Some folks say we already have a national id–Social Security. But if REAL ID is only a lateral move, why are we doing it? We are doing it because it is indeed an increase in the government’s ability to track its citizens. If we’re on the wrong road, the soonest way to progress is to turn around.

We don’t have to do anything stupid. Just because we “can” doesn’t mean we “should.”

Tennessee [and all of America] should Just Say NO to REAL ID.

by John Rush, who grew up in central Kansas and went to a small college in Florida to study for the ministry. John has pastored a church in Hailey, ID, and has served as a Christian School administrator in Newport, TN. He is currently pastoring Liberty Church of Cosby in Cosby, TN. John is a conservative republican who believes that people ought to love all ten amendments in the Bill of Rights. He welcomes feedback through his blog at http://realidwatch.blogspot.com.

State resistance to REAL ID is growing. The Associated Press reports from New Hampshire:

The New Hampshire Legislature took a baby step Tuesday toward rejecting what they say amounts to the creation of a national ID card.

The House Transportation Committee voted unanimously to recommend barring the state from complying with the federal REAL ID Act, which sets standards for driver’s licenses. The full House next considers the bill.

REAL ID, Passed in 2005 and due to take effect in 2008-9, turns your driver’s license into a de-facto national ID card. This is yet another step towards a totalitarian police state in America.

The Act mandates that all driver’s licenses carry the same information, no matter what state issues them. The states must also “provide electronic access to all other States to information contained in the motor vehicle database of the State.” In other words, your information will be in a national database that puts everything at the Feds’ fingertips.

Additionally, the Department of Homeland Security is given the power to require “biometric” information on these licenses/ID’s in the future. This means that what appears to be a harmless-looking driver’s license could eventually contain a retina scan, fingerprints, DNA information, or radio frequency technology. We don’t know just what right now because REAL ID keeps this power open-ended. DHS will tell us…someday.

All this is supposed to help us fight terrorism, somehow, because the nineteen 9-11 hijackers had driver’s licenses. In order to be “safe” you’ll soon be required to have the proper “papers.”

Any refusal to comply by the States will mean that their residents will lose the ability to get on a plane, receive social security, and potentially, to get a bank account or a job. So, the feds are doing little more than blackmailing them into compliance and submission.

Wait a minute! That doesn’t sound legal, does it? First, a little constitutional background.

The US Constitution was written under what’s referred to as “positive grant.” This means that the Federal Government can only exercise powers that are specifically given to it by the Constitution – nothing more. This is where the Tenth Amendment comes into play – reaffirming positive grant:

“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

Pretty simple, right? Right. If a power isn’t delegated to the U.S. government by the Constitution, then that power belongs to the States or the People. It seems that the only people who could possibly confuse this one sentence are politicians, lawyers, and federal judges.

It’s worth repeating. If a power isn’t specifically listed in the Constitution, the feds can’t do it. Period.

As New Hampshire representative Sherman Packard (R-Londonderry) said:

“We have to uphold the constitution,” he said. “We will not be blackmailed by the federal government.”

Sherman, you’ve hit the nail on the head! Obviously he’s read the Constitution. There’s not a single thing mentioned about ID’s, or licenses, or driving, or funding the states, or anything of the like. What does that mean? You’ve got it – it’s unconstitutional (against the law!) for the federal government to get involved in these things.

But, you might say, the Constitution is outdated! There were no driver’s licenses when the constitution was written – there were no cars! Right. There were no such things. But that doesn’t mean the law is “outdated” or bad.

In fact, the idea of strictly limiting the federal government is as good of an idea today as it was two centuries ago. Why? All you need to do is pay attention to what’s going on in our country right now. If you don’t keep the government in check, as many of the founders warned, governments will always grow and grow into a despotic beast.

Today, the government is larger than ever. Has that correlated with a better adherence to the law? Not at all.

Size of government notwithstanding, REAL ID is still unconstitutional. It doesn’t matter if the politicians think that it’s absolutely necessary. It doesn’t matter if they think the Constitution is outdated. None of it matters. The Law is the Law. The only legal way to approach this is through a Constitutional Amendment, and not by ignoring or violating the Constitution.

If the politicians were so confident that this program was necessary, and that We the People would approve of it, they would have presented it as a constitutional amendment. Instead, debate was light, and the bill was added to another, which passed 100-0 in the Senate.

It seems that abiding by the Constitution is pretty rare. Instead, addendums, riders, and backroom deals are the way of politics in Washington.

Think about that. Do you want to live in a society where the government has to follow the rules, or do you want to live in a society where politicians follow only the laws that they like?

Federal standards for identification are not authorized by the Constitution. It doesn’t matter whether they’re enforced through “laws” or economic “incentives” to the States. The politicians, by trying to force this on us without amending the Constitution to allow it, are showing utter contempt for states’ rights and the principles of the Tenth Amendment.

Bottom line: REAL ID violates the Constitution.

Legislators in New Hampshire (and elsewhere) should be applauded for their courageous opposition to this unconstitutional nightmare.

Long live the resistance!

Guest Commentary by Thomas Andrew Olson
Published with Permission from LewRockwell.com

Recently, I watched Lou Dobbs, and his handmaiden, Kitty Pilgrim, get all hot, bothered, and appalled by the Maine state legislature voting overwhelmingly to refuse to enforce any provisions of the REAL ID act, an unfunded mandate passed by Congress in 2005, and which is supposed to go into force in May of next year.

REAL ID is the complex workaround to Congress’ failure to sell a national ID card outright, to a frightened public, in the wake of 9/11. Instead they now insist the states individually comply with precise federal standards (standards yet to be fully developed by the Dept. of Homeland Security) for driver licensing. These will probably include the requirement that residents produce birth certificates upon renewal, plus the collection of biometric data. Then, that state DMV database has to able to be accessed not only by the feds, but all the other states. This is supposed to help us fight terrorism, somehow, because the 19 hijackers had driver’s licenses.

States like Maine protested that not only was this law an unwarranted intrusion on the privacy rights of their residents, but it was a de facto national ID card in its own right, yet another foot in the door towards a totalitarian police state. The costs of implementation would be too high, projected to be in the tens of millions in each state, and would have to be passed on to the citizens somehow.

As usual, there was no federal “carrot” with such legislation, only a “stick.” The stick, in this case, was that residents of states who failed to comply would either have to show a passport in order to fly, or they simply would not fly. This reminder was delivered, again, on Dobb’s show, by a sneering angry sycophant from DHS.

But this is standard operating procedure. The feds levy high taxes on the residents of the states, make sweeping, unfunded policy edicts, then enforce them by warning the state governments that failure to comply fully will result in those states not getting their own residents’ tax dollars returned to them (minus a cut) in the form of various subsidies.

But take heart – history has shown us that resistance is not futile. From 1973 to 1988 we were saddled by a particularly egregious and corrupting federal edict demanding that speed limits on highways be reduced to 55mph, ostensibly as a fuel-saving initiative. It was corrupt in that it was a total failure – non-compliance was legion, especially in western states with lots of wide-open spaces, low traffic, and too few cops. Car companies that produced vehicles with better gas mileage did more to save fuel than any federal speed law. But the stick remained: failure to enforce the “double-nickel” would result in a loss of federal highway funding.

In early 1987, then Arizona governor Evan Mecham, no stranger to controversy, had finally had enough, and told Washington they could keep their highway funding – he was raising the limits on all AZ roads to 65mph, and he didn’t care what Washington thought about it. Then, as now, feds and media talking heads alike were appalled by the audacity of a lowly state governor standing up for the rights of his state residents against the needs of the federal government. But his action enabled other states – and their residents – to stand up and cry “enough is enough!”

By 1988, 55 was history – Congress bumped it to 65. A few years later, it was bumped again to 75 in Midwest and Western rural areas, and allowed states far greater leeway to set standards that they believed worked best for them. In the late 90’s, Montana went so far as to revive their original “reasonable and prudent” rule for daytime travel – which essentially meant, “whatever speed you felt was safe under the circumstances.” (That was a bit of a rush, believe me, to go 115 mph on a dry, straight, open road, and cops wouldn’t bat an eye – sadly, a federal judge later put a stop to that one.)

Therefore, it’s possible, despite all the posturing by the national-security jackboots in the Congress and DHS, that Maine’s action may have opened the door for other states to follow suit. Similar bills are pending right now in Georgia, Massachusetts, Montana, New Mexico, and Washington state. The question remains whether that door will ultimately become a floodgate.

Thomas Andrew Olson [send him mail] is a technology consultant, writer and speaker in New York City.

Copyright © 2007 LewRockwell.com

Guest Commentary by Becky Akers
Published with Permission from LewRockwell.com

Maine’s state legislature “RESOLVED” almost unanimously last week that it will “refuse… to implement the REAL ID Act….” As if that weren’t enough, it “implores the United States Congress to repeal the REAL ID Act…”

What?

Go ahead and re-read it. Took me a few tries, too. Such stunningly good news knocks one’s comprehension for a loop. It’s like sunshine at midnight: so freak a treat that one can only blink and gibber. When was the last time we had news this good? Heck, when was the last time we had good news, period, from the political world?

The REAL ID Act, for those of you lacking the time and stomach to analyze Leviathan’s droppings, might better be titled “Papers, Please.” Passed in 2005, due to take effect in 2008, it finishes the job of turning Amerika into a police state by making driver’s licenses into national ID cards.

The Act requires all licenses to carry the same information, whether they’re issued in Alaska, Florida, or somewhere in between. Those who concede that free people should ask Their Rulers’ permission before driving cars they own on roads they pay for probably won’t object to providing their name, address, date of birth, gender, a “digital photograph,” and their signature – the usual data that good citizens are conditioned to yield without thinking.

But then comes this explosive little mandate: the license must also include “a common machine-readable technology, with defined minimum data elements.” Who gets to “define” those “elements”? The Department of Homeland Security (DHS), of course, the busybodies who brought us airport screeners and the infamous No-Fly List. Ergo, look for our new and improved licenses to feature fingerprints and a microchip that tracks our movements. And, while the DHS is at it, why not include our financial transactions (banks already report these anyway since the Feds claim to recognize a terrorist by his moneybags), medical history (hey, keeping tabs on the psychotics protects the rest of us), and the “passenger name records (PNR’s)” airlines compile. The states must also “provide electronic access to all other States to information contained in the motor vehicle database of the State.” In other words, a national database puts everything at the Feds’ fingertips.

A nightmare, right? But it gets worse. Try obtaining or renewing a driver’s license under REAL ID. You’ll have to show four documents, everything from a birth certificate to a Social Security card. Only Felix Unger and welfare mamas keep stuff like that around. Then there’s the pleasure of paying for this: REAL ID is now priced at $11 billion, over 100 times its original $100 million estimate. Those numbers will continue climbing as more details are settled, more glitches detected. Expect to pay hundreds of dollars for your new ID – and higher state taxes, too.

The Feds will force us to flash our licenses each time we interact with them – when we board a plane (ha! There’s news!), enter a federal building (hmmm. Even jurors?), file legal papers, or collect any sort of government payout. Even folks who don’t drive will need a license lest they become legal pariahs. And economic ones, too, as the mania spreads. How else will retailers prove they’re patriotic Americans, doing their part to catch terrorists, if they don’t scrutinize our papers at every transaction? It won’t be long until supermarkets ID us before selling so much as a loaf of bread. Imagine the quandary of the poor sap whose license is lost or stolen. And what about those whose licenses are suspended for speeding, drunk driving… or, one fine day, for political dissent…?

Our Rulers claim REAL ID is another tactic in the War on (Non-Governmental) Terror. But only Leviathan and its cheerleaders in the Mainstream Media believe that papers protect us. Such naïveté makes experts in security laugh. They realize that knowing the name of your attacker may add a personal touch to your interaction but does zilch to keep you safe. That’s why God made guns and target practice, barbed wire, mace and self-defense classes, window alarms, bullet-proof doors, and common sense: those things actually protect us, all without asking the assailant’s name first.

Expensive, ineffective, totalitarian: no wonder Maine’s legislature rejected REAL ID. We might ask why they chose this particular expensive, ineffective, totalitarian measure out of the boatload dumped on us the last few years, but let’s not quibble. Nor is Maine alone. New Mexico’s House Majority Floor Leader introduced a memorial denouncing REAL ID. A Republican state representative in Montana sponsored a bill that “nullifies” REAL ID while her Democratic colleague’s competing legislation “opposes” it. The Republican uttered words seldom heard anywhere, at any time, in politics: “She would have no problem, she said, if [the Democrat’s] bill passed and not hers. ‘It’s that important,’ she said.” Similar legislation is pending in Washington State, Georgia, and Massachusetts.

Back in Maine, Senate Majority Leader Libby Mitchell believes that “…it is our job as state Legislators to protect the people…from just this sort of dangerous federal mandate.” Bravissimo! Better late than never.

Becky Akers [send her mail] writes primarily about the American Revolution.

Copyright © 2007 LewRockwell.com

Kudos to the Maine Legislature! InformationWeek Reports:

Legislators in Maine have refused to implement the Real ID Act and are calling on Congress to repeal it.

The Maine Senate and House of Representatives passed a joint resolution Thursday demanding the repeal of the law and announcing they were the first state lawmakers in the country to do so. The resolution states that the Real ID Act of 2005 would place an unfair financial burden on states, threatens privacy, and leaves citizens vulnerable to identity theft. It also states that the law, scheduled to take effect next year, fails to accomplish its mission of improving security.

The first thing to note is that Real ID, in practice, federalizes the driver’s license, which, under the limitations of the Tenth Amendment, has been a province of the states. It’s been this way since 1908 - when Rhode Island passed the first law in regards to driver’s licenses.

Without a doubt, REAL ID turns state departments of motor vehicles into delegates of the federal government. Making national “standards” for driver’s licenses creates a national ID system - nothing more and nothing less. Having your home state put its name on it is little more than an inconsequential smoke screen.

The REAL ID establishes a massive, centrally-coordinated database of information about American citizens - information that is highly personal - including physical characteristice, residence, social security number, date of birth and name.

Additionally, the Department of Homeland Security, a dubious federal office at best, is given the open-ended power to require biometric information on these licenses/ID’s in the future.

Remember, it’s not the the abuse of power that’s of the greatest concern, it’s the power to abuse! Once an open-ended power to do something sometime “in the future” is given - it’s nearly assured that some politician will eventually come along and abuse it to their advantage. The power to require biometric information on a federalized identification card leaves many dangerous possibilities open.

While the individual states are not technically forced to accept these standards, any refusal to comply will mean that their residents will lose the ability to get on a plane, receive social security, and potentially, to get a job.

So instead of creating a direct mandate on the states, the feds are blackmailing them into compliance and submission. Only in government is such activity legal. If you were openly engaging in blackmail, you’d probably be hauled off to jail in handcuffs. But that doesn’t happen to the politicians who make up the federal government.

The saddest part about the REAL ID act is that the Constitution was written to prohibit the federal government from exercising such power - direct, or implied. The long-forgotten 10th Amendment is clear. It states that powers not explicitly delegated to the Feds are reserved to the states or to the people.

Federal standards for drivers’ licenses - whether enforced through “law” or economic “incentives” (bribery) - show utter contempt for states’ rights and the principles of the Tenth Amendment.

Bottom line: REAL ID violates the 10th Amendment, which severely limits federal power. For now, though, REAL ID resistance must continue. As Maine Senate Majority Leader Elizabeth Mitchell stated:

“The federal government may be willing to burden us with the high costs of a program that will do nothing to make us safer, but it is our job as state legislators to protect the people of Maine from just this sort of dangerous federal mandate. I am proud that this state has led the way in taking a stand against Real ID.”

More people and more states must stand up to the federal government and say no!