Quote from: articleBeginning May 2008, states will be required to issue federally approved driver's licenses or identification cards to those who live and work in the United States, due to an act passed by Congress in 2005 called the Real ID Act.

article


tinkerbell

I don't know why everyone is so afraid of this. Yes, it is a pain in the neck but if you have your drivers license now and you can prove that you are who you are, then what is there to be afraid of. If you think that the government will be into our business, well, it is too late for that now. We all enjoy the fastness of the computer and with that we are all under the microscope. The real ID act isn't here yet and from what I have seen it will cost a lot of money to implement this. Don't forget that we have a Democratic Congress now and Good old George will no longer hold office by then and it will probably go to a democrat. So it may not even happen. Where are the states going to get all this money that they need to put this into effect. Certainly not from the federal government, we have Iraq going and that is costing us billions of dollars. I think it is just a scare tactic and could care less about it. If it does happen then I will comply and that will be it.
Sheila

What is to be afraid of is that there are forces that are trying to leverage this to make it illegal to change ones' birth gender forever.

If they implement a reasonable procedure to change genders, I'll have a lot less problem with it.  At least, when some miscreant or marketer violates my privacy, the personal data they offload and cross-reference will say [FEMALE], and I won't be as easily targeted should someone want to stage a little witch hunt.

Karen

QuoteP.O. boxes may not be used as addresses, which could cause problems for people who may fear for their personal safety, such as judges, police officers or domestic violence victims. People who do not have a permanent address, such as the homeless, may run into problems obtaining the Real ID, which could in turn de[t]er them from receiving Medicare and other benefits.

...

Homeland Security is permitted to add additional requirements, which could include "biometric identifiers" such as fingerprints or retinal scan.
...

"...I do think it may have risks, just like any other thing we can come across in life. For example, it could make identity theft easier," Allie Correa, sophomore family and consumer science major said.

Probably the biggest concern that sticks out is that this ultimately an identity theft risk.  You will have lots of institutions that will be able to tap into large amounts of person data, and some of that data needs to be encrypted at a level that is essentially unbreakable for the lifetime of the person.  And then you have be sure some moron doesn't abuse power within the system for personal purposes.  So you have to simultaneously need to have oversight on the system, including something the public can use that doesn't compromise the system's security at the same time.  And you also need to deal with lost IDs to keep other people from using them for unlawful behavior, and people need to be able to acquire replacements.

It's not that these issues haven't existed before; it's just the raw quantity of personal data one can acquire so easily in this system is staggering.

what people [don't understand] is that they [won't have to ask for your id]. Because of [rfid technology], they will be able to scan you with an [rfid reader] and know everything about you. before you think of calling me paranoid, do research into it and you'll find out what i'm saying is true. this means if you go to a political rally that they find controversial [maybe an anti-war rally, or a free speech rally] they will be able to scan the entire crowd and label them as [enemies] of the state. this technology is [truly scary] and people don't understand the [invasion of privacy] this includes.

I wonder if I really can prove I am who I am.... crap.  My birth certificate has not been changed and I never have obtained a passport.  I sure hope they take my current DL as proof.

Cindi

Quote from: Katia on February 13, 2007, 12:02:09 AM
what people [don't understand] is that they [won't have to ask for your id]. Because of [rfid technology], they will be able to scan you with an [rfid reader] and know everything about you. before you think of calling me paranoid, do research into it and you'll find out what i'm saying is true. this means if you go to a political rally that they find controversial [maybe an anti-war rally, or a free speech rally] they will be able to scan the entire crowd and label them as [enemies] of the state. this technology is [truly scary] and people don't understand the [invasion of privacy] this includes.

I don't remember where I saw them, but they're selling little holders for your ID that block RFID.  You have to actually take the card out for it to be readable.  I found it because the moment I heard about this, my first thought was to start making those and selling them.  It was a bummer that someone had beaten me to it, because they're going to sell well, I think.

The Real ID act leaves it up to Homeland Security to decide on what is or is not valid for ID.  Someone, say like Frist, could just decide that anyone with a gender change has something to hide and immediately nullify any ID that shows a gender marker has been changed.  or they can decide that you are not allowed to change your gender marker at all, forever and ever.  Or rule out any name changes that were not done for the safety of the individual.  Pretty much HS can do whatever they want.  Yeah, nothing to worry about just move along and wait to be tattooed.


"The shield" for the proposed RFID passports will work as long as you never, ever open the ID up.  So that means keeping it taped shut until it is time to present it to a security officer at the airport and never any other time.  great that they decided to go with something that has already been compromised, saves them the trouble of trying to put on any appearance of being concerned about the safety and security of our identity.

The Real ID act is not something which a state has to participate in. If they do, they get federal funding, if they don't, they don't get the money. 11 states as of this week have already turned it down. The state of NC which I reside, is currently considering by-passing this as well and turning down the fed funds.  Remember folks NC is a conservative state, and they are not likely to play ball in this game either.

There is a serious issue with this for people transitioning. You need TWO documents showing your identity as a US Citizen, a BC or a Pass Port are required along with your current DL to have a new one re issued. So in those states where they did not change the BC for people transitioning, or you simply never bothered to do it.... I highly suggest if you can you do, it is going to be a mess if your documents don't match up.

Peace
Taylor

I just checked with the vital records department in my "beloved" home state of Utah.  They will not change my birth certificate. They will however provide an "ammendment" if I get a court ordered sex change (even though it happened 20 years ago) here in CA to do so.  They did tell me that I would need to have this done if I am ever to collect Social Security but there is no other reason to do it immediately.  It's funny that California changed all of my documents and ID years ago, with very little hassle.

Lovely.  Now, I've got to go to court in my little town, get my name plastered as the local TS so I can get a court ordered "sex change" so I can get an "ammendment" to my birth record...  the original birth certificate will always remain the same. Perhaps, I should wait on this item until I plan to move.  I think that I'll go ahead and start work on a passport which should take care of everything else in the short term. Sometimes I hate this world.

Cindi

Cindi,

SSI can be changed without change of BC. Not sure if your aware of this, but thought I would point it out in case your not.

Peace
Taylor

Quote from: taylor on February 13, 2007, 02:00:56 PM
11 states as of this week have already turned it down.
Peace
Taylor

which states? do you know?

Quote from: taylor on February 13, 2007, 11:13:51 PM
Cindi,

SSI can be changed without change of BC. Not sure if your aware of this, but thought I would point it out in case your not.

Peace
Taylor

I changed my SSI identity 21 years ago.  They send me reports every year to my legal name.  Is that what you are talking about?  I never wanted to confront the records office in Utah...  at the time, they wouldn't even ammend certificates.  I knew that it would be an exercise in futility.

I haven't had to travel outside the country since... so I've never worried about a passport. I think that if I ever want to do that, I could run down to San Francisco.  Is CA on the list of states denying this opportunity to get federal funding?

Cindi

Quote from: Cindi Jones on February 14, 2007, 02:47:29 AMI changed my SSI identity 21 years ago.  They send me reports every year to my legal name.  Is that what you are talking about?  I never wanted to confront the records office in Utah...  at the time, they wouldn't even ammend certificates.  I knew that it would be an exercise in futility.

My social security card was the first thing I changed.  But they never changed the sex designation in their computers.  It's the sole bit of legal information that's still out there identifying me as male.  I'm told that it totally depends on the clerk you get when you walk into the office, but I tried having them change it in Santa Cruz, CA, and the woman there refused.

I could care less which marker SSI carries for me.  I just don't want to lose my benefit because of it.... I suppose it could get tricky with Medicare.  I don't know.  I suppose that I'll find out down the road.  I've got quite a way to go before that's an issue.

ReikRobin... do you have any experience with SSI or medicare?

Cindi

Quote from: Katia on February 13, 2007, 11:58:40 PM

Quote from: taylor on February 13, 2007, 02:00:56 PM
11 states as of this week have already turned it down.
Peace
Taylor

which states? do you know?

I've only been able to find real evidence that Maine has definitely turned it down. But Georgia, Wyoming, Montana, New Mexico, Vermont and Washington are expected to (yay Washington!) from what I can see...I'll keep digging. Oh, and Arizona, Georgia, Hawaii, Massachusetts, Missouri, New Hampshire, Oklahoma, Utah and Wyoming have legislation against it or something to that exent.

This thing is a really nasty piece of work the administration has written up. I really hope it doesn't pass. If it is, I'm pretty sure states cannot reject it.

Nasty problem we have here, eh?

I agree and am very concerned about the issues this law (or any like it) bring up.  Too much information too easily accessible to any and all government employees...I would guess all the way down past your local police department to just about anyone who gets a paycheck from the city or county and can provide any kind of reasonable excuse.  Add in the track record the Feds already have about losing identity information, and don't forget those tricky little hackers...ugly.  And, believe it or not, I'm not one who sees government intrusion everywhere.

As far as the states not being required to follow the law, but losing Federal funding...that was the same thing they did when the speed limit was lowered to 55 MPH.  The Feds said "lower the speed limit or we will cut off your Federal Highway funds."  I don't recall many states (if any) where they said "we don't want your money", but the list of states seriously considering saying "no" to the Real ID Act is encouraging.

I haven't read the details on this law...are they mandating RFID technology in the ID?  If so, that is exceptionally bad.  As far as the concern about being identified if you go to a political rally or something...too late.  Facial Recognition technology already exists (though imperfect) and there was a big controversy a year or so ago when the police wanted to scan everyone in the stands at the SuperBowl.

On the flip side, there really needs to be a way to identify those who have a legal right to be in the country and those who don't.  This is not about the immigration discussion, but rather to point out that we live in a world where there are people who will do anything to hurt innocent people if they think it will harm our country.  While there have been native-born American citizens that have performed attacks against the US (remember the government building in Oklahoma City?) so it is no guarantee that a terrorist will be from outside the US, there is a strong possibility.

So, how do you provide some semblance of national security without trampling the heck out of individual rights or privacy?  Beats me, but the Real ID Act scares the crap out of me, and I don't like it one bit.  Ben Franklin said "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."  These words are as true now as they were then.

.....Laurie

Well... so far, we haven't even tried to figure out what pisses people off about us enough to kill themselves over it.  Until now, we haven't even cared.

I do have friends from various foreign countries... and the US is not well liked for many, many reasons.  We do not treat our neighbors very well.  We don't even care enough to figure it out.  I would think that would be first on the priority list.  You know.... fixing the problem instead of tending to the symptoms.  But hey... what do I know?

Cindi

Quote from: Cindi Jones on February 14, 2007, 10:36:32 PM
Well... so far, we haven't even tried to figure out what pisses people off about us enough to kill themselves over it.  Until now, we haven't even cared.

I do have friends from various foreign countries... and the US is not well liked for many, many reasons.  We do not treat our neighbors very well.  We don't even care enough to figure it out.  I would think that would be first on the priority list.  You know.... fixing the problem instead of tending to the symptoms.  But hey... what do I know?

Cindi

You hit the nail on the head, Cindi. You know lots.

Dennis

Cindi:

You have to change those records ASAP; things are getting very complicated now, and IMO it is best to be prepared...

Quote from: geocites.comSSA (Social Security Administration) records



Prior to 2002, some pre-ops were able to change the sex marker on their Social Security record.  Having an orchiectomy seemed to improve the odds that the clerks would be willing to change the sex marker, and some were even lucky enough to encounter a clerk who was kind enough to change the sex marker without any surgery at all.



But on October 3rd, 2002, the Social Security Administration changed their rules and now refuses to change the sex marker until you have had the complete SRS surgery.  Some pre-ops who managed to change their sex markers before October 2002 have even reported that the SSA changed those markers back to M.



The SSA spells out their policy for changing data in their records and specifies that sex reassignment surgery must have been completed before changing the sex marker.  Although this policy states that only a physician's letter stating completed sex reassignment surgery is required, some recent post-ops have reported needing a court order for gender marker change or an amended birth certificate.



While your Social Security card does not list your sex (it displays only your name and Social Security number), the SSA does keep other data on record including sex and your birth date.  Unfortunately, they can and sometimes do disclose your sex to your workplace.

Does the SSA change the sex marker after having only an orchiectomy?  I have found out for myself that the answer is no.  I began my RLE in December 2002, only two months after SSA implemented the new policy, and I did let the clerk know I had the orchiectomy, but the SSA still won't change my records until I have my SRS.

and this is the link for the SSA policy.




US Passports




U. S. States and Canadian Provinces:
Instructions For Changing Name And Sex
On Birth Certificate



IMO you will save yourself a lot of migraines if you do it now.

Quote from: Katia on February 13, 2007, 11:58:40 PM

Quote from: taylor on February 13, 2007, 02:00:56 PM
11 states as of this week have already turned it down.
Peace
Taylor

which states? do you know?

Hi Katia;

I found this link which provides a list of states where legislation against Real ID is currently active.  Hope it helps.


tinkerbell


P.S.  I am bummed! no legislation in Utopia.  I am sure that the terminator has a lot to do with it.