Comments on: Washington state pretends to reject REAL ID http://www.homelandstupidity.us/2007/04/12/washington-state-pretends-to-reject-real-id/ Protect yourself from government gaffes, bureaucratic blunders and incumbent incompetence Wed, 17 Mar 2010 23:34:55 -0400 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 By: Passport requirement to re-enter country temporarily suspended - Homeland Stupidityhttp://www.homelandstupidity.us/2007/04/12/washington-state-pretends-to-reject-real-id/#comment-47350 Passport requirement to re-enter country temporarily suspended - Homeland Stupidity Sat, 09 Jun 2007 07:32:54 +0000 http://www.homelandstupidity.us/2007/04/12/washington-state-pretends-to-reject-real-id/#comment-47350 [...] document until the Department of Homeland Security completes and evaluates the results of a pilot program with Washington State testing biometric driver licenses as border-crossing [...] [...] document until the Department of Homeland Security completes and evaluates the results of a pilot program with Washington State testing biometric driver licenses as border-crossing [...]

]]> By: Michael Hamptonhttp://www.homelandstupidity.us/2007/04/12/washington-state-pretends-to-reject-real-id/#comment-40761 Michael Hampton Fri, 13 Apr 2007 05:56:12 +0000 http://www.homelandstupidity.us/2007/04/12/washington-state-pretends-to-reject-real-id/#comment-40761 Except that Washington's new "secure" ID just happens to meet all the requirements for a REAL ID. Except that Washington’s new “secure” ID just happens to meet all the requirements for a REAL ID.

]]> By: Michaelhttp://www.homelandstupidity.us/2007/04/12/washington-state-pretends-to-reject-real-id/#comment-40731 Michael Fri, 13 Apr 2007 01:51:12 +0000 http://www.homelandstupidity.us/2007/04/12/washington-state-pretends-to-reject-real-id/#comment-40731 I would like to point out also that this is a Federal Mandate and while states are opting out it truly is not dealing with the law it self so even if a state does ban it any election could bring it back in any state. Second Washington States new secure drivers license is a totally different requirement outside of the Real ID required by Homeland Security. Not dealing with the issue would prevent billions of dollars in trade, tourism and tax dollars to the region and was a stop gap method to keep people and good flowing between Washington State and British Columbia. So it clearly points to the larger picture here Homeland can make up what ever rules it wants which amounts to passing laws without it being and act of congress which clearly points out that the supposed called sunset provisions in the Patriot Act were never intended by the current administration of going away. Unchecked government in action! I would like to point out also that this is a Federal Mandate and while states are opting out it truly is not dealing with the law it self so even if a state does ban it any election could bring it back in any state. Second Washington States new secure drivers license is a totally different requirement outside of the Real ID required by Homeland Security. Not dealing with the issue would prevent billions of dollars in trade, tourism and tax dollars to the region and was a stop gap method to keep people and good flowing between Washington State and British Columbia. So it clearly points to the larger picture here Homeland can make up what ever rules it wants which amounts to passing laws without it being and act of congress which clearly points out that the supposed called sunset provisions in the Patriot Act were never intended by the current administration of going away. Unchecked government in action!

]]> By: Michael Hamptonhttp://www.homelandstupidity.us/2007/04/12/washington-state-pretends-to-reject-real-id/#comment-40700 Michael Hampton Thu, 12 Apr 2007 22:16:11 +0000 http://www.homelandstupidity.us/2007/04/12/washington-state-pretends-to-reject-real-id/#comment-40700 I'm already here IN New Hampshire. You're at George Mason. What's taking you so long? I’m already here IN New Hampshire. You’re at George Mason. What’s taking you so long?

]]> By: jonhttp://www.homelandstupidity.us/2007/04/12/washington-state-pretends-to-reject-real-id/#comment-40698 jon Thu, 12 Apr 2007 21:46:28 +0000 http://www.homelandstupidity.us/2007/04/12/washington-state-pretends-to-reject-real-id/#comment-40698 Good point. Of the <a href="http://stoprealid.privacyactivism.org/wiki/index.php?title=Talking_points">many things wrong with Real ID</a>, the cost of an unfunded mandate is the one that virtually everybody at the state level opposes -- and that's probably a lot of what's spurring at least some state legislatures to action. (I agree with the Free State Project commenter that in New Hampshire, for example, other issues are at the forefront.)One of the things we're trying to do with the <a href="http://stoprealidnow.blogspot.com/">Stop Real ID Now</a> grassroots activism campaign is to use the <a href="http://stoprealid.privacyactivism.org/wiki/index.php?title=Instructions_for_filing_comments">DHS commenting process</a> to get a lot more awareness of other issues as well. There's so much wrong with Real ID that there's a good chance to bring different perspectives together on this ... so if people want to start by focusing on the $11+-billion unfunded mandate to the states, that's okay with me!jon Good point. Of the many things wrong with Real ID, the cost of an unfunded mandate is the one that virtually everybody at the state level opposes — and that’s probably a lot of what’s spurring at least some state legislatures to action. (I agree with the Free State Project commenter that in New Hampshire, for example, other issues are at the forefront.)

One of the things we’re trying to do with the Stop Real ID Now grassroots activism campaign is to use the DHS commenting process to get a lot more awareness of other issues as well. There’s so much wrong with Real ID that there’s a good chance to bring different perspectives together on this … so if people want to start by focusing on the $11+-billion unfunded mandate to the states, that’s okay with me!

jon

]]> By: Anonymoushttp://www.homelandstupidity.us/2007/04/12/washington-state-pretends-to-reject-real-id/#comment-40691 Anonymous Thu, 12 Apr 2007 20:49:46 +0000 http://www.homelandstupidity.us/2007/04/12/washington-state-pretends-to-reject-real-id/#comment-40691 New Hampshire is on it's way to getting rid of the Real ID for real. Only 8 members of the state house (out of 400) voted against it.-- FreeStateProject*Org -- New Hampshire is on it’s way to getting rid of the Real ID for real. Only 8 members of the state house (out of 400) voted against it.

– FreeStateProject*Org –

]]> By: Jeff Hoythttp://www.homelandstupidity.us/2007/04/12/washington-state-pretends-to-reject-real-id/#comment-40651 Jeff Hoyt Thu, 12 Apr 2007 15:05:37 +0000 http://www.homelandstupidity.us/2007/04/12/washington-state-pretends-to-reject-real-id/#comment-40651 The brilliant minds of the members of Washington's state legislature don't want to spend their own money on the REAL ID Act. They want all the <strong>other</strong> states to pay for it. Or am I wrong in my belief that the several states are where D.C. gets the money in the first place? (Yeah, yeah, I know all tax revenues are used to pay the interest on our debt, and the Fed just prints more money, but that's a subject for another post.) So, all the other states pay for Washington. Then all the other states, including Washington, pay for Vermont. Then all the other states, including Vermont, pay for Nebraska Then all the other states, including Nebraska, pay for Alabama... Am I missing something here? The brilliant minds of the members of Washington’s state legislature don’t want to spend their own money on the REAL ID Act. They want all the other states to pay for it. Or am I wrong in my belief that the several states are where D.C. gets the money in the first place? (Yeah, yeah, I know all tax revenues are used to pay the interest on our debt, and the Fed just prints more money, but that’s a subject for another post.)
So, all the other states pay for Washington. Then all the other states, including Washington, pay for Vermont. Then all the other states, including Vermont, pay for Nebraska Then all the other states, including Nebraska, pay for Alabama…
Am I missing something here?

]]>