S. 1261 - PASS ID act...

[il Padrino Ute]

anyone familiar with this? I read through it and it seems like this is yet another attempt by the feds to have a national ID card. (I'm not blaming only Obama here, but Bush as well). It just sounds like the feds want to step in and decide if state identifications are valid enough to be used. Am I misunderstanding the bill?

Here's a link to the bill if anyone wants to read it and comment.

[pellegrino]

It doesn't seem to do that from what I read. Instead it seems to set fort standards for state issued ID. The standards seem to be reasonable and really just require those seeking ID to provide proper documentation before issuing any sort of ID. If a state doesn't meet those requirements the Feds simply don't recognize that state's ID (and they'd probably withhold funding of some sort too). From what I know many states already have this kind of a law on the books.

That said, I wouldn't be opposed to having a national ID card. It's not much different than a passport and it's not an invasion of privacy.

[il Padrino Ute]

It doesn't seem to do that from what I read. Instead it seems to set fort standards for state issued ID. The standards seem to be reasonable and really just require those seeking ID to provide proper documentation before issuing any sort of ID. If a state doesn't meet those requirements the Feds simply don't recognize that state's ID (and they'd probably withhold funding of some sort too). From what I know many states already have this kind of a law on the books.

That said, I wouldn't be opposed to having a national ID card. It's not much different than a passport and it's not an invasion of privacy.

Because I support states rights, I don't like the Feds deciding what the standard for a state ID should be.

And we already have passports. There is no need for another national ID, IMO.

[pellegrino]

Because I support states rights, I don't like the Feds deciding what the standard for a state ID should be.

And we already have passports. There is no need for another national ID, IMO.

I can understand that. That (states' rights) is really the only logical reason to oppose a national ID card, IMO. I don't think this bill goes anywhere near that, it just requires that states have stringent rules for issuing ID. I can't oppose that. I think it benefits all citizens.

[il Padrino Ute]

I can understand that. That (states' rights) is really the only logical reason to oppose a national ID card, IMO. I don't think this bill goes anywhere near that, it just requires that states have stringent rules for issuing ID. I can't oppose that. I think it benefits all citizens.

Fair enough and I can understand your position as well.

[Tim]

Because I support states rights, I don't like the Feds deciding what the standard for a state ID should be.

And we already have passports. There is no need for another national ID, IMO.

But we have to have SOME type of ID card that EVERYONE can have access to. Passports aren't valid ID cards because they don't have your address on them, and most states don't provide a form of identification to anyone and everyone who's a citizen of the state. Most states only use driver's licenses as ID, which disincludes those who are too young or old to drive, too poor, disabled, etc.

I would support a state's right to continue to issue its own identification cards if the states would widen the availability of their cards to all citizens of the state rather than just using driver's licenses as ID. Otherwise I would encourage the states to continue with their current processes but to disallow the use of those state identification cards outside the state of their issuance. I agree on states rights, but there has to be a minimum form of national identification, and the passport isn't designed to be a day-to-day idenfitication. It doesn't possess address or locale information and it's deeply specialized toward international travel and very little more.

There simply has to be a standard, either at the national level or the state level. I support a national ID card standard with basic information that each state can supplement with its own state-specific information at its will on the flip-side. The front-side would have national information like a national ID number (which would just be the social security number with a new name), date of birth, birthplace, profile info (hair, height, weight, etc.). The back-side would have state-specific information like address, driver information, donor information, and other state-related information. Each state could issue the card using the national standard for the front side and their own standard for the back side. It's a perfect balance of state and federal needs on one card! Plus no more need for a social security card.

[All-American]

Because I support states rights, I don't like the Feds deciding what the standard for a state ID should be.

And we already have passports. There is no need for another national ID, IMO.

The main reason why there has been any motivation behind standardization of state IDs is security. The more variation you have from state to state on what information goes into a state ID, the easier it is to pass off a fake to somebody unfamiliar with it. If you're worried about security at airports or about illegal immigrants faking IDs, you can come up with more than a few reasons to be happy with these acts.

I'm interested, Il Pad, to hear what you think about Utah's driver privilege cards. Any thoughts?

[pellegrino]

But we have to have SOME type of ID card that EVERYONE can have access to. Passports aren't valid ID cards because they don't have your address on them, and most states don't provide a form of identification to anyone and everyone who's a citizen of the state. Most states only use driver's licenses as ID, which disincludes those who are too young or old to drive, too poor, disabled, etc.

I would support a state's right to continue to issue its own identification cards if the states would widen the availability of their cards to all citizens of the state rather than just using driver's licenses as ID. Otherwise I would encourage the states to continue with their current processes but to disallow the use of those state identification cards outside the state of their issuance. I agree on states rights, but there has to be a minimum form of national identification, and the passport isn't designed to be a day-to-day idenfitication. It doesn't possess address or locale information and it's deeply specialized toward international travel and very little more.

There simply has to be a standard, either at the national level or the state level. I support a national ID card standard with basic information that each state can supplement with its own state-specific information at its will on the flip-side. The front-side would have national information like a national ID number (which would just be the social security number with a new name), date of birth, birthplace, profile info (hair, height, weight, etc.). The back-side would have state-specific information like address, driver information, donor information, and other state-related information. Each state could issue the card using the national standard for the front side and their own standard for the back side. It's a perfect balance of state and federal needs on one card! Plus no more need for a social security card.

I would be strongly opposed to having to put your SS # on any form of ID. If that were to be stolen it could really screw up your credit and it would be difficult to get things sorted out. There's a reason why FERPA prevents schools from using SS# as a means to identify their students. A separate number, one that has nothing to do with finances should be used on any sort of ID, state or federal.

[Tim]

I would be strongly opposed to having to put your SS # on any form of ID. If that were to be stolen it could really screw up your credit and it would be difficult to get things sorted out. There's a reason why FERPA prevents schools from using SS# as a means to identify their students. A separate number, one that has nothing to do with finances should be used on any sort of ID, state or federal.

Well, my mentioning of the social security number was actually a "compromise" on my part. I'd prefer a separate number altogether, but many people will say they don't need "another" number when they already have their SS#. The problem, though, is that in the absence of a true national ID number, the SS# has become the standard identifier.

Regarding schools: I was asked for my SS# at school as recently as 4 years ago. It was always used as the primary identifier.

[il Padrino Ute]

But we have to have SOME type of ID card that EVERYONE can have access to. Passports aren't valid ID cards because they don't have your address on them, and most states don't provide a form of identification to anyone and everyone who's a citizen of the state. Most states only use driver's licenses as ID, which disincludes those who are too young or old to drive, too poor, disabled, etc.

I would support a state's right to continue to issue its own identification cards if the states would widen the availability of their cards to all citizens of the state rather than just using driver's licenses as ID. Otherwise I would encourage the states to continue with their current processes but to disallow the use of those state identification cards outside the state of their issuance. I agree on states rights, but there has to be a minimum form of national identification, and the passport isn't designed to be a day-to-day idenfitication. It doesn't possess address or locale information and it's deeply specialized toward international travel and very little more.

There simply has to be a standard, either at the national level or the state level. I support a national ID card standard with basic information that each state can supplement with its own state-specific information at its will on the flip-side. The front-side would have national information like a national ID number (which would just be the social security number with a new name), date of birth, birthplace, profile info (hair, height, weight, etc.). The back-side would have state-specific information like address, driver information, donor information, and other state-related information. Each state could issue the card using the national standard for the front side and their own standard for the back side. It's a perfect balance of state and federal needs on one card! Plus no more need for a social security card.

So, you're saying that you want people to have the proper papers?

[All-American]

So, you're saying that you want people to have the proper papers?

And show them on request. You know, just to make sure that they're here legally. But only if the officer suspects that they're not.

[il Padrino Ute]

The main reason why there has been any motivation behind standardization of state IDs is security. The more variation you have from state to state on what information goes into a state ID, the easier it is to pass off a fake to somebody unfamiliar with it. If you're worried about security at airports or about illegal immigrants faking IDs, you can come up with more than a few reasons to be happy with these acts.

I'm interested, Il Pad, to hear what you think about Utah's driver privilege cards. Any thoughts?

My thoughts about the driver's license as ID?

[All-American]

My thoughts about the driver's license as ID?

No, the drivers privilege card. It's different from the driver's license.

[Tim]

So, you're saying that you want people to have the proper papers?

Yes! I'm all for each person have official documentation and identification! I've never suggested otherwise.Identification has its proper uses and I prefer that all legal residents have valid documentation. I suppose you're mentioning that in relation to the current Arizona issue -- I would reply that while I think everyone should have papers, they shouldn't have to provide them at an officer's whimsy. Requesting identification as part of a transaction is different than spot-checking identification based on nothing more than presumption of guilt.

[il Padrino Ute]

No, the drivers privilege card. It's different from the driver's license.

My understanding is that it is for those who are for some reason unable to legal residence in the state. If that's the case, I'm not sure why any illegal resident would willingly apply for that card.

But quite honestly, I really don't give it much thought because it doesn't directly affect me.