You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Home Front Economy
Real ID Dead In Arizona
2008-06-18
Arizona will join roughly a dozen states that have vowed not to participate in federal plans for a uniform standard on state-issued driver's licenses and identification cards. On Tuesday, Gov. Janet Napolitano signed a measure, House Bill 2677, barring Arizona's compliance with the Real ID program. In so doing, she called it an unfunded federal mandate that would stick states such as Arizona with a multibillion-dollar bill for the cost to develop and implement the series of new fraud-proof identification cards.

HB 2677 is a rare recent example of broad, bipartisan agreement at the state Capitol, with the Democratic governor and GOP-led Legislature finding common ground in their opposition to Real ID.

Some of that opposition is grounded in concerns about privacy and government advancement toward a national identification card. For Napolitano, the biggest issue is related to Real ID's costs for the states.

In a letter explaining her support for HB 2677, Napolitano cited a White House estimate that Real ID would cost at least $4 billion to implement. But thus far, she said, the federal government has only appropriated $90 million to help Arizona and other states offset those costs. 'My support of the Real ID Act is, and has always been, contingent upon adequate federal funding,' Napolitano wrote Tuesday. 'Absent that, the Real ID Act becomes just another unfunded federal mandate.'

U.S. Department of Homeland Security spokeswoman Laura Keehner disputed the characterization, saying states have access to hundreds of millions in federal grants to help pay for Real ID implementation.

Arizona and other states that have taken a stand against Real ID now are on a collision course with the federal government. The program was approved by Congress in 2005 as part of a package of post-9/11 security recommendations. While state compliance is voluntary, individuals will be required by the end of 2009 to carry identification that meets Real ID standards in order to board commercial flights or enter federal buildings. That provision still stands, Keehner said, adding, 'The rules are clear.'

Dan Pochoda, legal director for the American Civil Liberties Union of Arizona, scoffed at the suggestion that millions of Americans would be barred from air travel or federal buildings because of the standoff between the states and federal government. His organization has been a vocal opponent of Real ID because of concerns about privacy and government intrusion. Said Pochoda, 'I can guarantee that 25 percent of airline travelers will not be banned from the purchasing of airline tickets in 2009.'
Posted by:Anonymoose

#9  that along with the continual loss of vote for felons knocks a leg or two out of their support stool
Posted by: Frank G   2008-06-18 22:35  

#8  You know, 38 or so of the States had no trouble implementing the Real ID law. I suspect the Dems in the other States are upset at the disenfranchisement of two of their prime voting blocs, the illegals and the dead.
Posted by: RWV   2008-06-18 20:47  

#7  But while the Feds cannot fund this, the DHS can fund the new and improved TSA uniform badges that resemble real poolece badges so the sheeple will comply better.
goto: http://www.usatoday.com/travel/flights/2008-06-15-tsa-badges_N.htm
Posted by: USN, Ret.   2008-06-18 15:00  

#6  Bipartisan open borders
Posted by: Icerigger   2008-06-18 13:14  

#5  And the ACLU concern about privacy is 100% pure, unadulterated red herring. Between the Social Security Administration and the IRS they already know where you live, where you work and how much money you make. They know more about the car you drive than you do. So what difference does a Real ID make?

But the question isn't what difference a Real ID makes. The question is: What are they trying to hide?
Posted by: Abu Uluque   2008-06-18 12:11  

#4  In so doing, she called it an unfunded federal mandate that would stick states such as Arizona with a multibillion-dollar bill for the cost to develop and implement the series of new fraud-proof identification cards.

I understand about unfunded federal mandates but just cannot believe that it would be a multibillion dollar proposition in Arizona. Just cannot believe that is anything other than the most despicable type of political hyperbole. But, apart from that, how much money would the state save if they didn't have to educate, incarcerate and hospitalize illegal aliens?
Posted by: Abu Uluque   2008-06-18 12:02  

#3  I no longer think the US should waterboard terrorism suspects. I think we should just make them fly coach instead.
Posted by: Abdominal Snowman   2008-06-18 11:31  

#2  'I can guarantee that 25 percent of airline travelers will not be banned from the purchasing of airline tickets in 2009.'

As things are going, I suspect 25% of potential airline travelers won't be able to pay the airline body weight fee for traveling 4th class, strapped to the wings.
Posted by: Procopius2k   2008-06-18 10:41  

#1  Said Pochoda, 'I can guarantee that 25 percent of airline travelers will not be banned from the purchasing of airline tickets in 2009.'

No, they just won't be able to use their Arizona (or other scofflaw states) drivers license as identification. A passport should suffice.
Posted by: RWV   2008-06-18 09:08  

00:00