(no subject)
May. 8th, 2007 03:11 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
drewkittyThe "Real ID" system proposed is a colossal waste of taxpayer money, and far more importantly, the fragile credibility of DHS. Any security specialist knows that a "unbreakable" ID will be immediately compromised. Far from correcting a vulnerability, the "Real ID" system creates a number of new vulnerabilities based on excessive reliance on a single form of identification. Reputable organizations and entities have laid out these points in far greater detail.
Further, the "Real ID" system promises to create unnecessary and damaging barriers to employment, credit and most importantly to the exercise of Constitutional rights in voting, access to the court system and government buildings, travel across state borders, and freedom of speech. Consider that the added costs of "Real ID" will cause large numbers of poor people not to get one. This will result in delays in employment and public benefits eligibility, more limited access to already difficult credit and banking resources, and reduce effectiveness of law enforcement by creating a larger "sea" of undocumented persons for criminals to hide within.
I am very concerned that the "Real ID" initiative will make it more difficult for people to exercise their right to vote. The requirement to produce identity documents that many poor people do not have, or cannot easily obtain (birth certificates, utility bills, land title / rental agreements, etc.) could well be used to disenfranchise voters en masse.
One last consideration: my training in Social Ecology at [...] was in complex systems theory. It is my belief that the "Real ID" project is doomed to failure due to the interlocking complexities created by direct and indirect costs of implementation, unless the true goal is to create a document to separate the rich from the poor. Such an attempt is un-American on its face and should be forthrightly abandoned.
If the goal is to strengthen existing ID systems, a radically different, much cheaper and far more effective approach would be to create a qualification process by which any ID, privately issued or publicly issued, could be vetted as acceptable to the Federal government. This would allow such varied organizations as banks, schools, private agencies, public agencies, and even volunteer groups to prove their internal identifications worthy of clearance, bringing up the credibility of identification to the benefit of all.
This open-source qualification process would allow, for example, Bank of America to issue valid identification -- or the University of California -- or IBM -- or even the Salvation Army -- if the process met strict and audited standards. Costs would be dramatically reduced because these organizations already spend much effort, although piecemeal, to verify identity and improve security. Perhaps even the ACLU could get in on the identification-issuance bandwagon, if willing and able to identify persons issued identification, vouch for their identity, and have a verified process for control of issuance, control of documents and their creation, and resultant databases. Thank you.
Further, the "Real ID" system promises to create unnecessary and damaging barriers to employment, credit and most importantly to the exercise of Constitutional rights in voting, access to the court system and government buildings, travel across state borders, and freedom of speech. Consider that the added costs of "Real ID" will cause large numbers of poor people not to get one. This will result in delays in employment and public benefits eligibility, more limited access to already difficult credit and banking resources, and reduce effectiveness of law enforcement by creating a larger "sea" of undocumented persons for criminals to hide within.
I am very concerned that the "Real ID" initiative will make it more difficult for people to exercise their right to vote. The requirement to produce identity documents that many poor people do not have, or cannot easily obtain (birth certificates, utility bills, land title / rental agreements, etc.) could well be used to disenfranchise voters en masse.
One last consideration: my training in Social Ecology at [...] was in complex systems theory. It is my belief that the "Real ID" project is doomed to failure due to the interlocking complexities created by direct and indirect costs of implementation, unless the true goal is to create a document to separate the rich from the poor. Such an attempt is un-American on its face and should be forthrightly abandoned.
If the goal is to strengthen existing ID systems, a radically different, much cheaper and far more effective approach would be to create a qualification process by which any ID, privately issued or publicly issued, could be vetted as acceptable to the Federal government. This would allow such varied organizations as banks, schools, private agencies, public agencies, and even volunteer groups to prove their internal identifications worthy of clearance, bringing up the credibility of identification to the benefit of all.
This open-source qualification process would allow, for example, Bank of America to issue valid identification -- or the University of California -- or IBM -- or even the Salvation Army -- if the process met strict and audited standards. Costs would be dramatically reduced because these organizations already spend much effort, although piecemeal, to verify identity and improve security. Perhaps even the ACLU could get in on the identification-issuance bandwagon, if willing and able to identify persons issued identification, vouch for their identity, and have a verified process for control of issuance, control of documents and their creation, and resultant databases. Thank you.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2007-05-09 02:11 am (UTC)All The Problems I'm Hearing...
Date: 2007-05-09 05:15 am (UTC)Every person that handles a RealID document, request, and/or file has to have a full and complete background check. Which means that people that, only a few years ago, wouldn't have a problem before could have...especially if disqualified.
So, you either have to hire new people that are clear, or have fewer people handle the documents. Which means more time...
And, of course, this doesn't assume that the Federal government just doesn't decide to take it over (and thusly expand the numbers of members of the various Federal employee unions...).
Oh, we need a standardized set of rules for ID. If only just to make sure somebody doesn't go to an "easy" state and get new IDs. RealID isn't it.
no subject
Date: 2007-05-09 05:41 am (UTC)The idea of this just smells(badly) of more government control.
Which, in my opinion we need less of.
no subject
Date: 2007-05-09 05:49 am (UTC)Disagree with your formating. Baby Jesus cries when you don't make paragraphs.
no subject
Date: 2007-05-10 02:08 am (UTC)