I think the "domestic passport" aspect is most worrisome.

The I-9 form requirements allow an expired passport to serve the ID purpose (for now, anyway). I have a passport already, albeit expired, so I'm already covered there. But I would not be happy to have to get a passport merely to qualify for a job, and neither would millions of Americans. RealID makes it easier to "forget" that one must be a "federally recognized person" in order to have a job. It removes the need to acquire additional forms of ID to qualify, just as payroll withholding makes it easier to forget the true burden of the income tax, blunting the irritation taxpayers would normally feel if they had to write checks on April 15th for their entire tax liabilities.

Just so, by establishing driver licenses as "internal passports," RealID makes it easier for Americans to forget that a new aspect of control is being rolled into place. If everyone had to get a passport to use air travel, the airline industry would go belly up even more quickly than it is now, or at least there would be a huge backlash of outrage that might topple the careers of several people in Washington. But now, getting on a plane (or soon, I expect, proceeding through checkpoints or across state lines), will come "for free" if you have a driver license. Since most people will be getting those licenses anyway, they won't pay as much attention to the fact that citizens will be required to have a "hall pass" just to move around in their own country.

This is why I have a beef with the dems and repubs. We need to protest against this unconstitutional invasion of privacy before it gets really out of hand.

One other comment: if there was any doubt whether "the terrorists have won," conclusive proof was provided by the passage of the RealID act in a breathtakingly sneaky manner, as well as the widely televised spectacle of thousands of Washington DC vermin scurrying away from the Capitol and White House, in fear of what turned out to be an errant flight instructor. Game over, freedom lovers: DC Surrenders.

I urge everyone to write, fax, or call their Congressmen. Here's a little fax I sent to my congressmen.

Dear Senators Kohl and Feingold,

I am taking this moment out of my workday to inform you of my complete and utter disgust at your vote for the Real I.D. act.

That you would even consider voting for (let alone actually do it) such an egregious violation of our intrinsic rights just baffles me.

Are you even familiar with the Constitution of the United States, or the Declaration of Independence? Have you read the Federalist Papers and the Anti-Federalist Papers?

Do you understand that the existence of government is for the sole purpose of protecting the rights of individuals? That means government does NOT exist to benefit groups or do the will of the people, or of power mad people in government. It exists ONLY to protect my rights. In doing so it protects everyone's rights, until you start voting them away.

The Constitution was written to prevent you from having that power. You took an Oath to defend and uphold the Constitution. By your vote (many, many votes over the years, actually) you are in violation of that contract and should resign your position immediately.

It is clear you have no understanding of the principles this country was founded on. Men and women fought and died to secure our rights and you've gone and handed them away, as if they were yours to give away in the first place. Our men and women in the armed forces are supposedly fighting to secure these same intrinsic rights for people in despotism around the globe. Isn't the hypocrisy sickeningly obvious to you?

I cannot begin to imagine why you would betray your own freedom that way, unless, of course, you won't be subject to the loss of it; or you truly have no concept of what rights and freedom are.

With freedom comes responsibilities and you have failed to fulfill yours.

Sincerely,
XXXX XXXXXX

It'll achieve nothing, but I feel a little better. Anyway, welcome to the U.S.A.S.S.R. fellow comrades.

I agree with James Merrit above statement. If this really goes into effect the terrorists have indeed won and the United States is going to be a country that will self-destruct in its own fears.

I am in the US Air Force... I can remember being taught that the old Soviet Union would require a internal passport for its citizens to move from city to city.. what is the difference with the Real ID concept? Not a whole heck of allot.

For those who profit by 'Identity Theft' (I mingle with them frequently) this new law will be a God-sent blessing!

Posted by: Mike at May 12, 2005 01:54 PM

U.S.A.S.S.R. I love it. Just wish it wasnt so true. This will be challenged in Court, I just hope the Constitution can handle 3 more years of this clown-government.

DC

Posted by: Frank Martin at May 12, 2005 01:55 PM

If you remember the film "Red October" with Sean Connery, there is a great scene where his second in command is talking about what it will be like living in America and Sean Connery explains that he will be able to travel the U.S. without carrying his "papers." Maybe they can edit that scene out in future runnings.

Is it me or do "conservatives" love big government the most nowadays?

I don't see how this is any different from the Social Security card, which is already a National ID card, and optional just like a drivers license.

I can't believe that no one is talking about the supposed reason for the national ID card. The only reason we even need to consider anything like this is because the Federal Govenment (Our Senators and Congressmen) have not fulfilled one of their most basic reasons to exixt - Protech the Population - by protecting our borders. No one in the press or public seems to be outraged at the fact that The Senate passes on a corrective measure to the States (without funding an additional activity required) and the only reason it is neede is because the Federal government and our Oversight representatives have permitted wholesale illegal immagraion in the first place.

For shame.

NICK: A SS card can hardly be called optional, since it is required to work. Unless, of course, working is optional. Your sort of reasoning is what they LOVE to hear. Fall in line.

Why was the Libertarian party not more active on this issue?

This issue was well known for some time and I had contacted my Senators regarding this issue. The party email did not come out until the Tuesday morning of the vote - far too late to really rally anyone.

We've seen the party rally behind action items before - why not this time?

Here was the response I recieved from my Senator:

Thank you for contacting me regarding H.R. 418, the
"REAL ID Act of 2005." I appreciate hearing from you on this
important matter.

The 9-11 Commission's terrorist travel report states that
abuse of the immigration system and a lack of interior enforcement
worked together to support terrorist activities. The commission
recommended reducing terrorist travel options so that terrorists
will be forced to rely on means of interaction which can be more
easily monitored, as well as travel documents more easily
detectable for fraud.

The REAL ID Act contains four provisions aimed at
disrupting terrorist. The first deals with monitoring driver's
licenses as a form of identification to a Federal official. It is not
trying to regulate states' policies for those who may or may not
drive a car, but rather to ensure that people are who they say they
are. Second, this legislation will tighten our asylum laws. The
primary method the 9-11 terrorists used to remain in our country
was immigration fraud. This legislation will reduce immigration
fraud while still protecting legitimate asylum seekers. Third, the
REAL ID Act will waive federal laws to the extent necessary to
complete gaps in the San Diego border security fence. Finally, this
legislation makes aliens deportable from the U.S. for terrorism-
related offenses to the same extent that they would be inadmissible
to the United States to begin with.

As you know, H.R. 418 was introduced in the House of
Representatives on January 26, 2005. On February 10, 2005, H.R.
418 passed the House of Representatives. On May 10, 2005, the
Senate the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for
Defense, the Global War on Terror, and Tsunami Relief Act of
2005, which included the REAL ID Act. The bill now awaits the
approval of the President.

Since September 11, 2001, President Bush and Congress
have made numerous efforts to help make our country safe from
terrorism. As your United States Senator, rest assured that I will
make every effort possible to ensure that the atrocities that
occurred on that day never occur again. The REAL ID Act will
make America a safer place, and is endorsed by the 9-11 Families
for a Secure America, an association of family members of 9-11
victims.

Again, thank you for contacting me on this important
matter. If I can be of assistance to you in the future, please do not
hesitate to let me know. In the meantime, if you would like to
receive timely email alerts regarding the latest congressional
actions and my weekly e-newsletter, please sign up via my web
site at: www.chambliss.senate.gov.

Sincerely,

Saxby Chambliss
United States Senate

The tragedy here is that the "Real ID" won't make us any safer from terrorism. In fact, it will do nothing about terrorism.

Terrorism is caused by the U.S. Government's perpetual meddling in the affairs of other nations - - overthrowing legitimate governments to install puppets, bribing them with foreign "aid", blockades, embargos, "misinformation" campaigns, plundering their resources, and on and on. Until this inhumane and brutal foreign policy changes, we won't be any safer and we'll continue to lose freedom.

"This legislation gives authority to the Secretary of Homeland Security to expand required information on driver's licenses, potentially including such biometric information as retina scans, finger prints, DNA information, and even Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) radio tracking technology. Including such technology as RFID would mean that the federal government, as well as the governments of Canada and Mexico, would know where Americans are at all times of the day and night."

Bin Laden won. We are destroying ourselves.

Let us face reality: We are rapidly becoming a fascist nation. Bush is our generation's Hitler - aggressively building up an empire, using religious language to win people over to his side, working hand in hand with repressive organized religious leaders, and then telling us it is for our own best interests and security. This national ID is only a small part of their intention to turn us into their own interpretation of a new right wing theocracy.
In my opinion, the current administration deserves to be charged with treason.

I am sickened and outraged that the Senate voted unanimously on this appropriations bill with its sneaky Real ID Act. I wrote emails to congressman but to no avail. It seems they are all covering their own behinds to not get labeled "anti-American" for not voting to support the troops. How immature to not have the strength to stand up for what you think is wrong (and many of them do believe this Real ID Act is wrong!).

The Social Security card (number) has been a requirement to get a job since the 30's. Now we have millions of illegal aliens, some of whom mean us great harm. How do you folks suggest we separate out the terrorists from the legal citizens. It's great to bitch, but come up with a better solution that is not an "invasion of our privacy".

The 9/11 boys had over fifty licenses between them, issued by states that had lax laws. Even after 9/11, there are a number of states that continue to issue licenses to illegal aliens. If the states won't step up to the plate, the feds must. The number one responsibility of the feds is to protect the country. They have finally taken action after almost four years.

As so often happens, this is an inappropriate solution to a big problem, with the Law of Unintended Consequences playing a major role. The problem is terrorists who want to destroy the U.S. and our way of life. The "solution" reduces the liberties of our citizens, which the bad guys want, but does not realistically address the problem. Any dedicated terrorist with enough money can find a way to get a forged ID; they have done so in the past and will do so in the future. I remember a comment by Bertrand Russel many years ago: We hate the wicked Communists so much that we have decided to emulate them.

Political Correctness keeps us from focusing on the actual threat: We can't single out for special treatment the folks who have harmed us and will continue to do so, and instead must make life increasingly difficult for Methodist Bishops, little old ladies, and other ordinary citizens. Why not get rid of rabid dogs by slaugherting all dogs, or eliminate drunk drivers by prohibiting all automobiles? It is much the same thing.

Our freedoms are constantly being diminished by ill thought out legislation designed to make us think that our Government is doing something useful when, instead, it is simply putting a band aid on a festering sore.

Enough!

The only road left open to fight this now is to lobby the local state politians (good luck). They are upset because once again the Federal Government has issued another mandate from high on the mountain, and left it up to the states (us eventually) to pay for it. If enough states opted out or refused to comply with the mandates, then it would fall apart at the seams.

The solution is as Carl states. Revamp the foreign policy of the United States to achieve the only legitimate goal... that of national security; and not one for "National Interest" (read economic).

I am also distraught at the actions of our senators. Here is the reply I received from one of mine before the vote. Boarder fences and national ID cards! The USASSR indeed.

Stan Warford

Mr. Stan Warford
24360 Baxter Drive
Malibu, California 90265

Dear Mr. Warford:

Thank you for your letter regarding the "REAL ID Act of 2005" (H.R. 418). I welcome the opportunity to respond.

As you know, Congressman Sensenbrenner introduced H.R. 418 in the House of Representatives earlier this month, and the bill passed the House of Representatives on February 10th. Generally, I support the thrust of the bill, which I am in the process of reviewing. I would hope that there will be hearings in the Senate Judiciary Committee and that we will follow Senate procedure. I may have some changes to recommend and believe there needs to be a thorough analysis and discussion of its provisions.

I believe that the Federal government should have the ability to issue standards that all state-issued driver's licenses and identification documents should meet. The issue is how should this be done, phased in and paid for. And I think that the Senate needs to examine these issues and help ensure it is not an unfunded mandate on the states.

Finally, I also am a strong supporter of Operation Gatekeeper and completion of the border fence, which is one of the bill's provisions.

Again, thank you for writing, and please know that I will keep your comments in mind as the Senate considers this legislation. I hope you will continue to keep in touch. If you have any further questions please contact my Washington, D.C. staff at (202) 224-3841.

Sincerely yours,

Dianne Feinstein
United States Senator

“they that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."~~~Benjamin Franklin

I'm not surprised nor should anyone be surprised at this. This is from the same people who gave us the UnPatriot Act. I'm shocked Sen Feingold (he's my senator) voted for this when he voted against the UnPatriot Act and was the only US Senator to do so.

1984 is just 21 years late

I am truly saddened. This is the most egregious infringements on privacy from the American Fascist/Socialist State in my lifetime (48+ years). Like every law passed with the intention of "catching the bad guys", the bad guys will find ways around it, the citizenry will by and large comply, and the law will primarily be used to prosecute/find so called "criminals" who have nothing to do with terrorism. Just look at how the RICO laws are used, how the majority of gun laws are applied, how the Patriot Act is used, etc, etc etc, and you see that the common citizenry, who were never the intented targets of the law will become the primary targets of it. I am sorry to say it, but unless this Senate and House passage isn't signed by Bush (fat chance!!!), it will be up to the courts to strike it down (even fatter chance!!!). Guilty unless you can prove otherwise. Truly, one of the saddest days in my life.

Actually, Bush has already signed it without batting an eye:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/05/20050511-5.html

Thanks Tex, for that update. As an additional thought, only wholesale civil disobedience to this infringement will change things. I am not holding my breath.

Just to bolster my stance, if you think about what the original "intention" of driver's licenses was, ie to make sure that only qualified people were operating several thousand pound macines at relatively high velocity, and thus improve safety on the road (though I believe it's laughable that anybody would think that such a law could actually achieve its' intentions), driver's licenses are now ID cards, and not just for the States, but now for the Feds as well. So it goes that the original "intent" of this Real ID is to catch terrorists, it will be used for every other police state reason. Let's face it, the politicians aren't passing these laws for safety . . . their purpose is for coercive power and intimidation of the citizens, pure and simple, regardless of what the original "intent" is purported as being.

This is far and away one of the biggest tragedies I have seen in my lifetime. The RealID act will not only, as many have said, make us carry "papers" to travel our own states, but also essentially imprison us in our own states.

I can hear it now: "Sorry sir, you are not allowed to leave."

For those of you that think this is good for our security, you are sadly mistaken. Here are some questions: Where are the terrorists? All they[Government] have to do is increase a threat level to give us a "perceived" terrorist. The reason the terrorists were able to take down those planes is because the planes were undefended. Would they have been that stupid if people on the plane were armed? Would they be that stupid to bomb a downtown if citizens on the streets are armed ? Why hasn't this turned into martyr central like the middle east? There are muslims out here too. Why aren't they blowing themselves up for Allah? Wake up people! This is tyranny at it's finest.

The Libertarian party has a lot of appeal, but its purely idealistic philosophy makes it rather extreme. This blog, unfortunately, demonstrates that. The conspiracy theories, and complaining, and lack of any real solutions mirrors democrat and republican blogs I've been on. A national I.D. card "standard" is a step. Maybe its correct, maybe its not. At least it attempts to address the issue. The trampling of rights is no worse than by state driver's license. At worst, this decision is just patchwork. Would all of you who think it's a waste of time prefer our representatives to simply continue to TALK about solutions? Maybe they'll vote on an approved list of solutions in a couple months- barring another attack. A lot of our national security decisions have been knee-jerk reactions to a problem that has been festering since Carter and some have been bad ideas, but an ineffective decision can at least be learned from. Procrastination only keeps the door of opportunity open to our enemies.
I'm sure that the surface of this comment makes me look like I'm trembling in fear over the next possible attack, but I can't accurately express the real need for ideas and decisions. I don't have any great ideas for improving our national security, but I did decide to join the Army right after 9-11.

If you are part of society, have a drivers license, own a home, credit cards, pay taxes, etc. You have multiple ID's that the gov't tracks. If you are a law abidding citizen, I believe a National ID photo with fingerprint info will solve more problems than it creates. ID theft for one. There are many battles to pick with the two reigning parties. This is not one of them. This is compared to the ACLU fighting for the rights of a convicted murderer to watch TV. The civil rights of law abidding citizens are violated everyday (this includes high taxes and personal liberties). Please pick a better battle. The LP can become a more viable party that way.

I have a few ideas in place of a national id card.

Maybe we should pull our troops out of Europe and place them on our borders and oceans. Another idea would be for the United States to pull out of the UN and quit telling countries what they can and cannot do.

I will comment about more ideas latter but it is storiming really bad outside and I need to shut down the computer.

Roger,

The LP has given a solution already. So by say at least they're addressing the problem is like saying a doctor address a patients minor fracture by cutting off the arm. Well, hey the arm isn't broken anymore,but it wasn't really the solution was it.

SOLUTION: Stop going into people homes (countries) and telling them how to live. When our government stops doing that people won't have a reason to attack us.

It's funny how the 9/11 commission left that out of their report.

If you don't think that's the cause consider a stranger coming into your home and telling you how to live. Then he leaves some henchmen around to make sure you do it. First you'll plead. When that fails you'll try to kick the henchmen out. When that doesn't work you'll attack his home... then somehow you're a terrorist.

Please excuse the horrible typos... yeesh!

The Government (notice I didn't say "our Govt) doesn't obey it's own laws. I.E. no SS # is required to work or live in the u.s., oh, and it's "not for identification purposes" according to the back of it.

The obligarchy that starts the wars at the expense of other peoples childrens blood, and reaps the windfall of profits from war, has a cash cow. It's called us feedom loving flag wavers( most don't have a clue what a free society is).Iraq citizens have more freedoms that we do (don't laugh, it's a fact). When we get done "liberating" them and giving them "democracy", they'll have a national I.D. number also!!!!!!!!

Rescind your Government contracts and tell them to get in their own backyards! FEDERAL ZONES! Forts, Dockyards,etc. per the constitution for these united States.

I just don't see how this act would prevent a terror attack.

Anyone could make a large quantity of home-made explosives, rent a ryder truck and go any where and blow something up. It wouldn't be that hard, and it could not be detected or prevented by the govt's war on terror.

It is impossible to avoid terror attacks altogether, so making new laws, introducing new acts, and taking away people's rights will not prevent a terror attack.

one dirty bomb could ruin your whole day

I am for homeland security, but unlike the President I would not allow our borders to stay open, and would not allow cargo to go unchecked. I would put the National Guard at the borders and sea ports patrol them, make sure all nuclear radiation was safe and begin to dismantle our nuclear weapons (we would keep many, but most could be destroyed), eliminate many unconstitutional gun laws and allow pilots to carry guns.

Our military should be protecting us not protecting Europe. If we put our troops on the borders of Canada and Mexico and at the cargo facilites they would actually be protecting the United States instead of the United Nations.

Since becoming a Libertarian approximately four years ago I have lost all faith in government, except to do what it is Constitutionally supposed to do. The sad part is that I have even lost faith in that; it is so busy caring for us sheep that it is neglecting its true responsibility. We as a nation are so entrenched in our statist paradigm that we cannot see anything else; to ask Joe American how he likes living in an environment in which our freedoms are being eroded is like asking a fish what he thinks of living in water..."Water? What water?". I and my contemporaries (I am 30 years old) are victims of presentism...we have not learned the lessons of history and therefore fail to realize just how we have drifted.

Terrorism has been festering since Carter? What about the U.N. creating Isreal, or the day WWI began, or the Crusades? Go back as far as you want Roger my friend, you give Carter way too much credit. And this bill is not simply about creating a standard for states to go by when designing their next driver license. Just as gun laws do not prevent gun crimes, this law will not prevent terrorist attacks.

If the LP platform is implemented we will be a much more secure nation. Shut down the welfare state and the illegals will stop pouring in. Stop trying to run other countries and bring our lads home to defend the homeland, we'll be safer and be able to return to an "innocent until proven guilty" system where we are all not cataloged in a criminal database.

It seems that FDR was right afterall; "The Only thing we have to fear is fear, itself".

Of all the comments posted regarding this subject, one only has to read the one very true statement submitted above by Carl Vasser. Read it again and see that this is indeed what it is all about.

You know, I am very passionate on matters such as these. This is the type of Big Brother which our Founding Fathers were rebelling against when the Declaration of Independance was issued, and the Constitution was designed to protect. The fact of the matter is, None of our elected representatives give a damn about the Constitution or care about protecting it, they only pay it lip service. There was a time when they did, what do you think the confederates were doing! This country is on a one way track to disaster. Relief is not going to come at the polls that is for sure. As Jefferson put it there needs to be a rebellion every 20 years, we are long over due. I think it is time to re organize the sons of liberty and due to our tyrants what they did to King George, and started a revolution. Please e-mail dadofjalen@yahoo.com if you are interested in reforming the sons of liberty! I am not talking about forming another useless political party, the time for talk is over my friends, we need action and need it now!

Roger is entirely wrong. This law is a direct violation of the 4th amendment to the Constitution which says, "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

Pay special attention to the word "papers" in that quote.

Roger, is adherence to the letter of the Constitution extremism? If so, I proudly embrace the label.

Libertarian TV, Congress dosen't even have the power to create an id system, or drivers licenses in Article 1, Section 8. And I also think you could say that it violates the tenth amendment by violating the states rights and forcing them to do somenthing against their will.

Besides recognizing the problem, we need to focus on solutions. Can anybody give at least three options to avoid going thru this process

Mike:
I understand the frustration with our foreign policies. I detest a lot of them. Some, however, are very necessary in a world that has such an integrated global market and where the security of one nation is supported by the strength of another (i.e. our allies- the ones that matter, anyway). Going into other countries and telling people what kind of government they should have is overly simplistic of our military activities (no disrespect, I don't know a better way to put it). The Middle East, in general, is a threat because of its blatant support of terrorism (Saudi is a serious bone of contention for me). Afghanistan and Iraq will, hopefully, be the seeds of reform. It's not as if the people there haven't welcomed help in the past. We just never delivered.

Libertarian TV:
I don't understand your point. How does the RealID violate the fourth ammendment the way it's presented. ANYTHING can be corrupted. Sure, eventually, ReallID could allow the Federal Government to track everything about a person with the push of a button. It's just another tool. It's up to us to make sure it's used properly.

I agree JD

As for the next post asking for "at least three options to avoid going thru this process," I'd have to ask what process you're trying to avoid? Define the problem first before you try to solve it.

Bear in mind that the perceived need for a national ID is based strictly and solely in fear. The politicians are using fear of terrorists to justify usurping power.

If people truly want to reduce the threat of terrorist attack, the first step should be to stop encouraging terrorism. National ID cards do nothing toward that goal.

I'm going to be deluged for the above comment by those who claim that terrorists are nothing but deranged bomb-throwing thugs and that you can't do anything to avoid being attacked by them. These people need to explain why terrorists are so selective about which countries they attack.

As I said, you have to define the problem before you can solve it. I define the problem thusly: America maintains bases in Saudi Arabia against the express wishes of their own people. Muslims around the world take offense at this because Saudi Arabia is home to two of the most sacred cities in Islam: Mecca and Medina. The overwhelming majority of Muslims do nothing violent to oppose this occupation. Only a tiny minority join organizations like Al Qaeda for the express purpose of destroying the invading infidel.

The solution is so simple that many people refuse to see it or even acknowledge its truth. Withdraw from Saudi Arabia. End the occupation of the land of Mecca and Medina. Stop fueling the terrorists' fires.

Mark:
I was refering to modern terrorism and Carter's failure with Iran, which turned from being an American ally to becoming one of the powerhouses of terrorism. The crusades are ancient history, the practice of the time even for Muslims, and irrelevant to the cause at hand.

Roger wrote: "How does the RealID violate the fourth ammendment the way it's presented."

It sets standards for how papers (drivers licenses and other identification cards) may be prepared by the States and by individuals in Section 202 of the act, and it states that any such cards that do not meet these requirements may not be accepted as valid identification by any Federal employee or department for any purpose. The only possible use for such a regulation is if they intend to demand that you "show your papers" at any time of their choosing within rules established by the bureaucrats. This is the essence of not being "secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures."

If you think that the Federal Gov't demanding your papers for anything they consider to be "reasonable" to be justified by the 4th Amendment, then you and I have two vastly different definitions of the term "reasonable."

Such use of these IDs would not constitute corruption of new the law. Rather, the law itself is corrupt from its creation.

Sorry, I meant to say: "Such use of these IDs would not constitute corruption of the new law...."

Roger,

The crusades are only irrelavant in that the United States wasn't involved. As far as the terrorists - who could actually be nothing more than privateers - are concerned, the crusades are still happening, and we are the crusaders. They send that message to the disenfranchised , then you know the rest.

Our country was not founded on the principles of pragmatism. And to use pragmatism in solving these problems is completely ineffective as the people we are at "war" with don't respond to pragmatic measures. Pragmatism is a purely American way of looking at things and is imcompatible with foreign affairs as they now stand...imho. The answers require a different philosophical approach. And our forefathers were philosophs in the "Classical" and "Common Sense" schools. This is why we are in such a mess. Here is a solution: Require literacy of our politicians. : )

wow, i just read this right now after hearing about it in government class yesterday. this seriously pisses me off.

Roger wrote:
"The Middle East, in general, is a threat because of its blatant support of terrorism (Saudi is a serious bone of contention for me)."

You have to understand the root cause of this "blatant support for terrorism."

Prior to WWII how many terrorist attacks on the US can you name? Since WWII when we formed Isreal there have been escalating Middle Eastern 'terrorist' activies, oddly following the increased intervention of the U.S. in the region. Everything comes to a head at some point. 9/11 was the result. Were they terrorists before we started sticking our nose where it didn't belong? I'm not the utmost authority on the matter, but I don't recall any terrorist attacks on us.

Roger,
I see your argument, but as Lib TV said you have to define the problem before you can address it (or solve it). And you, like apparently the majority of congress, aren't addressing the root cause. You're getting your cause and effect wrong. Who started it does matter, and the U.S. forgein policy is the culprit.

We entered THEIR land 60 years ago (for practical purposes) and slapped them in the face. When they slapped us back (U.S.S Cole, 9/11 etc etc) we got all insulted and labled them terrorists. Maybe they deserved to be slapped initially, but not by us. They're own people needed to do it.

It seems that the united states government (with the real I.D act) is determined to divide free americans from the freedoms that many have died to protect. The freedoms that we have are rights given to each individual as part of our constitution and bill of rights,(Which makes this new communist law both illegal and null and void) as well as a GOD given right to live ones life in peace and security without interference from politicians who are beholden to a one world government and special interest groups. When the hell is america going to wake up to these socialists in democrat and republicrats clothing?I see people living their lives day to day ignoring what these comunist SOB,s are doing to our country. Its pathetic to see so many sheeples being led around by a bunch of stalinist clones. If only the LIBERTARIAN Party could take over one state at a time and show the rest of this country what they are losing, maybe several other states would begin to wake up. Montana, Idaho and Washington states would be great states to start with.This whole war on terrorism is a total lie and the united states government is involved with deception and lies clear up to their eyebrows. All of our so called leaders need to be sitting in guantanamo bay prison for life terms. George bush and tony blair are war criminals and serial killers and should be brought to justice just as any war criminal would be.(Unless of course iraq has secretly handed over all of those weapons of mass destruction that we gave them. (OOPS, did I say that we gave them weapons of mass destruction?)We must also accept the idea that many people choose to let dictators do there thinking for them, but I think that those people should move there carcasses to cuba.

The powers that be obviously have a submissive public when they are proving that they can achieve total cradle to grave monitoring of travel for every man, woman and child in America and every Senator votes for it. What next?

We ought to impeach every one of those communists, and I mean all of them. Not one more tax dollar for senators who create failed programs that cause a truckload of problems; not one more vote for congressmen who infringe on our liberties; and not another vote for presidential canidates who are more or less the same.
As for blaming us for the actions of Carter, Reagan, Bush(and his son), and Clinton: is it really necissary to point fingers at people who had nothing to do with those DC idiots' irresponsible actions? Wouldn't it be better to actually do something good for this nation instead of mouthing off about how much everything sucks without offering any reliable, credible solutions to fix it? I may be young, but I love my
nation.

I love seeing a couple of people in this blog that is obviously new to the philosphy but it is sad that they think that we have to ignore the constitution in order to compete as a political party. I hope both of you stick around long enough to understand why we can't sell out these principles.
I think we are missing a big part of why terriost exist. Although the interventionism of our foriegn poilcy I find foolish and counter productive, I think it's a stretch to say that we wouldn't have been attacked if we had a different foriegn poilcy. Dictators that opperesed it's people and ruled their life and the nation's economy while their people starve. These dictators scapegoat America and more specifically America capitlism as the reason of the poverty in their country.The terriost selection of the wtc towers as their target was from their own words an attack on american greed.You combine the power of absoulate power plus the little need of fact and reason when it comes to relgion and the poverty these people face and you have the perfect breeding grounds for terriost.For this reason I think we may have been attacked even without the self destructive foriegn policy.For these reasons I think it's important that we don't underestimate our enemies.
I'm not saying that changing our foriegn policy will not go a long way to making us safer, I'm just saying it is only part of it.

What kind of a government hide bad legislation such as the ID in another bill, in order to sneak it by. This is one sick evil government that mr. lincoln brought us.

What happen to for the people by the people?

The best thing that people can do with this new national I.D system is refuse to go along with the states who approve this kind of communism. The LIBERTARIAN PARTY needs to use some of our donations to put huge one page articles in major newspapers such as the new york times, the los angeles times, the seattle times ect, and show the american people where this new COMMUNIST NATIONAL I.D. SYSTEM is not only un-constitutional and illegal, but to give many americans a chance to understand the reasons that our government and way of life is being dissasembled by an out of control one world government group of elitist skull and bones dictators. The LIBERTARIAN PARTY is the only party who has the understanding of the corruption that we are now facing from this puppet government that the PEOPLE have elected, and the LIBERTARIAN PARTY is the only party who can reverse this trend of socialism and destruction of our constitutional rights and guarantees. We can fight these SOB's but it has to be done right and it has to be done now. Unlike this out of control REGIME of a government that we have in place, we can defeat these communist jack-asses in a non violent way through education of the masses. This government can't even recruit soldiers for the military without resorting to lies and deceptions because even the teenagers are starting to wake up to the fact that the united states government went to war on false pretenses, lies, and misrepresentation of facts. They are having to resort to STOP LOSS TACTICS in order to force the military soldiers to stay in combat areas long after there obligations have been met. No wonder the government is letting the southern border stay open, they are going to need millions more troops for the coming illegal wars with Iran, north korea, and Syria.It won't matter if those troops are american or mexican because they will probably be sent home in body bags anyway. What this government is doing to our country and the meddling that is going on throughout the world by our dictators needs to be stopped now before they finally get us into a 3rd world war with china, russia, pakistan, india, north korea, japan and anybody else who is certain to learn to hate our guts.These dictators (george bush,tony blair) are screwing with the legitimate governments of countries such as venezuela, iran,north korea etc, without probable cause and its going to explode in our faces very soon if it doesn't stop. Where the hell does this government get the gull to demand that north korea and iran dismantle their nucleur weapons programs when the UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT continues to help ISRAEL build theirs and has NEVER DEMANDED THAT ISRAEL OPEN THEIR WEAPONS FACILITIES TO INTERNATIONAL INSPECTIONS. What a bunch of ARROGANT, TWO FACED JACKASSES.

Not to mention that the UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT, along with a coalition of the willing,(BRITAIN,ITALY,ETC,) has caused unbelievable death and destruction to INNOCENT PEOPLE who might otherwise have enjoyed life a little more if they were not forced to live life with missing limbs and dead relatives. Saddamn hussein may have been a butcher but donald rumsfeld, ronald reagan, and many others supported this ruthless scumbag during his reign of terror and that makes our government SUPPORTERS OF TERRORISM. THAT MAKES OUR GOVERNMENT WAR CRIMINALS. THAT MAKES OUR GOVERNMENT MASS MURDERERS. THAT MAKES OUR GOVERNMENT AS BAD AS HITLER AND STALIN. THEY HAVEN'T KILLED 6 MILLION INNOCENT LIVES YET BUT BY GOD THEY ARE WORKING ON IT........AND THE NUMBERS MAY BE FAR GREATER BEFORE THE ELITISTS ARE DONE IF AMERICA DOESN'T WAKE UP SOON.

Matt wrote:
"These dictators scapegoat America and more specifically America capitlism as the reason of the poverty in their country"

I agree with you there, but again why do they use America as the scapegoat? Why not other capitalist nations in Europe or Japan?

The answer, or at least a huge portion of it is because other capitolist nations don't have troops stationed in over 135 countires around the world dictating policy to those nations. The USA does.

I don't see a problem with this at all and I've consistently voted Libertarian at every possible opportunity since the early 1990's.

Why can't our states simply meet a series of federal guidelines designed to prevent irresponsible states from handing out drivers licenses to illegal aliens? What is so apocalyptic and anti-constitutional about this idea?

It seems like if the federal government asks for any cooperation at all from the states the Libertarian Party is automatically up in arms in kneejerk fashion. I don't get it.

If you're a citizen rather than an illegal you should have NO PROBLEM providing your birth certificate at the drivers license facility. The only people who should be making a stink are either the extremely lazy who don't want to bother finding their document or people with ulterior motives.

The Libertarian Party promotes personal responsibility but apparently doesn't think that state drivers license facilities need to practice the same.

This isn't about some new, additional Orwellian form of identification. This is about making sure that people who have drivers licenses are U.S. CITIZENS, a perfectly legitimate cause and an invasion of privacy to no one.

I thought that Michael Badnarik promised during last year's campaign to eliminate entitlements for U.S. citizens and non-citizens alike and treat people illegally crossing the border into the U.S. as what they are: INVADERS! If the Libertarian Party opposes a crackdown on states giving out drivers licenses to illegals and failing to coordinate and cooperate with federal authorities on matters of national security, then what the hell is this party's plan to address the problem of people invading our country's borders?

Can anyone tell me what the Libertarians' solution is to this problem? This bill isn't going to solve all our problems by any means, but at least it's a start to hopefully get the ball rolling.

If there's one thing that bugs me it's complaining without any alternative solution being offered up. I'm currently disappointed in the Libertarian Party, the party I've supported for over 10 years running.

I hate to say it, but I can't knock the incumbent parties on this.

Still, for all of my (valid) points, I haven't mentioned one thing we can do about the national id now. Like many others I'm more talk than action. Bitching, griping, complaining, no matter how warranted, rarely change anything by themselves. I should get off my frightened butt and do something.

But what?

Tom,

The problem is that good intentions pave the road to hell, as they say, and the safe guards put in place to make sure that road could never go there are being circumvented by people with your apparent perspective.

I truly mean no disrespect to you, but I have to question your familiarity wiith the Constitution and/or the reasoning behind it if you're asking what's so unconstitutional about it.

This really isn't the medium for U.S. Constitution 101, but States are sovereign (I.E. STATES) and beholden to the federal government only by the finite and few powers granted to it and only as long as they continue to consent to be governed ( see Declaration of Independence ).

The federal government is now trying to over step its bounds even more to put a tattered bandaid on a sucking chest wound it created in the first place.

In reponse to this quoted comment:

>The Social Security card (number) has been a requirement to get a job since the 30's. Now we have millions of illegal aliens, some of whom mean us great harm. How do you folks suggest we separate out the terrorists from the legal citizens. It's great to bitch, but come up with a better solution that is >not an "invasion of our privacy".

Terrorists and legal citizens are not mutually exclusive persons. This "As long as we get the bad guys" authoritarian thinking is irrational. Remember Tim McVey or the Unabomber? "Sorting out" good and bad people is inefficacious for its purposes, disenfranchising for people who are wrongfully put into the bad category, and perilous for our citizens when people are wrongly placed in the good category.

Tom. The federal goverment does not have the authority to track our citizens every move with a national I.D card. We are not illegal aliens. We are legal united states citizens who live in a free country that is to remain free as the law of the land provides. The united states constitution does not give the government powers over the people, it gives the PEOPLE the power over the government and if anybody is to have an implant or a national I.D card attached to their person, it should be a visiting guest from another country or a corrupt politician, which would cover all who voted for this communistic legislation.The point is that freedom is as it sounds. (TO REMAIN FREE WITH NO GOVERNMENT INFRINGEMENT AS LONG AS YOU DO NOT INFRINGE ON THE RIGHTS OF OTHERS.)A national I.D card removes a major element of freedom by allowing the government to have power over the people instead of the reverse. If you feel the need to allow uncle sam to brand you with a national I.D card then by all means do so, but when uncle sam says that no state who refuses to meet these FEDERAL MANDATES will be allowed to have their citizens board commercial airplanes without them, then the government is seizing control of the states and the people.The congress and senate, as well as the supreme court are breaking the law by allowing this to happen and you are being tricked into giving up your freedoms for a false sense of security. The government has far overstepped its authority, not just here at home, but worldwide and its up to you to read the united states constitution and the bill of rights if you think i'm wrong.

Tom,

I personally think this ID issue is a tough one. You state that this is about making sure people have driver's licenses are US citizens. Are you saying that law abiding citizens shouldn't have a problem with it? That's like saying it's ok to search anyone at the drop of a hat since law abiding citizens shouldn't have anything to worry about. The question in a search is probable cause. The foundation of probable cause is the presumtion of innocence. The problem with the REAL ID is that law abiding citizens will be searched and presumed guilty unless they can prove their citizens with a REAL ID.

What about people who have no birth certificates? Home births were quite common at one time and many people don't have a birth certificate. What if your birth certificate was destroyed in a fire to either your house or the court house? (Don't laugh, these issues have arisen here in Virginia). The fact is that the standards effect law abiding citizens the most and shifts the burden of proof to the citizen instead of the state. The terrorists will have the means to forge documents... Grandma won't.

That being said, contrary to the nay-sayers here this legislation does not, in and of itself, create a national ID; it sets the standards by which the states must issue their own ID's. But it does lay the foundation for a national ID that will be much easier to pass if/when it comes around for debate.

At it's essence, it is an unfunded mandate on the states and should be fought from that perspective.

And I do think it should be fought. To bad the LP doesn't have a sitting Governer. Think Jessie Ventura would consider running under the LP flag since the Reform Party is in the pits?

Infinity. The first solution to stopping people from bringing us harm is to keep our noses out of other peoples business. We didn't get to this point in world relations by minding our own business. We got to this point of terrorism by sticking our noses where they don't belong. We got here by using our CIA to manipulate the governments of sovereign nations. We got to this point by supporting people like the ruthless dictator saddamn hussein. We got here by supporting osama bin laden and the talaban in afganistan. We got here by involving ourselves in vietnam for political reasons. We got here by allowing the contras to export illegal drugs into the los angeles basin to sell to our kids sothat the contras could use the procedes to buy weapons of mass destruction to use against the sandineestas. We got here by butchering all those men,women and children at waco texas. We got here by allowing our government to set randy weaver up on weapons charges and then shooting his wife in the face and his son in the back. This is why our government does not need control over the people. The solution to stopping these people from attacking the united states rests at the foundation of our government. We the people need to put LIBERTARIANS in office who will not involve themselves in the internal workings of other governments, and the immigration problem would be solved if the minuteman project was funded by the people or run as a permanent volunteer group instead of the federal government funding a border patrol agency that the government controls and will not allow them to do there jobs as they were hired to do. Another solution to the problem would be for Vicente fox to get the corruption in his government under control and to stop demanding that america cure all of his peoples problems. He's a leader, SO LEAD AND STOP CRYING TO US. Why should america continue to fix everyone elses failures at our expense. I hope this helps.

Tom: As I stated in an earlier post entry on this page, you're trying to solve a problem without defining and stating exactly what it is. That doesn't work.

Also, where does privacy fit into your scenario? As far as I can see, it doesn't.

Ray: I am sympathetic to much of what you say, and I understand your obvious anger. But I have to tell you from experience, if you want to win people over, don't piss them off with your anger.

I just want to state that ,here in Ohio at least, we already must present a birth certificate in order to get a driver's permit and or liscence. Since I was born in Pennsylvania, I had to send a request and pay money to Harrisburg in order to get my birth certificate. And copies of my birth certificate was not acceptable. Don't ask me why. This "Real I.D." act sounds like something the Anti-Christ would support. "Whoever doesn't have the mark of the Beast, and the number of his name, can not buy or sell". It certainly sounds like a dangerous precedent to me.

Jason, I think this is the thing an anti-Christian would support and so I cannot figure out why it is the republicans who are doing this. They want power and a big national(We have a federal government, a national government was feared by the founding faters) government so they can control the people.

After reading all the blogs posted, I can't understand how anyone would want tomake the national id a decree of the government for setting standards on stat indetification. Illegal immigrants still, to this day, and will, find a way to get some sort of illegal id. Whether it be SS cards, drivers licenses, and even birth certificates. This act of legislation has gone too far, and to sneak it in the way the Senate and House did is complete heresy.
As for the foreign policy issue, it can go hand in hand, like all other subjects that we can discuss. If anyone cares to look it up, I have no links for any site, but the ones who control our foreign policy, dictating it through government, is the Council on Foreign Relations. It basically sets us all up for an economic and political foreign policy that our founding fathers have went against. Like Mike K. quoted in an earlier blog....Jefferson is right...every 20 years, there needs to be a revolution or some sort of over-haul of the government. We are well past this due date. Lets take action. Let's defend the documents that were truly bled upon by the REAL PATRIOTS...the ones who fought for our freedom in the Revolution.

Excuse the typos, got a little excited...lol

One problem with the Real ID act is that it may allow police to view your criminal history from every state you have ever been to when you have just been pulled over for a simple seat belt violation. Should we have to carry this baggage from our whole lives everywhere we go and reveal it to anyone who scans these new IDs? As many of the laws in this country should be repealed, this is very unjust to peaceful people who are on the wrong side of illegitimately passed laws.

I arrived to the US in mid 70's. By 1980, I warned all my friends in H.S. to get their passports and consider being able to get out quickly as it was clear already then that the US was becoming a lot more like the USSR than the USSR was becoming like the US.

Remember the word "incrementalism?" It is exactly what R's and D's have been doing one nibble at a time to our constitution and the true American way.

After USA Unpatriot Act, I was detained under it over an alleged $315.00 bounced check that had indeed been paid, but the store forgot to tell the DA. 36 hours in incommunicado as a US Citizen, suffering all you hear about (sexual humilation whenever I used the toilet in my CCTVd cell, angry cops attempting to provoke me to do something stupid destroying my personal property the wedding gifts and bashing my corporate issued laptop, refusal to tell me the nature of the charges, telling me that I'll be stuck for 2 weeks minimum before I get to see a judge, and when I do I'd better waive all my rights or else things will get worse for me "-have you ever heard of gitmo?")

Oh, and yeah, once that act was used against me as a US Citizen I've been unable to find a lawyer willing to take up the case against the gov't or the store (Sam's Club division of Walmart)...

I'll never go back. N E V E R.

Get out whilst you can. Riot before it's too late. But don't do nothing... Or you'll end up too scared like me.

Roger says awhile back in this thread, "Would all of you who think it's a waste of time prefer our representatives to simply continue to TALK about solutions?"

Would that they would even talk about SOLUTIONS. Stupid, anti-liberty measures such as RealID solve nothing. If our representatives would discuss our foreign policy and how that helps create an environment that produces terrorists, perhaps they might also begin to talk about solutions that 1) lessen the likelihood of anti-American terrorism; and 2) enhance (or at least do not reduce) liberty.

The terrorists themselves have said often that they don't hate the American people, our liberty, or our way of life. (Yes, there are some nutjobs who rail against us, but the statements of deadly terrorists such as bin Laden have actially been a lot more rational than that.) They hate what American foreign policy is doing or fostering in their corner of the world. We dismiss that, for some reason, as if we really know what's in their hearts and minds. As our experience in Iraq proves, we have almost no clue of what is in the hearts and minds of people over there. Even if we can't completely trust them to be honest, what they themselves say seems to be a better indication of their motivations than what our people say about them.

The answer to poverty? Forcibly redistribute wealth! The answer to terrorism? Lock down the borders and force every person to have government-issued ID. The answer to a fuel shortage? Force everyone to drive 55! The answer to drug abuse? Fight a domestic War on Drugs. It goes on and on. Government keeps missing the target, yet claims success anyhow, not to mention an unlimited right to have "second chances."

Assuming Expat is not a nutcase, he is a good example of the potential abuse of new legislation such as this national ID card. Again, I don't think the bill is a direct threat against the constitution, but when cases such as these show up and there is ample evidence to support the occurence of such abuse are there any resources the Libertarian party has to counter them in a public manner. Does the Libertarian party have links to watch-dog groups who are dedicated to the legal representation of victims and exposure of rights abuses?

Also, it was mentioned in an earlier blog that terrorists are targeting the U.S. because of our global influence. This was an attempt to explain why they are attacking us instead of our European allies. First, you forgot about the recent attacks on Spain just before they withdrew. Second, you must consider the nature of the enemy. We are not talking about the general populous of the Middle East. We are talking about a wacked out minority who have nothing better to do than try to be at the forefront of a regime change. They would be most favored if successful and would likely be spared the bloody tyranny of the next ruler so that they could carry out his atrocities. Sure, A FEW of them have legitimate grudges against the U.S., but they are merely puppets in an ancient, bloody game that is controlled by drug lords, arms dealers, and psychos. The attacks on the U.S are nothing more than prizes that are legitimized with cries of crusades, Jihad, and the release of "oppression" from the very people they intend to oppress. Of course they are going to attack the U.S., we're the biggest prize and the best one to show off. It's great propoganda to recruit drugged out teenagers and blood thirsty adults while striking fear into those who wish only to protect their families. The terrorists that are practically glorified by some of the people in this blog are killing THEIR OWN PEOPLE!!! Not just people who are mixed in with U.S. soldiers, but people standing in line waiting to get work and help build their military and police force. People who are rebuilding the infrastructure. People who are just trying to get their kids to school. How on Earth are these scumbags justified in their behavior regardless of U.S. foreign policy?

Libertarian TV

I'm trying to see your point, but the question, I guess, is on the intent of the word "papers". Besides, the Federal Government demands identification at various times as it is and I don't see it as a violation of my rights.

Mike

Maybe we weren't the ones who should have slapped them in the face, but if they deserved it...I guess I'm a little kick happy with my boot.

Three things I have come to realize since the passage of The Real ID Act:

1. The only terrorists currently operating in the United States resides in Washington.

2. There are currently two terrorist cells in operation. Once calls itself Republican and the other Democrat. One cell has adopted an elephant as its mascot; the other has adopted the image of an ass. How appropriate!

3. Those looking to make a buck should invest not in oil or gold, but in bullets. It wont be long now before ammunition futures are on the rise.

Libertarian tv.....I suppose you are right. My anger comes from not only watching this government destroy the lives of good human beings for absolutely no reason what so-ever, but also from the fact that so many people are voting to give (my freedoms) away without my consent. It pisses me off when the voting practices of others is allowing my neck to be put in the same noose as theirs is, and the problem is that unless america wakes up to the incredidible damage that the domocrats and republicrats are doing to this nation and our freedoms,there ignorance will send us all on a boatride to hell. Michael badnarik had some great ideas that many americans would love to have heard, BUT with the filthy, unjust, communist way that our politicians run our un-democratic, un-fair, un-free election process, mr. badnarik was totally shut out by not only the two major parties, he was totally blackballed by most of the major news organizations. If he was allowed to speak, they asked him how he was doing today, and as soon as he opened his mouth they went to a commercial break and THAT WAS THE LAST YOU HEARD OF MICHAEL BADNARIK FROM THE MAJOR NEWS NETWORKS. My anger comes from watching these injustices happen in america while this pisshead of a government continues to talk about free democratic elections around the world. This government is nothing more than a bunch of socialist, arrogant dictator bastards who wouldn't know what freedom was if it walked up to them and punched them in there faces. I appologize if my anger is so apparent but it took me 45 years of watching this political injustice to get this way.I have this bad habbit of calling a pig a pig even though the pigs in upper government are too stupid to understand why.

Anybody notice that cato has been strangly quiet about the national ID cards.Nothing on the cato site since the house passed it.Nothing when the Senate passed it.Why? I think maybe they have gone to bed with this adminstration on the social sec. issue. I don't understand why. Cato has said that the precentage of the payroll tax that has to go into the accounts for it to be succesful is no less then 6% and the president's plan only puts in 2%. Never send a Republican to do a Libertarian's job. I think we should do some type of protest where we call the media and show us ripping up soc. sec. card and explain that: A) It is a worthless program and that we should be able to opt out. B) The card and the number has been used as a type of national ID despite the government saying that it would never be used in this way.C) Point out the dangers of this and the extreme increase in danger by the passing of the real ID act.D) read them the 4th Amendment.

Roger wrote: "I'm trying to see your point, but the question, I guess, is on the intent of the word 'papers'. Besides, the Federal Government demands identification at various times as it is and I don't see it as a violation of my rights."

That only goes to show just how much you've bought into so much of the nonsense that the Federal government (not to mention the state governments) have conditioned you to accept. The Founding Fathers never, ever intended for us to be controlled by the Federal government (or indeed by any government) via our papers.

Take a look at the history of the 4th amendment as presented at FindLaw.com. The URL is http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/amendment04/01.html#3 and I have reproduced excerpts of it below:

---------

"Few provisions of the Bill of Rights grew so directly out of the experience of the colonials as the Fourth Amendment, embodying as it did the protection against the utilization of the 'writs of assistance.' But while the insistence on freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures as a fundamental right gained expression in the Colonies late and as a result of experience, there was also a rich English experience to draw on. 'Every man's house is his castle' was a maxim much celebrated in England, as was demonstrated in Semayne's Case, decided in 1603. A civil case of execution of process, Semayne's Case nonetheless recognized the right of the homeowner to defend his house against unlawful entry even by the King's agents, but at the same time recognized the authority of the appropriate officers to break and enter upon notice in order to arrest or to execute the King's process. Most famous of the English cases was Entick v. Carrington, one of a series of civil actions against state officers who, pursuant to general warrants, had raided many homes and other places in search of materials connected with John Wilkes' polemical pamphlets attacking not only governmental policies but the King himself.

"Entick, an associate of Wilkes, sued because agents had forcibly broken into his house, broken into locked desks and boxes, and seized many printed charts, pamphlets and the like. In an opinion sweeping in terms, the court declared the warrant and the behavior it authorized subversive 'of all the comforts of society,' and the issuance of a warrant for the seizure of all of a person's papers rather than only those alleged to be criminal in nature 'contrary to the genius of the law of England.' Besides its general character, said the court, the warrant was bad because it was not issued on a showing of probable cause and no record was required to be made of what had been seized. Entick v. Carrington, the Supreme Court has said, is a 'great judgment,' 'one of the landmarks of English liberty,' 'one of the permanent monuments of the British Constitution,' and a guide to an understanding of what the Framers meant in writing the Fourth Amendment.

"In the colonies, smuggling rather than seditious libel afforded the leading examples of the necessity for protection against unreasonable searches and seizures. In order to enforce the revenue laws, English authorities made use of writs of assistance, which were general warrants authorizing the bearer to enter any house or other place to search for and seize 'prohibited and uncustomed' goods, and commanding all subjects to assist in these endeavors. The writs once issued remained in force throughout the lifetime of the sovereign and six months thereafter. When, upon the death of George II in 1760, the authorities were required to obtain the issuance of new writs, opposition was led by James Otis, who attacked such writs on libertarian grounds and who asserted the invalidity of the authorizing statutes because they conflicted with English constitutionalism. Otis lost and the writs were issued and utilized, but his arguments were much cited in the colonies not only on the immediate subject but also with regard to judicial review."

--------

There are a number of key points here.

First, don't make the mistake (as the courts often do) that the 4th amendment only applies to entering your home. That is a primary protection of the amendment, but it is not exclusive.

Second, notice that the colonists' example cited had to do with protecting the rights of smugglers, and the English example had to do with protecting the rights of seditionists by requiring the presentation of reasons for probable cause (a warrant). This clearly shows that one's papers, no matter who issues them, are not to be produced on demand by the Federal or State governments.

You say that it's reasonable for the State government to force you to produce your state issued drivers' license on demand? I disagree. While that is certainly the practice today, in principle it is clearly a violation of the spirit and original intent of the 4th amendment.

Third, notice also the use of the word "libertarian" in the article. Clearly, even FindLaw takes notice that the libertarian position stands against the government's constructions of what constitutes legitimate inquiry.

Fourth, it is abundantly clear that the 4th amendment requires that the government first show probable cause. When has a government official EVER first shown probable cause when demanding a citizen's papers? You know the answer as well as I do. The only time they ever show probable cause is when they demand the papers of a lawyer who decides to dig his heels into the ground and knows how to fight back. Government officials routinely ignore this requirement, only making sure that they don't offend some judge in the process of their investigations.

Finally, I commend to your attention the last sentence, "...his arguments were much cited in the colonies not only on the immediate subject but also with regard to judicial review." While the article doesn't go into greater detail, it makes it abundantly clear that the 4th amendment was considered to be of paramount importance to those who pushed for its passage and confirmation.

Here is another source you can examine:
http://www.flexyourrights.org/facts/fourth-amendment-history.html
"The Fourth Amendment protection against 'unreasonable searches and seizures' was adopted as a protection against the widespread invasions of privacy experienced by American colonists at the hands of the British Government. So-called 'writs of assistance' gave royal officers broad discretion to conduct searches of the homes of private citizens, primarily as a way of discovering violations of strict British customs laws. This practice led to a unique awareness among our Founding Fathers of the threat to individual liberty and privacy that is created by unchecked government search powers."

Does the 4th amendment only apply to accused seditionists and smugglers? Does it only apply when the gov't wants to enter your home? Clearly not. It was originally intended to have wide range and scope to protect and defend individual privacy. Clearly, even government issued and required papers are, by definition, private once they are turned over to the citizen. If we conclude the opposite, that government-issued papers avoid the restrictions of the 4th amendment, then we open the door to any violation of privacy that the government can invent. All they have to do is to require you to hold certain papers that they've issued and it gives them carte blanche to get around the 4th amendment's privacy protections any time they wish.

Please tell me Roger: how is this sort of loophole consistent with the libertarian view of strictly limited government?

Ray: I share your anger and experience. It certainly makes it hard to make the libertarian case to non-libertarians when we feel such anger. I know I often want to just vent my rage in protest against the innumerable violations of us, our Constitution, and our heritage.

Nor do I claim that you should keep your anger inside. You should find constructive ways of getting it out, so that it doesn't fester inside you and do damage.

At the same time, we must all be prudent about when and how we express that anger. An online blog such as this is our platform to the world. It has only been online for a short time, yet look already at how many non-libertarians have apparently visited us! Keep making the libertarian case, Ray, but do so with prudence and reason. This is the time to keep your anger in check. Use it instead to focus your mind and hone your arguments.

Most of us feel the way you do Ray, so take heart and remember that we'll capture more flies with honey than with vinegar.

Re: Social Security Card (personal reflections)
The US government (and state governments) can't get my name or social security number right!
They have to 'track' us, but the actual employees of the State and Federal Government can't spell very good, print very good, or type very good. The more ID's they need, they more screw-ups we will have to endure.
Re: SS#
559-90-7280 was the WRONG SS# for me for TAX purposes on mutual fund stocks and IRA account in the 1980's. I made the TERRIBLE mistake of trying to set up a Retirement Acccount (private sector) but, as usual, what we have for 'civil servants' are hopelessly incompentent with things like (arabic) numbers and (English) letters (AKA the alphpabet).
Government: a fearful master and troublesome servant -George Washington (paraphrased)

Hey, I liked the U.S.A.S.S.R. thing so much I bought the domain name www.usassr.com - If anyone is interested in posting to or developing it, please let me know! You can respond to this blog until the site is running

not trying to advertise, but heres a cool shirt you may be interested it

http://www.kmfdmstore.com/product_info.php?cPath=1_2&products_id=105

I certainly agree with the U.S.A.S.S.R. analogy. More frightening, does anyone recall Nazi Germany?

I agree with the LP with regard to most issues. However, where I strongly disagree, is the LP's stand on immigration. If this Real ID Act is truly to enforce strict immigration laws I have no problem with it. IF it is in fact just a socialist method of making sure American citizens have their "papers", then obviously I am against it. I was sold on it when it was touted as a way to enforce immigration laws. For instance, the states that issue D.L.'s to illegals, their state identification cars and driver licenses would not be accepted for security reasons. Keep in mind that at least some of the terrorists involved in 911 had valid state issued driver licenses. That is just wrong! I don't see how the LP can be against something if it really is used to protect American citizens from illegal immigration and terrorists. No we should not be babysat by the government, but one of the few jobs of the federasl government it to protect national security. As with most Libertarians I would like to see them do it with the least intrusion on our liberty and civil rights. No I am not one of those people that are willing to give up a little liberty for security, and therefore deserve neither as Ben Franklin once said. I just believe that our nation's security is important now more than ever. Giving illegal aliens a government I.D. that is making them de facto citizens is just plain wrong.

Don't be fooled by the Government telling you it will protect you from the evil doers. You simply can't keep bad people out of a country. And if you see a country successfully doing so, you are no longer looking at a Free Nation.

Libertarian TV

OK, I think understand what you're saying, but it goes back to the statement I made earlier that the Libertarian philosophy is too idealistic. Suppose, for a moment, that we had no ID cards or any other way to properly identify an individual. What of national security then? When an officer or other government official demands to see identification the circumstances typically present probable cause; entering a government building or installation implies consent; if I am pulled over the priviledge of driving implies consent, but even then I can refuse to show it without the officer explaining why; if I am casually walking on the street I can refuse to show identification without being told the reason why. It's on this last circumstance that provides the most opportunity for infringement, but I am unaware of violations related to it.

No society could depend on any form of domestic security without a means to identify legal residence which requires that we submit certain documents to provide proof such as birth certificates.

I can understand, but not entirely convinced of, the argument against the social security card as a means of identification- mostly because of a lack of detailed understanding of SS history. Besides that the system is clearly a farce.

In what ways could we identify illegal immigrants? I am not entirely sure how the RealID could accomplish that any better than to stop pandering to immigrants. Maybe it is a smoke screen with questionable intent. The core argument, though, is that such identification is an infringement of rights, yet it's also a fundamental requirement for domestic security. Please tell me what you think would be a better alternative to documented identification.

Roger

you are stating all these things with the false assumption we NEED to identify citizens of a certain country to distinguish them from those of another.

this is the problem with having seperate nations. It creates wars, it creates hate, it creates envy. It is as though we are animals fighting over territory.

We are all humans living on EARTH. we are not americans, we are not mexicans, we are not north koreans. All this soil belongs to everybody.

What I would like to see is a one world government created by libertarians; a one world government with a clear bill of rights, containing the most sacred of freedoms: The right to do as you wish with your own body as long as you do not take another person's rights.

If we had this, we wouldn't have to go to war to "spread freedom", stop genocide, etc. Nations like china, north korea, cuba, wouldn't be allowed to oppress its citizens because A) there would be no nations, and, more importantly, B) oppressing people would be illegal due to a World Constitution.

I would love to see the entire earth be one vast economy, with free trade, free competition, etc. I don't want the U.S. Gov. forcing me to pay more on certain goods because they came from another country.

Nationalism kills global capitalism

I think we may be missing something here, guys. They slipped the amendment into a military budget. How about slipping a repeal into the VA budget? At this point in time, no one would vote against the VA budget. Political suicide. Do you think Ron Paul would be willing to do this?

simply add the line, "the REAL ID (or whatever the official name is) Act is hereby repealed. Add it to something like page 683.

subterfuge to introduce it, subterfuge to repeal it.

thoughts?

Roger,

You think that Libertarians are too idealistic. I disagree. I think we're far more realistic than the pragmatists are who are running our country into the ground.

You also ask what a better solution would be (again), but once again you ill-define the problem. At least this time you took a stab at it, although it was a poor stab.

You wrote, "In what ways could we identify illegal immigrants? I am not entirely sure how the RealID could accomplish that any better than to stop pandering to immigrants. Maybe it is a smoke screen with questionable intent. The core argument, though, is that such identification is an infringement of rights, yet it's also a fundamental requirement for domestic security. Please tell me what you think would be a better alternative to documented identification."

First, is this truly the "problem" you're trying to solve? I doubt it. It's certainly not the politicians' purpose. They propose to use the RealID to fight terrorism. Of course, as you point out, it's a fools errand. Let's see now...how many terrorists have they caught using all of the "desperately needed" violations of our civil liberties that are, in your words, "a fundamental requirement for domestic security." Hmm let me think.....hmmm....if we add up all of the terrorists who have been caught with all the added airport security, the passing of the Patriot Act, the creation of the Dept. of Homeland Security....I suppose the answer is....none!

That's right, none. Zero. Zilch. The big goose egg.

So much for "a fundamental requirement for domestic security."

Your entire last paragraph is a testimony to the futility of national policing for domestic security. It's all rubbish.

You want real security? You want to end the threat of terrorism? You want prosperity? You want to feel good about your country again?

The answer is total liberty...all of it...as guaranteed by the Constitution and by our founding fathers. That's what made this country great in the first place. It's also what made it safe. And if we have the guts to restore our country to its original path, it will be all of those things once again.

Our country was not originally a people grasping for world power. For most of our first hundred years, we minded our own business (comparatively speaking) and left world affairs to others. As George Washington said in his Farewell Address: "The great rule of conduct for us in regard to foreign nations is, in extending our commercial relations to have with them as little political connection as possible.... Trust in temporary alliances for extraordinary emergencies... steer clear of permanent alliances with any portion of the foreign world." Thomas Jefferson seconded this sentiment in his Inaugural address 14 years later with the phrase, "Honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none."

You want protection against terrorists among us? Give us all our liberty back, pull our noses out of other peoples' affairs, and then leave us alone. There's no need for identity cards in order to create security. It's actually just the opposite. Identity cards create insecurity in the name of solving it. They're a ruse, a figment of the fear-based imaginations of the power-hungry. Show me any period in history when identity cards were in use, and I'll show you a period in history that is more dangerous, more threatening, and more violent than those periods that don't have identity cards...particularly when those cards are issued by the State in all its glory.

As Princess Leia said to Governor Tarkin in the first Star Wars movie, "The more you tighten your grasp, the more star systems will slip through your fingers." Government ID cards are all about tightening the grasp of those in power.

Libertarian tv. You are absolutely right and I apologize for my anger. I also would like to tell Brandon D that he should consider running for senate or congress. He has a perspective rarely seen. His idea is that all people were created and put here on earth to live as equals. To live here in peace, without interference from governments.He is exactly right. The entire earth being one vast economy would be the way to go but we would have to remove the greed from politics as well as the idea that someone needs to be in control of the masses.This can only be accomplished by putting politicians into office who have a personal responsibility attitude and a desire to leave people alone. It would also have to come from people who did not support violence of any kind. It would have to come from people who had the understanding that helping ones neighbor out of the goodness of his or her heart would only bring success back to him 10 fold. The masses would also have to be educated with the principals in mind that when a dictator such as saddamn hussein or george bush come along, he should be imprisoned immediately before he can do damage to innocent lives. Looks like the LIBERTARIANS have a long way to go.

I agree great idea and well put Brandon D. The way we can go about is start getting our government to follow the constitution and then we can invite anybody that is willing to follow the constitution to join the union.

I must respectfully disagree with one statement Branden made. I do not believe that "one world government with a clear bill of rights" is the answer. I don't believe that one world government makes any sense at all.

As L. Neil Smith wrote in his novel, The Probability Broach, "...sometimes the interests of various government(s)--local, state, national--conflict. That's a good indication that you have have too many governments!"

Now you want to add a fourth layer to the madness? I shudder at the thought.

Libertarian TV

I don't understand what "total liberty" is without resorting to anarchy. In fact, it's not possible. The simple fact that our founding fathers assembled a central representative government is proof of that. When has identification been required? What about birth certificates? Those have been around for a few years. Every immigrant needed papers- at least new ones drawn up upon arrival to our great ports. What is "total liberty"? You say Libertarianism is not idealistic, yet you offer only what isn't possible.

How did I not identify the problem before asking for the solution? According to you, the problem is that identification is an abhorrent infringement of rights, but I counter that it isn't for reasons of national security- within limits. If you disagree, fine, but to say that I'm not identifying the problem is a smoke screen for an argument that has as many philosophical points for it as against it.

"Total liberty" is as unattainable as communism or any other purist form of government. Human nature does not allow it. Our government was designed for the people to apply self-imposed regulations. If it weren't, then what point would there be in having a government? Consider the root word "GOVERN".

Disagree if you must, but in humankind's current evolutionary development, we are not capable of "total liberty". You may say that I am pessimistic, but I say that I'm realistic.

Brandon,

Your ideas are fine, but like I try say to Libertarian TV, there is a more reasonable happy middle. I certainly don't believe we are at that middle now, but too far in any direction is either corrupt or not possible- today. Maybe some century in the future we will truly be some sort of Star Trek type of society, but in the meantime, we must use the tools laid out by our founding fathers to responsibly construct the path to that existence. As long as there are tyrannical people there will be violence.

Having said that, I know there will be some crack job that's going to say that the US is tyrannical. If you truly believe that, get some of your buddies together and start a revolution- hell, I might join you. Jefferson was right about the need for those as well.

Roger wrote: "I don't understand what 'total liberty' is without resorting to anarchy."

It's very simple Roger. Total Liberty is living by the Constitution, in every way...not just the ways that are convenient or not in conflict with your fears.

Roger wrote: "When has identification been required?"

You're kidding right? Name one important function in our society that doesn't involve some sort of government-sanctioned requirement of identification via a government-issued ID.

Roger wrote: "Every immigrant needed papers- at least new ones drawn up upon arrival to our great ports."

That only started to be true in the early 1900's, when our country started taking the first baby steps toward closing our borders. Before that, no papers were required to enter this country.

Roger wrote: "How did I not identify the problem before asking for the solution?"

Actually, you still haven't identified the problem. The closest you've come to identifying the problem was when you made your comment about restricting immigration. But even that isn't defining a problem. There's a motivation behind your perceived need to restrict immigration, but you still haven't stated for the record what that motivation is.

Here, I'll get you started. "The problem is" ...this is where you fill in the blank.

Roger wrote: "Our government was designed for the people to apply self-imposed regulations."

Our government was not designed for the people to apply loads of regulations on each other via majority rule. Our government was designed to provide a way to pay back the financiers of the American Revolution who weren't getting their money back under the Articles of Confederation. It was done to the complete surprise of most of the people, who were not prepared to fight the battle for liberty again so soon. They ultimately agreed to the new system grudgingly, with the understanding that it would be an extremely limited government. Hence the need for the Bill of Rights.

Roger wrote: "If it weren't, then what point would there be in having a government?"

I often wonder that myself, but the answer is obvious if you think about it. Government is generally odious and to be limited as much as possible, but it does have one virtue and one virtue only. If it exists for the sole purpose to defending and protecting individual rights, and for no other purpose, then it is a good government.

As Michael Badnarik said in his introductory comments during the party's presidential candidates' debate last May, "I'd like to share a quote from George Washington: 'Government is not reason. Government is not eloquence. It is force, and like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master.'

"If you lived in a log cabin, you'd require fire for your survival. You'd use the fire to heat your home and to cook your food. Fire is such a necessary part of your survival that you'd create a special place for fire. It is called a fireplace.

"Government is necessary for our survival. We need government in order to survive. The Founding Fathers created a special place for government. It is called the Constitution.

"Anytime the fire is in the fireplace, it is a good fire. Anytime a fire gets outside of the fireplace, it is a bad fire. Conversely, anytime the government stays within the limits of the Constitution, it is a good government. Anytime the government is outside the Constitution, it is a bad government, and it is time to stomp it out."

Roger wrote: "Disagree if you must, but in humankind's current evolutionary development, we are not capable of 'total liberty'. You may say that I am pessimistic, but I say that I'm realistic."

You have not offered a shred of evidence to back this assertion. It's not just pessimistic. It's fear-based. It's based in negative emotion, not reason. Total liberty means living completely under the Constitution as written, not interpreting it to expand government power at the drop of the hat. Your alternative is the Hamiltonian advocacy of big government. If that's your idea of realistic, I'd hate to see what you think of as idealistic.

In regard to 'total liberty'...

If you believe, as the Founders did, that rights exist instrinsicly then total liberty is living with those righs and responsibilities. That means you can do whatever you wish so long as it does not violate someone else's rights. That is 'total liberty'. That is not anarchy. But obviously the reality is that too many people don't know how to respect other people's rights. First and foremost it requires an understanding of what is and isn't a right. Basically, if you don't own it you don't have rights to it.

That's why legitimate governments are formed...to 'secure' those rights. So it's completely contradictory to impose laws restricting freedoms in order to protect them. "I'm just going to cut off your legs so you don't have to worry about breaking them."

I don't believe you have to add another layer of government to have one world government. If we made our government adherent to the constitution ,that includes getting rid of the federal reserve and going to a backed currency, that would make our economy fly. We then allow any country that wants to join the union to join. I think the free market would force countries to join us or copy us.

Matt wrote: "We then allow any country that wants to join the union to join. I think the free market would force countries to join us or copy us."

I commend to you the words of Harry Browne: "But no law will be written the way you have in mind, it won't be administered the way you have in mind, and it won't be adjudicated the way you have in mind."

Let's not put the cart before the horse. You haven't even clearly defined what need there is for a world government.

Let's look at the world government question this way: history shows us that libertarians (or people who today inspire libertarians) founded the US federal and many state governments. The got off to great starts, but look how they ended up. Having libertarians participate in a world government might start said government off on the best foot for a few decades, but how can any sane person think that the mission won't creep (or be hijacked!) over the years, just as we've seen with the Federal and state governments? At the endpoint of that trajectory, will you want a single, supreme government? I won't.

Competing, sometimes conflicting jurisdictions are a good thing, in terms of keeping the would-be rulers (instead of humble public servants!) busy, jousting with each other, while the rest of us go about our lives. People need alternatives. It used to be that the states were independent and dissimilar enough, that someoneone wanting a real change could simply move. Now, legally at least, every part of America is becoming like every other, thanks to federal intrusion into so many areas of life. We also don't have the wide-open frontier anymore, that, in previous eras, served to attract the liberty-obsessed malcontents. Imagine no soverign nations anywhere, no place beyond the jurisdiction or reach of a central world government. If history is any guide, that government will be no better able to keep from passing bad laws and oppressing the people in various ways than our US federal or state governments are. So, when it eventually goes down the path that all governments seem to walk, sooner or later, what will be the result? Instead of a World War between nations, will be have a global "civil war" between factions?

The way I see it, problems "solved" by centralized governments seem to pale in comparison to the problems CAUSED by them. So we should be very careful in evaluating world government proposals, and even more hesitant to act on them.

want to end terrorism? stop making enemies abroad.besides we have a major government funded terrorist organization in this country already. it is called the IRS. we need to unite with everyone and protest this id card! and yes, that may mean banding with tose greens and other liberal groups, just on this issue.

To anyone who has any ideas: What can be done to prevent the RealID Act from being enforced?

I don't think we can prevent it from being enforced. However, once people start becoming aware of it as it impacts their daily lives, I think we should be hammering home who gave it to them...those ever-lovin' Republicans.

we can stop it. we need to make a huge stink about it. we need to launch massive protests and overload congress members with mail. we need t