This doesn’t seem like it should be a political issue, but I think it might be. I’m going to post the same thing in a general Q&A as well as “ask liberals” or whatever equivalent exists.
I have come across a few different people that all happen to be either libertarian or conservative, and all from Pennsylvania that are anti-Real ID. I’m sure there are leftists and liberals who don’t like the real ID thing I just haven’t come across them yet.
They say it’s fishy, they don’t trust it, they equate it to vaccine passports, etc. I genuinely don’t see the connection when I think about it critically. I have my opinions but I will save them so I can get answers that are not skewed. I’m just curious.
For those of you who are anti-Real ID, what is your reasoning
AskTrumpSupporters is a Q&A subreddit dedicated to better understanding the views of Trump Supporters, and why they hold those views.
For all participants:
Flair is required to participate
Be excellent to each other
For Nonsupporters/Undecided:
No top level comments
All comments must seek to clarify the Trump supporter's position
For Trump Supporters:
Helpful links for more info:
Rules | Rule Exceptions | Posting Guidelines | Commenting Guidelines
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
Most likely because it’s an inconvenience and should be unnecessary.
It’s a program by the federal government to get state drivers licenses and ID cards under a unified set of standards of identification and security for federal facilities. You have to prove your citizenship because 19 U.S. states and Washington, D.C. allow undocumented immigrants to obtain driver's licenses or ID cards.
By obtaining an ID don't they then become documented?
Symantics as they’re still here illegally and lack lawful immigration status. But yes they’ll have an ID stating who they are.
For the guys and gals who have to check ID for alcohol sales, wouldn’t it be nice if every state just put the DOB in the same spot?
Those days are well past me, but I still think about that. Be creative with everything else. Just get behind that one thing.
I'm a non-Supporter, but feel like OP would benefit from even just reading the wiki on Real-ID: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real_ID_Act.
Lots of states, including my home of the time Missouri, opposed RealID. It wasn't until Trump linked it to immigration that Republicans consolidated support for it.
There is a lot of written history showing many Republicans opposing RealID as a federal overreach and opposition to the government tracking citizens.
The question I always ask other Republicans I know that switched positions when Trump made it an issue is "is it worth giving up everyone's privacy and from the government and breaking the 10th amendment more to make it harder for undocumented people to get a state ID in some places?"
I'd be anti-RealID but for the fact that the federal government already has all of my biometric data, my address, ssn. I had a Washington enhanced license back when that was brand new. Perhaps if I had never joined the military I'd feel differently.
I just got pictures of my car taken to get a vehicle inspection. I don't get why the government needs so much of my data to function but also can't seem to stop terrorist attacks.
Perhaps because stopping all terrorism isn't the goal... Perhaps just some... Perhaps enough to drive an agenda... Perhaps...
Flock cameras work better to track you when they have documented photos to start.
Makes sense and I hate it.
I think your experience is pretty anecdotal. There’s no widespread movement against real ID.
I don’t like the claim that my state issued drivers license is not enough to identify me.
Does your state integrate Real ID standards in its issuance, or do you have to specifically request one? In my state, you have to pay an extra fee for Real ID, and it just feels like a money grab from the state.
I'm not against it. I don't like that it costs slightly more then a regular license (but not much). What I don't get is why some people are against having to use it or some other id to vote.
Part of it is that it isn’t free, so you are effectively instituting a tax to vote. A free ID would need to come first.
Do you think there would be opposition to a free national id system?
I have to drive to vote. So I guess my tax to vote is the microscopic cost of gas (especially nowadays).
There are other options, no?
There is literally not another option to vote that does not cost me money.
I do think a free ID system is one of the basic functions of government for its citizens. I do not think a non-citizen should be able to obtain a US Gov/State identification. Their own government should be providing this. I very much disagree with States giving driver licenses (including Commercial DL) to non-citizens with out making it obvious the holder is a foreign national. I do see situations were a foreign national may need a local DL. But that non-Citizen DL needs to be obvious that the holder is foreign.
A drivers license has become the de-facto standard ID by citizens and handled by individual States. The States do also provide a non-DL, ID only document. I do that an ID only should be free to every Citizen, Again, because this is a basic function of government.
So my family legally immigrated to the US from Canada as a kid. We weren’t citizens but were legal residents. Why wouldn’t my parents and later me and siblings not be getting a Minnesota drivers license? It’s incredibly impractical to go to Canada, learn Canadian driving laws and take Canadian tests, to drive in the US.
Sure, I did say that there are instances were a non-resident could need a DL. You getting a DL is fine. Just needs to be a differentiator on it to indicate residency status. I don't know how common your situation is. But its common enough.
I wouldn't be opposed to a free national id system.
Why haven't we converted our SS cards over to this? It still boggles me. State drivers licenses are more secure.
There is a better way to identify people. We have the technology to put biometric data on a chip and use it for ID. It's in every new phone and most people carry their biometric data securely with them. We also have the ability to put a chip on a card and access the data through a card reader. That is how credit cards work now.
We could create a biometric ID card with facial and fingerprint recognition. The biometric data is only stored on the ID card that is handed to you upon creation. No one has your biometric data but you. There are readers at airports and schools and polling place, etc. You insert your biometric ID into the reader, look at the device and put your finger in the right place and your identity is confirmed. You pull your card with your bio data out of the reader and go about your business in that place.
If you lose your card or it is hacked no one can use it because they do not have you.
This is tech that exists in abundance today and these devices could easily be created.
How’s this work if there’s no central registry to determine if the biometric chip is legitimate or not?
Because the chance of replicating a chip to vote or travel or healthcare is less than hacking a central registry. The readers will have layers of proprietary validation.
My only issue with Real-ID is that if I have one already (which I have since the program was first introduced) and then move to another state I need the same documentation to get another one. Seems kind of odd to me. Like it’s a federal standard, so shouldn’t my new state recognize my Real ID from my previous state?
Gotta love bureaucracy I guess. That said I didn’t realize it was really a controversial or political issue.
Do you suppose they just wanted to make sure your Real-ID wasn't stolen, before they transferred it? As in, they wanted to make sure you were you?
It's not just a Federal ID. It's also a State ID. The two have been lumped together. Federally, you can enter government buildings and travel the world. At the same time, you are held to each State's ID laws. So, you still have to fill out paperwork and pay fees whenever you move, just like with the old IDs.
Real ID was supposed to be a standard for qualifying validity of identification, to prevent false IDs. I'm not sure it does that - but I get the idea. It also sounds like a national "tracking" ID - which it was never supposed to be (although I cannot guarantee it isn't / won't be misused). A passport has the same qualifications EXCEPT in my state anyway they want proof of address that is for many of us very difficult to obtain (getting my passport which qualifies as a Real ID is much easier). So state implementations are a problem as I'm sure my state isn't alone.
I support it, at least the premise on which it is based. There are bad things like digital IDs and vaccine passports that are evil IMO and I can see how the uninformed or misinformed can see Real ID in the same light.
I've never met a person IRL that cares about real-ID. And I find it hilarious how the Left hyperbolizes the struggle of going to the tax collecter every 8 years to get one like it's some kind of insurmountable gauntlet of pain, strife, and monsters.
I think it’s a moot point until there is a law that requires an ID to vote in federal elections.