Steve_

Bizarrely Alberta was one of the first jurisdictions to comply with REAL ID, even though it's not in the US! Obviously there are some differences e.g. you have to prove you're legally in Canada rather than legally in the US to get one.

I don't recall there being that much of a stink when they did it.

AdobePinon

Yeah, well, the reason for NM's non-compliance is the fact that NM issues licenses to illegal immigrants. What they want is not a 'drivers license', it's something that should be issued from the federal level, so screw 'em.

Steve_

Otherwise known as a "passport" but do you really want to use one for domestic flights and going into federal buildings?

JAJ

What's wrong with using a passport card (or green card for LPR) for this purpose?

hungryhorace

I went to park in Boston the other day. Turns out the garage I went into is a Federal building. I needed to show ID to park. So, you're advocating carrying a passport with you most of the time in case you end up inadvertently entering a Federal building when you wouldn't think for a moment that it was one. It's just impractical AND it's a document requirement which sets the wrong tone (think wartime document carrying laws).

JAJ

The term used was passport card. No different to carrying a driving license. They've been issued since 2008.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passport_card

hungryhorace

I think it's impractical to be expected to carry both a drivers licence and a passport card with you. See my example of using a Federal building car park as to why one would find themselves carrying the Passport Card more often than not.

JAJ

No different to permanent residents carrying a green card as well as a drivers license. If/when the Federal government pushes on RealID, it may become the standard Federal ID option for those who live in states that refuse to issue RealID compliant documents.

Which wasn't the original intention behind the introduction of the passport card.

hungryhorace

Agreed, but who carries their GC with them (in practice)?

Lion in Winter

Not a fan of having to produce ID on demand - but the fact is the production of any form of identification is only the visible veneer on top of what lies underneath. Not only do "they" (the governement) already know all about us, where we go, who we phone and email, where we have our money and where we send it, what property we own, who lives in our house and who all the members of our families are, what plane we are on (ID at the desk or not, if you have a ticket and boarding pass they know), but a vast number of commercial ventures also know all about us - what we buy at the supermarket and online, what magazines we subscribe to, how old our children are, the value of the property we own, and a whole lot more.

To focus on the ID card alone is to miss the point - that's just the above-surface evidence of everything that "they" already know about us. Tackle the fundamental stuff - that might be worth doing. The ID is just a distraction.

JAJ

Some do, some don't. If it becomes needed for day to day Federal purposes, then I'd expect most will. It's already the norm to carry GC in border areas, and those who travel to another part of the U.S. would usually carry their GC with them.

AdobePinon

Or maybe the Feds should ask themselves why they require ID to park a car.

ScousePete

You'd better if you live in Arizona!

hungryhorace

Massachusetts seems pretty immigrant friendly so far

Steve_

What's wrong is that you've got to get one. So say you want to go to the SSA office - you've got to apply for a passport? And seeing as the passport office is a federal office, how do you get into the passport office without one?

And I'm Canadian - how do I get into one of these offices or places? I think Alberta ID is okay actually as I mentioned above but still it's a bit silly.

Personally I don't have a problem with the REAL ID requirements, it all sounds paranoid to me, can't see any harm in a federal standard for ID, but these are the arguments you're going to see soon. "Granny denied entry to her local SSA office because she didn't have a passport! News at 11!"

Some of the arguments I've seen against REAL ID are full-on foaming at the mouth crazy, the one that blew my mind was Arizona passing a law refusing to comply and moreover saying that the Enhanced ID program would violate people's privacy - errrr, it's entirely voluntary, you don't have to get an EIC or EDL, it's purely a substitute for a passport. "But it might be made compulsory" - only in your deluded minds and how is it worse than being forced to get a passport?