New McNaughton Painting:
Oregon lawmakers introduce bill to eliminate ‘proof of legal presence’ requirement to get driver’s license
Oregonians should not be required to prove they are U.S. citizens or legal residents to drive a car.
That’s the premise behind a bill filed in Salem this week by a bipartisan group of state lawmakers. If passed opens the door for non-citizens to obtain legal Oregon driver’s licenses, learner’s permits or general identification cards. It wouldn’t apply to commercial driver’s licenses.
The Equal Access to Roads Act would amend state law to allow drivers to submit a statement saying they have "not been assigned a Social Security number” instead of producing documents proving U.S. citizenship or legal residency. Qualified applicants would still have to pass a driver’s test and show they live in Oregon. The bill would not apply to learner’s permits or commercial driver’s licenses.
Rep. Diego Hernandez, D-Portland, one of HB 2015’s five chief-sponsors, said it makes sense to give all Oregonians an option other than paying more money for a Real ID starting next year.
The bill comes more than a decade after Oregon last issued eight-year driver’s licenses to residents without requiring they produce documentation proving they are citizens or legal residents.
The last of those licenses expired in 2016 and the state in 2017 decided to approve a plan to finally comply with Real ID. Transportation officials, while briefing state lawmakers last week, said Oregon would likely be the last state in the country to comply with Real ID.
If Oregon moves forward with a bill, it wouldn’t be the first state to do so.
Washington and California both caved out separate requirements for driver’s licenses, two of at least a dozen states to create licenses that don’t comply with the federal law according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.
Real ID is what we need to stop illegals voting:
The Dark states are in compliance, and the lighter ones are not yet
The Real ID Act of 2005
The law sets forth requirements for state driver's licenses and ID cards to be accepted by the federal government for "official purposes", as defined by the Secretary of the United States Department of Homeland Security. The Secretary of Homeland Security has defined "official purposes" as boarding commercially operated airline flights, and entering federal buildings and nuclear power plants, although the law gives the Secretary the unlimited authority to require a "federal identification" for any other purposes.[4]
starting January 22, 2018 "passengers with a driver's license issued by a state that is still not compliant with the REAL ID Act (and has not been granted an extension) will need to show an alternative form of acceptable identification for domestic air travel to board their flight”.
As of February 2019, 41 states and territories have been certified as compliant, and 15 have been granted extensions.[7]
A Real ID-compliant form of identification requires the following pieces of data:Full legal nameSignatureDate of birthGenderUnique identifying numberPrincipal residence addressFront-facing photograph of the applicantSaid cards must also feature specific security features intended to prevent tampering, counterfeiting, or duplication of the document for fraudulent purposes. These cards must also present data in a common, machine-readable format (bar codes, smart card technology, etc.).
Before a card can be issued, the applicant must provide the following documentation:[27]A photo ID, or a non-photo ID that includes full legal name and birthdateDocumentation of birthdateDocumentation of legal status and Social Security numberDocumentation showing name and principal residence addressDigital images of each document will be stored in each state DMV database.
The California DMV started providing federal compliant Real ID driver licenses and ID cards as an option to customers beginning January 22, 2018.[76] However, on December 24, the Department of Homeland Security has notified the California DMV that their Real ID driver licenses are not Real ID Compliant. This is because the California DMV has been requesting 1 “Proof of Residency” document as opposed to the minimum 2 as defined under Federal Law. The California DMV responded stating they will begin asking for 2 Residency Documents beginning April of 2019. Any Real ID Driver License or Identification Card issued before April 2019 will still be valid, however, when the applicant’s Real ID comes up for renewal, they will be required to submit an additional Residency Document to comply with the Real ID Act.[citation needed][77]
There is disagreement about whether the Real ID Act institutes a "national identification card" system.[99] The new law only sets forth national standards, but leaves the issuance of cards and the maintenance of databases in state hands; therefore, the Department of Homeland Security claims it is not a "national ID" system.[10
ACLU of Maryland says: "The law places no limits on potential required uses for Real IDs. In time, Real IDs could be required to vote, collect a Social Security check, access Medicaid, open a bank account, go to an Orioles game, or buy a gun. The private sector could begin mandating a Real ID to perform countless commercial and financial activities, such as renting a DVD or buying car insurance. Real ID cards would become a necessity, making them de facto national IDs". However, in order to perform some tasks, government-issued identification is already required (e.g., two forms of ID – usually a driver's license, passport, or Social Security card – are required by the Patriot Act in order to open a bank account).[101]
24 things that require a photo ID as of 2013:
1. Alcohol
2. Cigarettes
3. Opening a bank account
4. Apply for food stamps
5. Apply for welfare
6. Apply for Medicaid/Social Security
7. Apply for unemployment or a job
8. Rent/buy a house, apply for a mortgage
9. Drive/buy/rent a car
10. Get on an airplane
11. Get married
12. Purchase a gun
13. Adopt a pet
14. Rent a hotel room
15. Apply for a hunting license
16. Apply for a fishing license
17. Buy a cell phone
18. Visit a casino
19. Pick up a prescription
20. Hold a rally or protest
21. Blood donations
22. Buy an "M" rated video game
23. Purchase nail polish at CVS
24. Purchase certain cold medicines
But not to vote?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real_ID_Act
21 states, DC sue Trump administration over rules cutting Planned Parenthood fundingWashington Examiner ^ | 03/04/2019 | by Kimberly Leonard
Posted on 3/6/2019, 11:57:32 AM by SeekAndFind
Twenty-one states and the District of Columbia are suing the Trump administration over new rules that would cut federal funding from Planned Parenthood and other clinics that provide or discuss abortions.
California Attorney General Xavier Becerra, a Democrat, announced his decision on Monday to sue separately in a press conference and a coalition of 19 other states and the District of Columbia prepared to file their own suit Tuesday.
The rule in dispute applies to a $286 million-a-year grant, known as Title X, that pays for birth control, testing of sexually transmitted diseases, and cancer screenings for 4 million low-income people.
The Trump administration's change to the rule requires the "physical and financial" separation of family planning services and abortion. It would also block providers from referring for abortions for the purpose of family planning or promoting the practice if they are receiving Title X grants. Critics have often referred to it as a "gag rule."
Clinics will either have to comply with the rules or forgo federal funding. The policy takes aim at Planned Parenthood, which receives between $50 million and $60 million a year in Title X grants, and attempts to distribute the federal dollars to community health centers instead.
The lawsuits ask for an injunction of the rules, which are otherwise set to take effect in 60 days. Clinics would have a year to comply with the building requirements.
California filed its lawsuit in the U.S. District Court in San Francisco and coalition will file in the U.S. District Court in Eugene, Ore. Organizations such as the Center for Reproductive Rights and Planned Parenthood have also said they are considering lawsuits.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonexaminer.com ...