Talk:Real ID Act

Law C‑class Low‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

United States C‑class Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Archives

Archive 1 (2005—2008)

Funding for REAL ID Act

http://www.dhs.gov/xnews/releases/pr_1229446699591.shtm <--- Department of Homeland Security's Press Release on the matter. --Megwhit1012 (talk) 21:53, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Clarification re: Michigan

The article currently states that Michigan both a)has passed anti-Real ID legislation and b)adopted a pro-Real ID stance. Additionally, the link cited for part b is broken. On Thermonuclear War (talk) 04:55, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Broken Links

References 76 and 77 on this page are broken links. 128.36.71.33 (talk) 14:54, 6 February 2012 (UTC)Howie[reply]
Reference 12 was also broken. I've replaced it with a link to the Federal Register version of the document. This link should be stable. Musonius (talk) 07:21, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Broken Links

Sources 82-84 have broken links — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dryan910 (talk • contribs) 17:55, 7 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

New information regarding Ohio's rejection

As of Dec 6 2013, Ohio has rejected REAL ID act implementation. http://www.dispatch.com//content/stories/local/2013/12/06/state-pulls-plans-to-comply-with-federal-id-law.html. Putting this in the talk section since I don't know what the vision is of the authors regarding state by state implementation or rejection. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.0.34.2 (talk) 12:08, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

State compliance graphic is misleading

The graphic associated with the page only lists official compliance - a binary - not whether a state meets or exceeds the requirements, or what stance they've taken. As such, it's misleading; most states already meet or exceed the requirements. 174.62.68.53 (talk) 00:51, 17 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The graphic is out of date and inconsistent with the State adoption and non-compliance section. As an example, Indiana is shown as dark gray (filed extension) on the map but is listed as compliant in the referenced section. ejly (talk) 12:37, 2 November 2015 (UTC) 12:36, 2 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The graphic also lists at least one state, Tennessee, as being compliant when Tennessee is definitely NOT compliant, as of January, 2015.

Looks like acronym

The title looks like an acronym, but seems not to be. There must have been some press commentary on why the acronymic fetish for gov't programs is attractive to bill-drafters, and in what sense(s) it was argued that REAL ID was more real than its predecessors. Off-hand, it looks like a hint that lack of standards for counterfeiting-resistance was an issue or a red herring. Should be addressed.
--Jerzy•t 11:52, 11 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ID renewal / birth certificate Catch-22

My state ID expired on my 65th birthday. Then I discovered that, because Real-ID had been implemented in Arizona, I needed to present my birth certificate in order to renew my ID. However, before sending me a copy of my birth certificate, the San Francisco County Recorder requires me to send them a notarized form. But Arizona notaries require a CURRENT ID for identification before notarizing any form. So I am now and forever an "undocumented citizen."

Many others have the same problem. (Google for "catch-22 id renewal birth certificate") But I have yet to find a solution. This problem should be mentioned in the article. Or better yet the solution, if there is one. Ray Eston Smith Jr (talk) 21:34, 2 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Arizona has fairly typical requirements placed on the notary to identify the signer who appears before the notary, explained in the Arizona notary manual beginning on page 19. You can find a notary who knows you, in which case you don't need any ID. Or, you can bring a person with you when you visit the notary; the person you bring must know you and have ID. Arizona offers a search page where you can search for a notary in your area who you know. Jc3s5h (talk) 23:00, 2 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Why is this article rated as "low importance"?

For me and at least 40,000 others (41,400 hits on Google search for "catch-22 id renewal birth certificate"), it is of vital importance. Without a valid ID, I cannot file a Social Security change-of-address, therefore I cannot get my Medicare card, therefore I cannot get medical care. This is literally a matter of life-or-death.

Ray Eston Smith Jr (talk) 21:44, 2 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

needs a major rewrite

finding it hard to plow through, and I a) have a reason to read it and b) have a very high tolerance for gobbledegook Elinruby (talk) 12:29, 4 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]