How close is Oklahoma to Real ID? Much, Much Closer Than It Ought To Be

Kaye Beach

September 14, 2012

Have you noticed the flurry of activity related to Oklahoma’s driver’s licenses?  Did your Real ID radar begin to ping?

A Google photo search for “new driver’s license design” shows that many states, like Oklahoma, are getting new driver’s license designs.  And like Oklahoma, the photos are all moved to the left.  This isn’t a DMV fad.   These standards come from somewhere.  —  2012 AAMVA North American Standard – DL/ID Card Design

“AAMVA (the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators) is called the “backbone” and hub” of the Real ID Act in the final rules issued by DHS” Mark Lerner, testimony before the Michigan House of Representatives, 2008

Several news items were released last week about some changes coming to Oklahoma’s driver’s licenses.

Oklahoma Rolls Out New Driver License and Upgraded Issuance System by MorphoTrust Sep 06, 2012 by Business Wire

“The new license meets rigorous security requirements and will not only upgrade our system but enhance customer service as well,” said Michael C. Thompson, Commissioner for the Oklahoma Department of Public Safety.

Oklahoma driver’s license will get makeover

Repositioned photograph is among changes to be rolled out over next several months for Oklahoma driver’s license

“They totally redesigned the system to where it’s going to be faster for the operator, which will speed up the line of people waiting at the tag agencies and exam offices.”

These news items were primed by many articles released over the last couple of months regarding the horrendous waits driver’s license applicants are forced to undergo in our state since ‘The number of examiners at licensing offices statewide decreased from 152 in 2009 to 105 this year. The number of testing sites has been reduced from 89 to 36 in a decade’

Long lines drive push to help Oklahoma driver’s license exam sites

At this point, Oklahomans are frustrated and the news of any changes that could help speed up the process are sure to be greeted with a huge sigh of relief and little scrutiny.

A little scrutiny is in order.

The deadline for meeting the standards of the REAL ID Act is January 15, 2013.

The Real ID Act passed in 2005 imposed federal guidelines that use  INTERNATIONAL standards for state driver’s licenses and ID documents

REAL ID licenses are to be

•machine readable

•contain biometric data

(including facial biometrics)

This and other information is to be shared

•nationally

•internationally

There are 18 initial benchmarks (39 benchmarks total) to the Real ID Act of 2005 that, once they are achieved, a state can consider to be in “material compliance” with the Act.  A state is in “full compliance” with the Real ID Act upon meeting all 39 of the benchmarks.

Once material compliance is achieved a state may request to be able to place a gold star on their state license to indicate that the card is acceptable for “federal identification purposes” from the DHS.

Spring of this year seven states were named as being the naughty foot draggers regarding meeting the 18 Real ID benchmarks. Oklahoma is listed as one of those laggard seven states and for good reason-our state passed a law prohibiting implementation of the federal Real ID Act in 2008. 

Oklahoma – OKLA. STAT. ANN, tit. 47, § 6-110.3 (2007) (The State of Oklahoma shall not participate in the implementation of the REAL ID Act of 2005. The Department of Public Safety is hereby directed not to implement the provisions of the REAL ID Act of 2005 and to report to the Governor and the Legislature any attempt by agencies or agents of the United States Department of Homeland Security to secure the implementation of the REAL ID Act of 2005 through the operations of that or any other state department. . .

The President of the Coalition for a Secure Driver’s License took it upon himself to help the Department of Homeland Security pressure and threaten these last remaining rebel states:

“It’s their last opportunity to get on board with the REAL ID rules or face consequences. . . . REAL ID is no longer a policy matter, the REAL ID debate is over.  REAL ID is now part of DHS’ ongoing operations.”
PR Newswire (http://s.tt/1bIrU)

What are the “consequences” of not having a Real ID?  Here is what we are told;

“In the future, only those state issued Driver Licenses and Identification cards which are fully compliant with the REAL ID act of 2005 will be authorized for use as identification for official federal government purposes, such as boarding commercial aircraft and entering certain regulated federal facilities.” Alabama DMV-STAR ID

Does this mean we won’t be able to fly?  In a word-no.  We will still be able to fly.   A passport will work as well as a military ID.  Of course any government issued photo ID means biometrics and carries with it the some of the same concerns as Real ID.  Any lesser ID may require secondary screening procedures, but you can fly without a Real ID.  As far as the federal buildings.  That will be interesting.  Barring US citizens from certain federal building will probably set off a constitutional showdown.

Oklahoma was not alone in their opposition to the Real ID Act.  At least 25 states passed a law or resolution prohibiting the implementation of Real ID in their states.  This was a historic level of rebellion and one that both red and blue states participated.

At least 13 (the National Conference of State Legislatures recognizes 16) states passed an actual law against Real ID but we know from Congressional documents that some of these states are quietly issuing Real ID compliant driver’s licenses anyways.

Thirteen states have laws prohibiting compliance with the REAL ID Act. Even so, DHS believes that some of these states already issue secure identification documents consistent with the standards of the regulation.  Link

These states may not sign up for the gold star just yet, but with a wink and a nod, they are just as surely undermining the will of the people by meeting the first 18 benchmarks of Real ID.  To state it simply, these states are positioned to do the bidding of the Department of Homeland Security by meeting the requirements of the Real ID Act while retaining plausible deniability about violating their states’ law that prohibits implementation of the Real ID Act.

At least nineteen states are now in compliance with the Act.   Twenty-six more are reported to have committed to meet the standards before the (new) deadline. (Dec. 1, 2014) link

So where does Oklahoma stand on the 18 (Real ID) benchmarks?

I will show you that Oklahoma is merely one benchmark away from compliance with this international ID scheme that caused an unprecedented uproar by the states following its introduction in 2005.

Oklahoma has progressed from meeting 9 of these benchmarks in 2008 to currently meeting 14 of the 18 Real ID benchmarks. (3 of the benchmarks pertain to formalizing commitment by the state to REAL ID.  State’s that have passed a law prohibiting Real ID implementation are forgiven these benchmarks by the Dept. of Homeland Security.  That is the “wink and a nod” Do in reality, Oklahoma is really only one benchmark away from being considered Real ID compliant.)

Real ID benchmarks 1-6

Real ID Benchmarks 7-15

Real ID Benchmarks 16-18

 

Doesn’t appear that the law prohibiting implementation of the provisions of Real ID slowed us down much, does it?

Some of these 18 benchmarks are sensible measures that many states were already working on prior to Real ID anyways.

However, benchmark Number 1 is a REAL problem!

Benchmark #1. “Mandatory facial image capture and retention of such image.”

Let me explain briefly why:  the digital facial photo is a biometric suitable for use with facial recognition software.  In fact, facial biometrics is the governments biometric of choice.  Why?  It is not the most accurate biometric for identification purposes but it does allow us to be identified in public without our knowledge or consent.  Never mind that we have the right to go about our business, as long as we are not a criminal or suspect, without be investigated.  The Supreme Court has upheld our right to anonymity on several occasions in recent history.

Here is just one example;

Anonymity is a shield from the tyranny of the majority … It thus exemplifies the purpose behind the Bill of Rights, and of the First Amendment in particular: to protect unpopular individuals from retaliation–and their ideas from suppression–at the hand of an intolerant society.”

McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Comm’n, 514 U.S. 334

The inaccuracy of facial recognition could cause anyone to be misidentified which would introduce the unfortunate person host of unpleasant possibilities.  But, I suppose, it is ‘good enough for government work,’ as they say.  But it gets even worse.

After the initial 18 benchmarks are met, the states will proceed to implement the next 21 benchmarks, step by step enrolling us into a global biometric identity system.

“The main ideology for defining the design of the DL/ID is the minimum acceptable set of requirements to guarantee global interoperability. “

Source: Personal Identification – AAMVA North American Standard – DL/ID Card Design, 2012

Myself as well as many other policy watchers that care to know, have been warning for years that our government intends to use those DL photos, conveniently combined with our personal, biographical information to not just identify us in public absent of any specific, articulable suspicion; they intend to use our facial biometrics to investigate and even predict based on the associated data- whether we are more or less likely to present a threat to government.  As of late, these intentions have been loosed from obscure, seldom read government documents and have been printed in black and white for the world to see.

In addition to scanning mugshots for a match, FBI officials have indicated that they are keen to track a suspect by picking out their face in a crowd.

Another application would be the reverse: images of a person of interest from security cameras or public photos uploaded onto the internet could be compared against a national repository of images held by the FBI. An algorithm would perform an automatic search and return a list of potential hits for an officer to sort through and use as possible leads for an investigation.

New Scientist, September 7, 2012 FBI launches $1 billion face recognition project

And then this-a first-law enforcement admits to using facial recognition on protestors in public.

Computer World: Undercover cops secretly use smartphones, face recognition to spy on crowds

And this one from June 16, 2013,  the Washington Post:

State photo-ID databases become troves for police

Oklahoma residents who prefer to not be enrolled into this biometric identification system ought to be asking their representatives why the state is continuing in the fulfillment of the Real ID Act in spite of the law which clearly expresses the will of the people to not participate in the international biometric identity scheme.

 

Michigan Rep. Raps Real ID Cheerleader

Kaye Beach

March 2, 2012

Janice Kephart, Director of National Security Policy with the Center for Immigration Studies put out her yearly progress report on Real ID.  Real ID opponents fairly bristled at the glowing portrayal she gives of the highly unpopular biometric identification card scheme.

We know that 25 states passed either a law or resolution against implementing the Real ID Act but if you read Ms. Kephart’s report, you might wonder just what all the fuss was about since she claims that,

“Overall the report finds that there is substantial compliance sought across the board by all states and territories. . .”

Michigan Representative, Paul Opsommer, answers back,

“We do not see ‘tremendous value’ in pursuing ‘REAL ID standards’ as this report attempts to assert,” said Opsommer. “These are state policy positions we are pursuing on our own, irrespective of REAL ID.”

Janice Kephart is so dedicated to the Real ID cause that she even dropped by my little blog recently to reassure readers that

“There is no national ID here. Not even close.”

What a relief!  After years of study and worry about Real ID being a national, no!  An international ID,  to be precise, I can finally rest easy because I have it on good authority that Real ID is no such thing by Ms. Kephart.

Sarcasm aside, at least Kephart is not trying to hide the hated Real ID behind the cute little star that is gracing the face of state driver’s licenses that meet the federal standards imposed by Real ID which would indicate to most that their Real ID or  “STAR ID” card, is indeed a national ID. Some of  these same astute Americans will tell you that the national standards imposed by Real ID  on state driver’s licenses and ID cards, are also international standards leading them to the conclusion that not only is Real ID a national ID, it is also qualifies as an international ID as noted by a knowledgeable reader of AxXiom For Liberty in his response to Ms. Kephart,

International standards, international organizations and an international organization named a “hub” and “backbone” in the Final Rules issued by DHS in January 2008, HMMM!

Janice Kephart’s progress report on Real ID, while it is a very helpful guide for loyal opponents to the Real ID Act in helping to flush out the state’s that have either followed the will of the people or betrayed them by forging ahead with the Act that was formally opposed in 25 states, also does a grave disservice by claiming achievements for Real ID that it doesn’t deserve as Rep. Opsommer illustrates in his response to Kephart’s ‘REAL ID Implementation Annual Report‘

Opsommer: Real ID implementation report shows major portions of law no longer needed.

Michigan State Representative and House Transportation Chair Paul Opsommer (R-DeWitt) said that a recent report put out by the Center for Immigration Studies, titled the ‘REAL ID Implementation Annual Report’, misrepresents the notion of ‘compliance’ and actually makes the case that the federal law that would turn driver’s licenses into national ID cards is not needed.

“We do not see ‘tremendous value’ in pursuing ‘REAL ID standards’ as this report attempts to assert,” said Opsommer. “These are state policy positions we are pursuing on our own, irrespective of REAL ID.”

Before REAL ID was passed in Washington by dubious methods, there was already a negotiated rule making process going on with the states to make sure they were not giving driver’s licenses to illegal aliens, and that licenses were made out of tamper-resistant materials from secure card production facilities.

“REAL ID not only repealed that process, but did so in a way that creates a national ID card that puts unelected federal bureaucrats permanently in charge of wireless computer chip, facial recognition technology, fingerprint, and foreign data sharing decisions,” said Opsommer.  “For cheerleaders of this national ID card campaign to highlight that states continue to pursue secure standards on their own, even in those states that have not authorized REAL ID or have passed laws opposing it, as somehow indicative of mass acceptance or compliance is nothing more than a public relations gambit.”

read more

Who Owns the Fusion Centers?

Kaye Beach

Jan 15, 2012

Part II

This is Part II of my ongoing dissertation on Fusion Centers and the work they do.  You can read Part I, Intelligence Led Policing and Fusion Centers: How the IACP Helped the USA to Cross the Rubicon, which dealt with the flawed and dangerous philosophy of preemptive or Intelligence Led Policing that makes the whole domestic terrorism apparatus, including fusion centers such a threat to the liberties of everyone.

In Part II I am going to explain what the centers really do and who is in control of them and how.

Fusion Centers-State of Federal?

It is all about collecting the data and getting it to the federal government.  The most important function of Fusions Centers is also the most invisible portion of their work; the computer networks and information sharing that takes place through those networks.

Despite claims that the Fusion Centers were created by the states, the truth is that the modern day fusion centers were born of policy established at the federal level and they are largely funded, staffed and  trained by representatives of federal agencies.  The federal government likes to claim that the states are partners with the federal government in this and other programs like it.

Question: If I set the rules and I pay the bills and I own the house that you are currently residing in, are you really my partner?

Answer: only to the degree that I am willing to pretend that you are.

When it comes to state fusion centers, the federal government has been paying the bills, they set the rules and they own the house.

Paying the Bills-Federal Funding

Since 2003 the Department of Homeland Security has given $31 billion dollars to the state and local governments.

3.8 billion was given to the states in 2010 alone.  The programs funded by the DHS, largely focus on countering terrorism but also on natural and man-made disasters are required to be tuned to DHS dictates.  According to the Government Accountability Office, Fusion centers have been received $426 million in general grant funding from fiscal 2004 through fiscal 2009.  Stating the obvious about money and control, “You take the king’s shilling, you become the king’s man”—Tom Cole

This  news article published Nov 27, 2011, Oklahoma’s fusion center has a broad role these days,  makes who is paying the bills pretty clear.

Oklahoma’s federally funded information fusion center has a broader role today than it did when it began operations four years ago.

. . .Oklahoma’s fusion center is housed inside the Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation‘s headquarters, 6600 N Harvey Place, and includes a secured room where secret information from the federal government is received.
. . .A central office includes a small room filled with monitors and TV screens, relaying data to an analyst. Its operations are funded, for the most part, by grants from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.

Stenhouse said the federal agency provided Oklahoma’s fusion center with about $400,000, which he said was used to pay the salaries of four analysts and training purposes. (All emphasis mine) Read more: http://newsok.com/oklahomas-fusion-center-has-a-broad-role-these-days./article/3626735#ixzz1i4z2ZOBQ

Oklahoma has received hundreds of millions of dollars in Homeland Security funds since 911 and the state understands who is in charge even if the officials choose to dance around the truth with the public.

The following is from the Oklahoma Information Fusion Center’s “Privacy Policy.”  It is clearly stated that the Oklahoma Office of Homeland Security oversees the initiatives and mandates of the federal Department of Homeland Security-including our state’s fusion center.

OKOHS (Oklahoma Office of Homeland Security) is directed to continue their efforts in combating terrorism, and shall continue to oversee the implementation of any and all initiatives or efforts mandated by the United States Department of Homeland Security, including the development of a state information fusion center. (Emphasis mine)Read more

 

Federal Personnel Staff state fusion centers-.  According to the Government Accountability Office Report, as of July 2010, the DHS has deployed 58 personnel to fusion centers, and the FBI has deployed 74 personnel to fusion centers.

Setting the Rules

In 2008 we learned that the federal government has no qualms about yanking those strings attached hard and that includes subverting state law intended to protect the citizens of that state in the process.  The Fusion Centers have a job to do and that job requires some changes to be made to pesky state laws meant to provide residents with openness to,  and oversight of,  their government.

EPIC Executive Director Marc Rotenberg said, “the FBI memorandum indicates that the federal government is attempting to shroud the Virginia Fusion Center in secrecy and prevent meaningful public oversight. Virginia citizens deserve an open and transparent state government that is not constrained by federal secrecy policies.”

http://epic.org/press/041108.html

Through the litigation, EPIC uncovered a secret contract between the State Police and the FBI that limits the rights of Virginia citizens to learn what information the State Police collect about them.

http://epic.org/privacy/virginia_fusion/

Fusion centers may be physically located in the states but their guts belong to Homeland Security! 

If you think of Fusion Centers as a place you will miss what the centers are really about.  Fusion Centers are part of a domestic intelligence system and the guts of the fusion centers are the data networks.

The federal government (guided all the way by the International Association of Chiefs of Police) defined the fusion centers and their processed from the start. They drew up the map.

“The National Criminal Intelligence Sharing Plan, developed by Global in partnership with the IACP, is the first of its kind in this country — and promises to bring us closer to achieving the goal, expressed at your 2002 Summit, of “intelligence-led policing.” . . . it serves as a “roadmap” for our national criminal intelligence sharing initiatives.” –THE HONORABLE DEBORAH J. DANIELS

The question of whether or not these institutions are state or federal entities is a moot point.  Though they physically reside in the states, the federal government aside from defining, funding and staffing the centers, also controls the data networks and they set the standards for how data is collected and shared.

Federal standards equal federal control

Standards are important if you want to:

• SHARE DATA (speak the same language)

Standards Provide

• On-demand real time data access

 Navigating the Standards Landscape

A Nationwide Network

You know what is worse for you privacy ant autonomy that a central database?  A distributed network of databases that are constantly updated that the central government can reach into at will.

The DHS intelligence analysis center or the DCI’s counterterrorist center do not need to accumulate and hold all relevant databases to which they may gain access. In other words, there is no need to build one big data warehouse. Instead, the centers should interface with such databases as needed.

—Markle Foundation Task Force Report 2002

Owning the House

In 2008, the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Justice, and Global jointly published a supplement to the Fusion Center Guidelines called Baseline Capabilities Baseline Capabilities defines the capabilities needed to create a nationwide network of fusion centers and sets forth the minimum standards for a fusion center to be able to perform basic functions. 

The Department of Homeland Security set out an objective to create a network of fusions centers as a unique law enforcement and threat information resource that works across jurisdictions and is supported by multidisciplinary teams dispersed throughout a national network of information hives. Source EPIC

“. . .Fusion Centers will be the centerpiece of state, local, federal intelligence-sharing for the future and that the Department of Homeland Security will be working and aiming its programs to underlie Fusion Centers.” –DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano March 13, 2009

http://www.dhs.gov/ynews/speeches/sp_1236975404263.shtm

Jurisdiction

The Fusion Center Guidelines states that, “nontraditional collectors of intelligence, such as public safety entities and private sector organizations” will be “fused’ with law enforcement data”   The goal is to break down traditional barriers to information sharing. 

These barriers are commonly referred to as “siloes” or “stovepipes”

Those “silos” or barriers can also be thought of as jurisdictions.

From the Legal Information Institute;

Jurisdiction-The term jurisdiction is really synonymous with the word “power” Jurisdiction is the territory within which a court or government agency may properly exercise its power

It is not difficult to understand that when the the lines of authority are blended power will default to the higher level.

Agency protectiveness over jurisdiction and it is the authority an entity has over that jurisdiction that is the real barrier.  Simply stated, the problem with integrating data systems is not a physical or technical one; it’s political. Until recently, the barrier was both political and technological.  Now that the technological barrier has been removed, some think that the political barrier should follow suit.  But just because something is possible does it mean we should do it?

“National employment databases, national medical databases, national criminal databases, and others have already been created.

The dream is to blend all these separate resources into a single centralized one…the only real impediments to creating the database that now remain are political and cultural: the stubborn assumption of so many Americans that they have rights.”

The State’s Quest for Total Information Awareness by David M. Brown

In the past, the technological or physical barrier acted as sort of a firewall to siloes of data.  Data was shared on a legal right and need to know basis and  the entity wanting it had to ask.  While technology makes it possible to share lots of information in an instant with anyone in the world, there are still plenty of good reasons to protect sensitive  information.

If you really, really want to settle this whole argument about whether or not fusion centers are state of federal, just read about Homeland Security’s Federal Fusion Center initiative.

In 2010 The Department of Homeland Security announced its intention to;

“collect, plan, coordinate, report, analyze, and fuse infrastructure information related to all-threats and all-hazards, law enforcement activities, intelligence activities, man-made disasters and acts of terrorism, natural disasters, and other information collected or received from federal, state, local, tribal, and territorial agencies and organizations; foreign governments and international organizations; domestic security and emergency management officials; and private sector entities or individuals into the Department.”

The DHS is creating a federal fusion center by ‘fusing’ information from the   centers.  DHS is laying claim to all of that data to use as they see fit.

The Department of Homeland Security has repeatedly stated that Fusion Centers were  owned by the states, the creation of this new system of records action totally negates that dubious claim.   They didn’t ask anyone’s permission.  Why?  Because they paid the bills, they set the rules and they own the house.  The states are a  “partner” up until the federal government decided they weren’t.

Fusion Centers, for all practical intents and purposes, belongs to none other than Big Momma Gov. and if anyone tells you different,  grab a pitcher because their pants are on fire!

Oklahoma Joint Committee Meeting on Healthcare Reform OK-SAFE Covers IT, Security and Privacy Issues

Kaye Beach

Nov 3, 2011

I attended the fourth Joint committee meeting on the effect of the federal healthcare reform laws on the state of Oklahoma.

Of course the highlight of the day, for me, was Amanda Teegarden’s presentation,  Healthcare Reform –
IT, Security & Privacy Issues/Concerns , on behalf of OK-SAFE.

Amanda presented a clear, lucid and powerful 45 minute presentation of the research she has spent months working on.

The presentation laid bare the ugly guts of the federal health care reform by describing it by its most basic components.

}Health Care Reform – is really about the use of IT to implement a nationwide health information network (NHIN), that will enable the seamless flow of information across boundaries, and that allows a growing global surveillance system to function.

And that;

}Electronic Health Records  – Reform is predicated on the creation of a standardized, interoperable electronic health record (EHR) on every single individual

This system is;

}Cradle-to-Grave – EHRs are used for data collection, aggregation and reporting and are intended to track a person from birth to death. (Longitudinal)

And;

}EHRs are universal and to be shared globally – not only within our government, but with foreign governments, universities, and other third parties.

}Requires Standardization and Interoperability – to establish uniformity and compatibility in data collection, regardless of jurisdiction

It gets really personal;

}EHRs include each person’s genetic information – and will be used for research purposes without the knowledge or consent of the person

Not to mention;

}Rights killing – Health care reform, and other data collection networks, do an “end-run” around search warrants and nullify our inherent rights to life, liberty and property.

The presentation was split into six sections

Part I The Federal Data Hub/IT/Digital Everything

Part II Health Care Reform Defined/National Standards/Global Adoption

Part III Office of the National Coordinator/                                             Government+Industry +Academia = PPPs /One “Fused” System

Part IV State Initiatives

Part V Privacy & Security

Part VI Conclusion

Your personal, medical information flows from you to the health IT data collection system to the prying eyes of the federal government and research universities to the private sector and even foreign organizations.

Especially noteworthy were the points made about the inclusion of health information into law enforcement and intelligence data fusion.

Fusion Center: A collaborative effort of two or more agencies that provide resources, expertise, and/or information to the center with the goal of maximizing the ability to detect, prevent, apprehend, and respond to criminal and terrorism activity. Source: Recommended Fusion Center Law Enforcement Intelligence Standards March 2005

Purpose – the elimination of any barrier to information exchange and sharing, regardless of jurisdiction.  Information is to be shared nationally and internationally.

As noted in the notes section of slide 31;

The Fusion Center Guidelines have now been updated to incorporate public health and health care community information.

This is possible due to policy changes allowing the seamless flow of information across boundaries, and because all state systems, including the health care system use common sets of standards and are interoperable.  Both the Fusion Centers and the Health Care System are NIEM Compliant – both are part of the Nationwide Health Information Network.

The result – one fused system.

Read more about the integration of “public health and healthcare communities into the homeland security intelligence and information sharing process.” here

and here- Health Security: Public Health and Medical Integration for Fusion Centers

In short, when it comes to privacy, there is none.

Slide 41 touches up our medical and genetic information used for research purposes.

There are a few other surprises and outrages contained in the presentation, so be sure to take a look at it.

Amanda concludes;

The American People Are NOT Slaves – Nor simply ‘carbon-based life forms’[as one federal document refers to us]

Government, via health care reform and other federal initiatives, is establishing a globally networked and integrated  intelligence enterprise – one that includes an extraordinary amount of extremely personal, detailed information about the America people.

Government, in it’s attempt to be an all-knowing technocratic “god” and to satisfy the IT industry’s insatiable, ever-changing appetite, is doing an end-run around human dignity and nullifying our God-given rights to life, liberty and property.

And gives the joint committee seven recommendations;

1.Repent – not kidding here

2.Do not establish a state-based Health Insurance exchange – it will be the same as the Federal government’s version

3.Allow people to escape HIT/HIE system without penalty;  do not penalize providers who opt not to adopt EHRs or participate in this system

4.Repeal state laws that prohibit individuals from seeking alternative health care services,  i.e. homeopathic medicines or non-traditional treatments

5.Terminate the Oklahoma Health Information Exchange Trust

6.Audit the Oklahoma Health Care Authority – expenses outweigh benefits

7.Adhere to the OK Constitution – work to restore liberty

View OK-SAFE’s presentation here

Go to  www.okhealthcare.info for information on this and past joint committee meetings.

Republican Heresy? Get a R.O.P.E!

Kaye Beach

Oct 19, 2011

Jenni White, President of R.O.P.E (Restore Oklahoma Public Education) asks;

Am I A Republican Heretic?       

Why would she ask such a thing?

ROPE endorsed Republican Janet Barresi for State Superintendent of Public Instruction. Many of us actually campaigned for her.

White believed like many other Republicans that Barresi would be a better choice for conservatives dissatisfied with the decidedly leftist direction of public education than Democrat, Susan Paddock.  That logic is straightforward enough but has it held up in reality.

Unfortunately, that answer is no.

ROPE lists just some of the items that evidence reason for conservative disappointment.

I took the time to watch the videos of the Oklahoma interim study on the Common Core State Standards held a couple of weeks ago and what I found most amazing is the behavior of Ms. Baressi herself.

If you did not know, the ladies from ROPE are ordinary Oklahomans who have invested a great deal of time, care and energy in serving as a watchdog for busy moms and dads.  They have devoted no less than one year to the research that was presented at the interim study.  They do all of this one reason.  They care about this state and the children of this state.  The ladies of ROPE do not get paid to lobby, study legislation or present their findings to the policy makers and the public.  I feel safe in stating that these women do not expect any thanks for their advocacy but I am sure they do not deserve the disrespect demonstrated by Baressi.

An interim study is just that-a study.  Ideally all sides of an issue should be aired and policy makers get the opportunity to ask questions.  Barresi showed claws and precious little to refute any of the facts brought before the panel. It was poor form on her part to say the least.  Barresi responded to the ROPE presentation and by extension, since she was presenting similar facts, the presentation of a Senior Policy Analyst with the Heritage Foundation, with a sweeping dismissal.  “We are all entitled to our own opinions, but not our own facts”

Barresi did take the opportunity during her remarks to say that the Common Core State Standards are not mandated by the federal government.

“This is a state led, voluntary effort” says Baressi

http://www.youtube.com/user/RestoreOKPublicEd#p/u/6/z4-FstHrXbk

State led?    Two national, non-governmental organizations, The National Governors Association and the Council of Chief State School Officers, developed the standards behind closed doors.

“State led”, especially when coupled with the word “standards” really means federally controlled.  It’s just that the states are being good little troopers and doing Big Momma Gov’s work for her.

Barresi is simply mincing her words.  The old ‘carrot and stick method’  is being employed with nationalizing education just as we have seen with every other sector of our society.

Utah’s Republic asks; “Still think the Common Core Standards are just a state initiative? Ask yourself these questions and think again.” And shares some valuable insight;

1. What do you call it when standards are adopted from a national body and a state isn’t allowed to modify anything they just adopted except to add up to 15%? De facto federal/national standards
2. What do you call it when national assessments funded by the federal government and led by a Marxist researcher will measure the effectiveness of common core standards? National assessments overseeing national standards
3. What do you call it when national tracking is done on both academic and non-academic factors to ensure that students are scoring well on these assessments? A massive violation of privacy and national assessments and standards
4. What do you call it when the federal government engages with textbook publishers to create curriculum based on common standards? A national curriculum and national standards
5. What do you call it when federal dollars for state education come from countries like China and states like California? Immoral because our grandchildren will pay for their parents education
6. What do you call it when the federal department of education rewrites the laws on the books to eliminate and redirect local and state control of education to the federal government? Tyranny and national control of education
7. What do you call it when state officials and agencies fail to connect the dots on these items? A tragic lack of foresight

Barresi offers nothing but her ire to refute the opposing presentations which is a sure sign that she is up against the wall and cannot form a rational argument to the facts that were presented.

The debate over federal coercion with the Common Core Standards is a lively one to put it mildly, but suffice it to say that with adopting the Common Core State Standards comes more federal control over our schools than any conservative ought to be comfortable with.

And this leads us back to Jenni White’s question;

Am I A Republican Heretic?       

If Republicanism is a religion that operates on faith in whoever happens to pin an “R” by their name, then the answer is; Yes my dear, you are.

 

Tonight on A4L-Jenni White from R.O.P.E “Common Core State Standards and Race to the Top – An Introduction to Marxism 101”

6-8 PM CST on AxXiom For Liberty with Kaye Beach and Howard Houchen on Rule of Law Radio Network.

Listen Live Online

Bamboo Bob (he spanks liberals!)  will fill us in on The Republican Party Animals 2011 Hollywood Bash!

Then we welcome special Guest Jenni White of ROPE-Restore Oklahoma Public Education to educate us about;

Common Core State Standards and Race to the Top – An Introduction to Marxism 101

 

Restore Oklahoma Public Education (R.O.P.E.) is committed to educating tax-paying citizens and parent stakeholders on the ways in which the methods and philosophies used in public education today affect them.

R.O.P.E

Should be an informative two hours!

“Dark Skies” Might Be a Hard Sell in Oklahoma

Kaye Beach

*Update June 15,2011

Like I said-Dark Skies might just be a hard sell…Due to an sudden “dark sky” event, the lighting ordinance proposal had to be postponed due to a mighty storm that appeared to centered right on top of the Norman Municipal complex area where the City Council meeting was being held last evening.

June 15, 2011

High winds tear roof from apartment building, snap power poles in Norman. . .

Down burst hits Norman, NWS says

The down burst was centralized in Norman, Pike said.

The storm hit and knocked out the power in the municipal building just before the lighting ordinance was to be considered.  The meeting had to be  canceled.  It has been rescheduled for June 21st.

June 14, 2011

If the idea of “Dark Skies” doesn’t give you are warm and fuzzy feeling all over, it could just be that you are an Oklahoman.

But don’t be so hasty.  There are more ominous aspects to this proposal than just the foreboding connotation of threatening weather that come to mind when dark skies are mentioned in these parts.

“Everyone is a citizen of the world. At some level we should all be its stewards with accountability toward preserving its environment. One component of that is the preservation of dark skies or the prevention of light pollution”

GLOBE at Night . . .enlists the help of students to collect data on the night sky conditions in their community and contribute to a worldwide database on light pollution.

Read more about Dark Skies Awareness

There will be a Norman City Council meeting today at 5:30 pm to include consideration of the controversial lighting ordinance.
CONFERENCE ROOM – MUNICIPAL BUILDING
201 WEST GRAY
TUESDAY, JUNE 14, 2011 at 5:30 P.M.

See City Council Agenda

The proposed lighting ordinance is back up for a vote.

Norman Transcript Articles

June 11, 2011

Lighting Ordinance Resurfaces

April 13, 2011

Lighting ordinance draws opposition

The proposed ordinance, O-1011-44, is being presented as primarily an energy conservation measure.

SEC. 431.6 — COMMERCIAL OUTDOOR LIGHTING STANDARDS

(Established by Ord. No. O-1011-44 — ___, 2011)

1.         Purpose and Intent.  It is the intent of this Section to define practical and effective measures by which the obtrusive aspects of commercial outdoor light usage can be minimized, while preserving safety, security, and the nighttime use and enjoyment of property.  These measures are intended to reduce light spillover, minimize glare, and decrease resource waste.

Council Committee compromise version 6 7 11 Commercial Lighting vers 3 (2)-1

April 15,2011

Norman City Council and Public Discuss New Lighting Ordinance

Almost every seat was full on Tuesday night during the city council meeting; many were filled by students, all dressed in black shirts.

The students of Norman North High School’s astronomy club attended the city council meeting on Tuesday, April 12. They waited patiently in the back for their turn to speak their opinion to the city council. They all wore black shirts to show their support for the lighting ordinance. As the four students and one of their teachers stepped toward the podium, a power point presentation came up on the screen. The students passed forward a petition with 637 signatures in support of the proposed lighting ordinance proposed by the City Council.

http://simplysalmagundi.wordpress.com/2011/04/15/norman-city-council-and-public-discuss-new-lighting-ordinance/

Norman Public School teachers apparently are using our taxes to indoctrinate school kids on new   “rights” and using them to instigate the implementation of city policy that offers us these new “rights” invented by international organizations  in lieu of long established natural and legal ones.

The students, however, are to be commended.  They overcame the usual apathy and turned out in force to defend what they are being taught is a right.

The Starlight Initiative

An unpolluted night sky that allows the enjoyment and contemplation of the firmament should be considered an inalienable right of humankind equivalent to all other environmental, social, and cultural rights, due to its impact on the development of all peoples and on the conservation of biodiversity.”
Starlight Declaration. La Palma, Spain 2008.

http://www.starlight2007.net/theinitiative.htm

Too bad the schools aren’t teaching about them about their true rights to life, liberty and property that are recognized and guaranteed to each and every one of us by law in the United States.   For the first time, I am thankful that my daughter chose the more physical and less academic route at Norman North.  I don’t think I could face this sort of  public realization that my tax dollars had been used in this manner.

Outside Agitators

“Grzybowski said the class is Norman’s outside agitators to the city for the issue of light pollution, encouraging City Council to preserve the night sky by passing lighting ordinances”

“The students — steered by Norman North astronomy teacher Eileen Grzybowski — have collected readings throughout Norman as part of Globe Night 2010, a worldwide campaign to fight light pollution —“

(Source March 15, 2010  Star light, star bright  The Norman Transcript)

GLOBE Night 2010 centerpiece of the Dark Skies Awareness Global Cornerstone Project for the International Year of Astronomy (IYA) in 2009 a UNESCO initiative.  (More information below)

Mrs. Grzybowski’s husband is the author of this publication;

The Canadian River and floodplain in Norman, Oklahoma: Environmental perspective

Joseph A Grzybowski (Author)

Unfortunately, Amazon.com lists this publication as out of print

Joseph A. Grzybowski, Ph.D. is a Biologist/Ornithologist [scientist who studies birds]and Professor who serves on “various local, regional and national committees involving endangered species and environmental management.” link

IYA2009 Boosts Globe at Night to Record Number of Dark-Skies Observations

Source: International Year of Astronomy 2009 Posted Thursday, April 30, 2009

In Norman, Oklahoma, high school students, their teachers and local amateur astronomers produced a map of nearly 500 SQM measurements that canvassed their city. Local teacher and amateur astronomer Eileen Grzybowski, with students Brittany, Emily and Braden, then made a well-received presentation of the results to their local Environmental Control Advisory Board. (Emphasis mine)

They [the City of Norman’s Environmental Control Advisory Board]  want us to partner with them and be the outside agitating voice in the newspapers and elsewhere to put the issue of revising our lighting ordinances front and center, Grzybowski reported.

They[the City of Norman’s Environmental Control Advisory Board] made suggestions as to how the presentation could be revised to make a bigger impact.

They want us to obtain pictures taken from the sky down to the Earth from an airplane and pictures of our ground-based sites of high light pollution and dark oases, and they want us to include data about security issues and cost savings. http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=28094

**See below for information regarding the IYA2009 and “GLOBE at Night”

 

“Our next step is to go before the City Council and do the light demo and discuss our preliminary results.” Says Grzybowski

Which they did on May 13, 2010.

NORMAN PLANNING COMMISSION

REGULAR SESSION AGENDA

MAY 13, 2010

 

PRESENTATION BY EILEEN GRZYBOWSKI’S SCIENCE CLASS OF THEIR STUDENT LIGHTING PROJECT.

Link

City of Norman Environmental Control Advisory Board

Investigates, prepares plans for, and recommends programs regarding the preservation and enhancement of the environmental quality of the City as well as administers variance procedures in the Air Quality Control Ordinance. Meets the 3rd Wednesday; 5:30 p.m., Norman Municipal Building Multi-Purpose Room, 201 West Gray. (3-year term)

US Mayors’ Climate Protection Agreement

Members

• Amanda Rook – 07/14/09 – 07/14/09 – 10/27/12 – 5
• Mark Jensen  – 11/10/09 – 11/10/09 – 10/27/12- 2
• Dr. Moira Waterbury – 11/10/09 – 11/10/09 – 10/27/12 – 5
• Asia Scudder – 04/27/10 – 04/27/10 – 10/27/13  – 4
• Yves Badaroux – 04/27/10 – 04/27/10 – 10/27/13 – 3
• Dave Boeck – 04/10/07 – 10/27/10 – 10/27/13 – 4
• Larry Steele, CHAIR – 10/27/08 – 10/27/08 – 10/27/11 – 7
• Jane Dye – 10/27/05 – 10/27/08 – 10/27/11 – 7
• Neil Suneson – 08/09/05 – 10/27/08 – 10/27/11 – 2

http://www.ci.norman.ok.us/content/environmental-control-advisory-board

About those Dark Skies

2007 First meeting of the Starlight Reserves Working Group.

The overall aim is to discuss the problems of identification of specific catego­ries of natural sites, skyscapes, cultural nightscapes, and excep­tional sites for astronomical observation, as “Starlight Reserves” for their possible nominations on the World Heritage List.

www.starlight2007.net/pdf/ProgFVStarlight.pdf

 

IYA 2009
The United Nations declares 2009 the International Year of Astronomy.

20 December 2007: the United Nations 62nd General Assembly proclaimed 2009 the International Year of Astronomy. The Resolution was submitted by Italy, Galileo Galilei’s home country. The International Year of Astronomy 2009 is an initiative of the International Astronomical Union and UNESCO.

THE STARLIGHT INITIATIVE (Granting all the “right” to observe the stars which will obviously clash with your right to light your property!)

An unpolluted night sky that allows the enjoyment and contemplation of the firmament should be considered an inalienable right of humankind equivalent to all other environmental, social, and cultural rights, due to its impact on the development of all peoples and on the conservation of biodiversity.”
Starlight Declaration. La Palma, Spain 2008.

http://www.starlight2007.net/theinitiative.htm

The initiative is designed as an international campaign in defence of the values associated with the night sky and the general right to observe the stars. It is open to the participation of all scientific, cultural, environmental, and citizens’ organizations and associations, as well as public institutions and other public and private bodies willing to effectively cooperate in the conservation of clear skies and the dissemination of the knowledge related with their observation. The final aim of the initiative is to strengthen the importance of clear skies for humankind, emphasizing and introducing the value of this endangered heritage for science, education, culture, technological development, nature conservation, tourism and, obviously, as a quality-of-life factor.

http://www.starlight2007.net/theinitiative.htm

GLOBE at Night is a fun, international citizen-science event that encourages everyone— students, educators, dark sky advocates and the general public— to measure the darkness of their local skies and contribute their observations online to a world map. The program is a centerpiece of the Dark Skies Awareness Global Cornerstone Project for the International Year of Astronomy (IYA) in 2009. Its goal is to raise public awareness of the impact of artificial lighting on local environments by getting people involved. http://www.darkskiesawareness.org/gan.php

GLOBE at Night in Norman

United States: 475 Sky Quality Meter measurements & 475 Orion measurements during GLOBE at Night in Norman, Oklahoma àlighting inventory for city

http://www.starlight2007.net/pdf/lapalma2009/WalkerS4.pdf

Dark Skies initiatives are concerned with land development control policies and part of a “Global Assessment” done on behalf of an International Union

GLOBAL ASSESSMENT OF LIGHT POLLUTION IMPACT ON PROTECTED AREAS

The Dark Skies Advisory Group of the Specialist Group works to reduce light pollution and protect a natural night sky. While it focuses primarily on protected areas and sites, the group is also concerned with appropriate design and land development control policies.

www.interenvironment.org/pa/dark.htm

IUCN, the International Union for Conservation of Nature, is the

world’s oldest and largest global environmental network – a

democratic membership union with more than 1,000 government and

NGO member organizations, and almost 11,000 volunteer scientists

in more than 160 countries.

www.iucn.org

The International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) recognizes the importance of natural darkness to the ecological integrity of protected areas, and to the sustainability of healthy lives in healthy cities.  The Dark Skies Advisory Group has been established within IUCN’s World Commission on Protected Areas to help advance this recognition. 

“. . .ecosystems and wild species operate 24 hours each day, seven days each week.  They have evolved to cope with, depend on and take advantage of natural darkness.  A night sky without artificial light is therefore vital to the proper functioning of natural ecosystems.  Artificial lighting affects species migration patterns, predator-prey relationships, and the circadian rhythms of many organisms, to name just a few of the consequences of light pollution.”

Web site of the IUCN Dark Skies Advisory Group

The IUCN’s official mission is “to influence, encourage and assist societies throughout the world to conserve the integrity and diversity of nature and to ensure that any use of natural resources is equitable and ecologically sustainable.”

Members of the IUCN include the US Department of Agriculture Forest Service, US Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service, US Department of the Interior National Park Service, US Environmental Protection Agency, the Sierra Club, The Nature Conservancy, Natural Resources Defense Council, National Wildlife Federation, National Audubon Society, and hundreds of other federal, state and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and land trusts

Naturally-The Sierra Club supports the proposed lighting ordinances in Norman.

It is imperative that all Sierra Club members attend this important meeting to ensure that the proposed lighting ordinance remains effective and is even strengthened.

We also continue to urge Sierra Club members to individually contact their council members and the mayor asking them to adopt this ordinance as it is currently proposed or even strengthening the ordinance. Contact information including email addresses are located here for council members: http://www.ci.norman.ok.us/content/city-council and here for the mayor: http://www.ci.norman.ok.us/content/mayor.

http://www.oklahoma.sierraclub.org/redearth/newsletter/2011AprNewsletter.html

 “Dark Skies” Might Be a Hard Sell in Oklahoma 6 14 11 pdf

ROPE Takes the High Road, Calls Barresi on the Carpet

Kaye Beach

May 31, 2011

This article is from Restore Oklahoma Public Education-R.O.P.E.’s latest newsletter. (sign up here to receive ROPE’s newsletter by email)

I admire their courage and adherence to principle over politics.  This is what separates the mere advocate from the Watchdog.

Thanks ROPE!

At the State Republican Convention in May, State Superintendent Dr. Janet Barresi told members present that she went up to “The Hill” to testify before the U.S. House Committee on Education and the Workforce and told the Federal Government to stay out of “our business”.

In the actual testimony, Dr. Barresi states, “As all participating states prepare to transition to Common Core curriculum standards [initiated with Arne Duncan and the DOE], more flexibility is also needed in the use of federal funds for professional development that would support effective instructional practices. Additionally, broadening the scope of the designation of Title programs to include a wider array of subject matter, such as STEM initiatives, would help enable states to offer a more challenging curriculum.”

This does not sound like “get out of our business” so much as “give us the money and let us spend it the way we want”.

Republican Ronald Reagan wanted to abolish the Federal Department of Education created by Jimmy Carter. Our state Republican platform specifically says, “The federal government has no constitutional role in education”

Though Dr. Barresi has stated on numerous occasions that she advocates for “local control”, a post on the State Department of Education website dated “May 19th” heralded the announcement that Dr. Barresi had just joined Jeb Bush’s Chiefs for Change.

As is visible from the post on the left, the Chiefs are very specifically advocating MORE federal control of the already over-federalized Elementary and Secondary Education Act. How does surrendering local control of our elementary and secondary students to the federal government in turn provide local control?

According to a CATO study it doesn’t. “We find strong evidence that the widespread adoption of preschool and full-day kindergarten is unlikely to improve student achievement.”

Though recently, Dr. Barresi told an audience in Tulsa that she had not used Federal money for education reforms she has touted, the NewsOk article in the upper left, Oklahoma State Education Board awards millions to poor-performing schools, flies in the face of such a statement.

ARRA (stimulus) funds are those used to “turnaround” failing schools. Is this semantics? If the Oklahoma State Department of Education is simply ‘passing’ on the funds from the federal government to the local school, then the Department is not spending them so the Department is not taking federal funds for education reforms?

ROPE has found at least one bill “requested” by the Department containing references or inclusions for access to federal grants. Additionally, ROPE has uncovered the mechanism by which the Core Curriculum Standards and something called the P20 data system (begun by a “requested” bill) which will collect data from children across a wide range of data points and share that information in  without parental consent are linked to federal funding. We will share that with you soon.

In the meantime, we must be vigilant and continue to monitor the words and actions of our newly elected State Superintendent of Public Instruction, Dr. Baressi, and hold her accountable for them.

In This Issue

Oklahoma State Education Board awards millions to poor-performing schools The School Improvement Grants were approved by the board Thursday and the federal money is intended to help the schools, all of which are in Oklahoma City, improve a track record of poor student performance. “We’re hopeful that this will have an impact,” state schools Superintendent Janet Barresi said.

Oklahoman plays key role in announcement of new Race to the Top “Early childhood education, special for children ages birth to 3, is both a profound moral obligation and the most effective way to reverse the cycle of poverty in  America,” Kaiser said in a town-hall meeting in Washington, D.C., following Duncan’s announcement.

State Superintendent Janet Barresi Joins Jeb Bush’s “Chiefs For Change”In the “Statement of Principles for Reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act” dated May 19, 2011, the Chiefs maintain: Federal law should incentivize rigorous academic standards. Federal law should encourage transparent and rigorous accountability. Federal law should recognize and reward excellence. Federal law should encourage states to replace failure with success. Federal law should encourage and reward the recruitment and retention of excellent teachers and leaders. Federal law should encourage viable options for all students.

Q&A With State Supt. Baressi with the Oklahoma Education Association
“No. I don’t like mandates. I’m a local control type of fan and advocate. I’m sure Oklahoma City would be happy to share their best practices in this area and results from this. My bottom line is this: I want to see the numbers. I want to see the academic outcomes as a result of this process, after they’ve had it in for a couple, three years. I want to see how it facilitates outcomes, how it facilitates learning.”

Oklahoma charter schools hire math, science teachers from overseas

The schools have come under scrutiny by conservative and tax watch groups throughout the nation, including Restore Oklahoma Public Education (ROPE), which can be defined as both.

“If Oklahoma teachers are being laid off, why are we as Oklahoma taxpayers paying people from not even inside our country to come and teach our children?” asks Jenni White, president of ROPE.

To Read More information collected on Gulen Schools by ROPE, see this article just recently added to our website.

Real ID and that little gold star on your driver’s license

Kaye Beach

Feb 5, 2011

______

The Sneetches, by Dr. Seuss
Now, the Star-Bell Sneetches had bellies with stars.
The Plain-Belly Sneetches had none upon thars.
Those stars weren’t so big. They were really so small.
You might think such a thing wouldn’t matter at all.

The REAL ID Act imposed federal guidelines that States must adopt for their state  driver’s licenses and identification cards. Furthermore, those federal guidelines include international standards.  Why is that important?  There is only one reason to set international standards and that  is allow for international sharing of the information.  So while we continue to debate whether or not Real ID is a national ID card, the truth is that it is actually an international ID.

The federal guidelines for REAL ID  are comprised of 18 benchmarks.

Benchmark #1. Mandatory facial image capture and retention of such image.

At least eleven nineteen States have met all of 18 benchmarks that constitute Real ID.

Even if your state was one of the 25 that have passed either a law or resolution against Real ID,  the federal government doesn’t find that fact to be any obstacle at all to continuing to force the states to implement Real ID.  Your state is most likely still  working to implement Real ID.  Real ID compliant driver’s licenses will be marked with a gold star.

How can that be?  Well, the policy is simply not being called “Real ID” although the  benchmarks are the exact same ones set for Real ID.

“. . .many state motor vehicle departments are quietly doing the work to meet the law’s initial 18 benchmarks.”  http://tinyurl.com/4rgrv87

And

The ASI card, also known as “the card with the star,” is marked with a gold star indicating that it’s materially compliant with the Real ID Act’s regulations and can be used as identification for federal purposes” March 22, 2010 Nevada link

So right under the noses of our state legislators, some of whom went to bat and got a law passed to prohibit  Real ID,the administrators of State Departments of Public Safety or the Departments of Motor Vehicles are continuing to work on enrolling us all into an international biometric ID as though nothing ever happened.  Neat trick huh?

____________________________________________________

States should treat ObamaCare like REAL ID

That is a great idea and if those in charge on both the state and federal level had more respect for the American people and the law, this response should be adequate.  The reality is that those in charge are not following  the rules, they are too busy circumventing them.

They will do the same thing with the blatantly unconstitutional Health Care Reform Bill or any other DC mandate for that matter if we do not speak up.

Just saying NO! doesn’t seem to be working very well.

The states should be the guardians of their citizens’ domicile information and only share this data when the federal government has a legal need or right to know.

_______________________________

Back to our “Gold Star” resistors down in Florida who are demonstrating appropriate outrage to the situation that they have found themselves in.

Those Sneeches who do NOT have a star will be prohibited from:

• Accessing Federal facilities;
• Boarding Federally regulated commercial aircraft;
• Entering nuclear power plants; and
• Any other purpose that the Secretary shall determine.

That’s right!    Janet Napolitano  can add ANY other purpose that she decides should require the “gold star” at her sole discretion.  She doesn’t need your approval or even the approval of the person you  elected to represent you- your congress person.

Do you have a little gold star on your driver’s license and what does this star mean?

What happens if you don’t get the “gold star”?

This Florida resident and co-host of the radio show “Liberty Underground”,  explains why the “gold star” is where he draws the line.

Read more about Florida and getting the  “gold star card”

I-Team: Questions About New National ID Card