Department of Homeland Security Blinks, Extensions Given

A REAL ID showdown has been averted for now and driver licenses from all 50 states will be accepted on May 11^th (the implementation date in the REAL ID Act). All four of the holdout States that refused to apply for an extension to REAL ID compliance were given extensions anyway. The Department of Homeland Security gave these extensions despite earlier declarations that only states that commit to implementing the REAL ID Act would get them. Anti-REAL ID advocates view this as further evidence that DHS is struggling to maintain support for REAL ID and that DHS has blinked.

The four states that got the unasked-for extensions are Maine, Montana, New Hampshire, and South Carolina. Each of the states had sent letters to DHS making explicit their refusal to comply with REAL ID. California, though it had applied for an extension, also sent a letter making clear that their extension request should not be viewed as a commitment to REAL ID.

Montana was given an unasked-for extension first, about two weeks before the March 31^st application deadline. Montana sent DHS a letter asking that Montana not be penalized, still not requesting an extension. DHS chose to interpret the letter as a request for an extension anyway. Montana Governor Brian Schweitzer said, "I sent them a horse and if they want to call it a zebra, that's up to them." He also said, "They can call it whatever they want, and it wasn't a love letter."

New Hampshire became the second state to get an unasked-for extension after sending a letter similar to Montana’s. An earlier letter from New Hampshire was rejected by DHS, but at that time DHS was still adhering to its tough stance demanding a commitment to compliance.

DHS demonstrated further softening by giving a last-minute extension to South Carolina, even though the state sent a defiant letter rejecting REAL ID. Maine's extension came two days after the March 31^st application deadline, and after DHS issued an ultimatum and a rejection of Maine's first letter, also defiant. Maine's governor agreed to propose legislation requiring proof of citizenship for driver licenses in a second letter, which DHS found sufficient to grant the extension.

An article in yesterday’s Washington Post said that the Senate Judiciary Committee criticized DHS Secretary Michael Chertoff for “pressuring reluctant states to adopt new federally approved driver's licenses,” with Senator Leahy going so far as to describe it as "bullying."

Now that the May 11^th compliance deadline is a moot point (since all 50 states have been granted extensions), the next major deadline is December 31, 2009. By that date, states are supposed to have come into material compliance with REAL ID.

REAL ID Heating Up, Deadline Looming

A mini-showdown over REAL ID is looming on the horizon. States have until March 31^st to apply for an extension or else driver licenses and IDs from those states will not be accepted for air travel or entering federal facilities beginning May 11, 2008. Montana, New Hampshire, Maine, and South Carolina have said they will not apply for the extension, which is where the showdown comes into play.

With the deadline only five days away at this writing, we are starting to see some unusual twists and turns…

Montana has been leading the resistance by vocally proclaiming it will not apply for an extension, and urging other states to follow its actions. Yet, on Friday, March 21^st, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) gave Montana an extension, even though Montana had not applied for one and has insisted it will not follow the law. A few days before DHS gave Montana the non-requested extension, a bipartisan group of U.S. Senators had asked for a blanket exemption to the May 11^th deadline for all 50 states. DHS Secretary Michael Chertoff denied the request citing that he is legally bound to that deadline by the REAL ID law.

New Hampshire requested an exemption, but DHS regarded it as legally unacceptable. South Carolina is considering suing over REAL ID, and today it was reported that Maine’s governor has requested REAL ID leniency, similar to what Montana was given.

California had previously requested and been granted an extension, but is now backing off of its commitment to REAL ID and is considering legislation opposing REAL ID. Louisiana is one of several other states considering similar bills. A total of seventeen states have already passed legislation.

DHS has been adamant in earlier statements that the May 11^th deadline will be enforced. However, recent DHS actions have been characterized as “blinking” by both Montana Governor Brian Schweitzer and the American Civil Liberties Union.

The looming deadline may be the impetus for Senator Lamar Alexander’s (R. – Tenn.) decision to propose legislation next week that would stop REAL ID from going forward. Sen. Alexander could have the leverage necessary to push the legislation through where other anti-REAL ID bills have been stalled in committee.

Opponents to the REAL ID Act cite privacy, infringement of state rights, and enormous financial costs, with no discernable anti-terrorism benefit, as the basis for their rejection.

Understanding REAL ID

You’ve been hearing about REAL ID in the news and from us, at NCTE. But perhaps you are not quite clear what REAL ID is all about? In general, that is…not just the ways that transgender people are affected by REAL ID.

Fortunately, CNET News.com has published a four-part series of articles that provides background on the REAL ID Act and how the upcoming deadlines can impact people’s everyday lives.

CNET News.com does not cover the transgender angle of REAL ID, of course. However, the ways that all Americans will be affected certainly includes transgender people. I am sure that most transgender people will be able to imagine how these general difficulties would translate into even greater hardships for our particular community.

Four-part series: "REAL ID vs the states"

++++++++++++++

CNET News.com has also made available an easy-to-read version of the relevant section of the REAL ID Act. For those who want to read the entire text and history of the bill, click here.

national legislation to repeal REAL ID Act

We mentioned two pieces of legislation in our recent review and analysis of the Department of Homeland Security final rules for implementing the REAL ID Act. The following is a brief explanation of what those bills are:

The two bills, S. 717 and H.R. 1117 (U.S. Senate and U.S. House bills, respectively) are nearly identical. They both call for the repeal of Title II* of the REAL ID Act and to reinstitute section 7212 of the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004, a much better law for making secure driver licenses and IDs, which includes privacy and civil liberty protections.

The Library of Congress Thomas website has the complete text of both bills, lists co-sponsors of the legislation, and provides the current status of the bills. Click on these links to go the appropriate sections of Thomas: S. 717 & H.R. 1117

If you would like to contact your Senators about S. 717, you can find their contact info here.

If you would like to contact your Representative about H.R. 1117, you can find their contact info here.


* Title II of the REAL ID Act is the section that pertains to driver licenses.

Congress Investigates Potential Voter Suppression

For those of you who have been following voting rights issues, check out the Leadership Council on Civil Rights (LCCR) March 11th article about Congressional investigation into voting suppression. The article is "Congress Probes Justice Department Efforts to Curb Voter Suppression".

Given what happened in Florida during the 2000 election and in Ohio in 2004 (among other places), access to voting is a pertinent issue in the lead up to the 2008 presidential election. With the identity document issues that transgender people can face, it is easy for transpeople to become caught up in voter suppression efforts targeted at racial minorities and immigrants.

If you like would like to know more about voter suppression in general, see Wikipedia's entry for a quick primer.

And f you haven't already, check out NCTE's handout, "Overcoming Voter Obstacles" for tips on how transgender people can deal with voting issues.

John Otto

Stop No-Match Letter Legislation

A bill pending in the U.S. House of Representatives would make it mandatory for every employer in the nation to participate in the E-Verify (formerly called Basic Pilot) Program. This program would expand the Social Security Administration "no-match" letter program that was recently halted by a federal judge.

This pending bill is called the Secure American Through Verification and Enforcement Act of 2007, or the SAVE Act. It is also known as the Shuler-Tancredo bill or H.R. 4088. It is one of many ways that the government is seeking to be more intrusive in our everyday lives, and could improperly identify at least 2.5 million workers as ineligible for employment.

While gender is not verified in this particular program, another similar program does verify gender and has outed an untold number of transgender people in their workplace. If employers are required to participate in this program, it is unlikely that they will make a distinction between this program and the ways that transgender people are susceptible to no-match letters.

For this reason it is important to urge your Representatives in Congress to stop this bill. It is also important because it is the right thing to do, in support of our immigrant neighbors, friends, and families.

The House Republicans are attempting a procedural manuever to bring the SAVE Act to a House floor vote without going through committee. They are doing this because they don't think this flawed piece of legislation would make it through a committee vote.

Your help is needed now to block this move. Urge your representative to "decline to sign the petition to discharge H.R. 4088, the Shuler-Tancredo Bill."

Call the House Switchboard at 202-224-3121 to find your Representative's phone number, or visit http://clerk.house.gov/member_info/mcapdir.html.


More information about the Shuler-Tancredo Bill/H.R. 4088/SAVE Act can be found in this National Immigration Law Center's document: ttp://www.nilc.org/immsemplymnt/ircaempverif/shuler_EEVS_2008-02-01.pdf

Voter registration

Last week, I went down to the County Clerk's office to update my voter registration in time for the upcoming caucuses here in New Mexico (I'm a telecommuter to NCTE's Washington, DC offices). I'm moving so I needed to get my new address in the system. The incredibly helpful staff made sure I knew where my polling place was and helped me find it and my new home on the county maps. They even found the mistake I'd made in writing my new address and made sure I knew where I was actually living.

But then I still had to figure out just how this caucus thing works, since I've always lived in states with primaries, not caucuses. I had seen reports of the Iowa caucuses and thought it sounded rather intriguing, but in New Mexico it turns out to be pretty much like casting a ballot. I still had to contact my political party to figure out where to go or to get an absentee ballot, since the parties organize those.

Still, sleuthing it all out has been rather fun ... and I hope that you, too, are finding out all the information you need to register to vote and to participate in the electoral process.

US Supreme Court Hears Voter ID Case Starting Today

A voting rights case comes before the United States Supreme Court today. Oral arguments will be heard challenging an Indiana voting law requiring government-issued ID with photo. The court is expected to issue a decision sometime in June 2008, in time for the November Presidential election.

Voting issues affect the transgender community, and therefore, this case will be an interesting one to follow. For background on the case, see these webpages:

Voter ID Laws Are Set to Face a Crucial Test
New York Times - January 7, 2008

Voting Rights Advocates Challenge Voter ID Laws
civilrights.org - January 7, 2008

Crawford v. Marion County Election Board

Electronic Privacy Information Center

And also, don’t forget to check out NCTE’s Voting webpage and our publication, “Overcoming Voting Obstacles.”

John Otto
Privacy and Documentation Program Manager

Frustation about ENDA

On our daily conference call about ENDA today, one of the members of our community expressed a frustration that I’ve been feeling for some time. We hear from members of Congress that transgender people have not yet done as much work educating them and their colleagues on issues of gender identity as gay and lesbian people have around sexual orientation. Therefore, they argue, they just aren’t ready to vote for civil rights for transgender people. This seems to me to be a way of passing the buck, of blaming the disenfranchised for their lack of rights.

Those of us who have called our legislators, who have met with them and who have worked hard on educating them are rightfully frustrated. It may feel like our best efforts have been in vain. We’ve told our stories of friends and loved ones killed, of jobs we didn’t get or being fired for no other reason than who we are. It is incredibly painful to think it hasn’t been enough. Yet.

However, we need to remember that our work to educate members of Congress—and members of the LGBT community—have actually made an enormous difference. I truly believe that we would not be having this conversation at all, that we wouldn’t be on anyone’s agenda, if we had not been diligent in the work we have done so far. Nor would the House of Representatives passed a transgender inclusive hate crimes bill this session without the work we’ve done to educate them.

Thinking about this today has led to two conclusions. First, we absolutely must continue to do the work we are doing. We need to redouble our efforts to get people to Washington for our annual lobby day. We must continue to visit our legislators when they are in the home offices, sharing our stories, letting them know exactly why we need civil rights protections and what the stakes are for transgender people, our loved ones and families. We have to encourage each other to come out and speak up for our rights. We need each and every voice to be heard.

Second, we also need to remember that role of Congress isn’t to award rights to those who make the most noise, have the largest cadre of lobbyists or are the biggest group. Their job is to enact laws in keeping with the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. For transgender people, that means working for a country where we too have life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. In order to achieve that, we need to be free of violence and discrimination. Passing a transgender-inclusive ENDA wouldn’t fix that overnight, but it would be a step along the way.

ENDA Update Monday, November 5, 2007

All signs on the Hill today are that Congressional Leadership plans to send the divisive ENDA that the LGBT community opposes to the floor for a vote tomorrow. We do not have all the particulars just yet, such as whether the Baldwin Amendment will be allowed. This means that we probably have less than 24 hours to express our opinions to members of Congress. We will provide more information when it is available.