some local headlines

[acroyear]

Airport board raises rates for Dulles Toll Road - washingtonpost.com

Frustrations of married women trying to get IDs at DMV - washingtonpost.com:

It took Earley four visits to the Fairfax/Westfields DMV office to get an ID card. All because her birth certificate didn't have her current name on it and that, according to new state and federal laws, means it doesn't prove that she is a U.S. citizen.

For women in particular, the passage of the Real ID law, which created standardized, federal identification standards in response to the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, has made the process of documenting who they are far more complicated, frustrating and unreasonable.

My wife carries her marriage license (well, a notorized copy) with her every time we leave the country, just in case someone gripes about name A != name B on any of the other documents she has.

Comments

Thought that was standard

[ginger-rose.livejournal.com]

Having been one of those "married women," I've always known bringing any legal documentation that demonstrates your identity (or how it's changed over time) is standard -- its not unreasonable, it's common sense. It's more detailed now, but um, yeah that makes sense too.

It's annoying when the media champions the cause of people unwilling to be responsible for themselves. This really isn't an agency problem (though their attitude obviously is). I was updating and maintaining my identity documentation way before 9-11 and Identity theft. It's just common sense. I don't care if you're an old lady or a ministers wife -- there are tons of ways to prove (and steal) ones identity. I'm sure they'd be the first to whine when their identity is stolen and they feel some agency should have been stricter in enforcement then.

(and sorry, elderly and religious somehow carrying the guise of innocent and non-suspect? Try living in Florida for a while, and you'll find quite a few silver haired and silver tongued con artists...) ;) oy ve!

Re: Thought that was standard

[uncle-possum.livejournal.com]

Well, assuming that the person was not an idiot, it's plausible that she didn't have the correct documents (per the new law) with her the first time. But, she was, or should have been, told what she needed, and presumably did bring them the second time. So, there's still the question about why two more times, no?

Having been a government bureaucrat in my life, and having some dealings with identity issues on both sides, it is not beyond the realm of plausibility that (1) the law didn't really consider all the types of legit name change (2) the rules based on the laws didn't consider these,or even had unreasonable requirements and (3) the staff in question didn't have proper training and (4) the staff were just jerks anyway and didn't look up the rules. Or all of the above.

Right after 9/11 was stopped at an airport security point and refused entry because my Wisconsin driver's licence with current picture, only had a sticker with the expiration date, not an entry in the laminated licence. Now, that's what the state had done to save money on renewals, but no luck. Fortunately, there was an intelligent supervisor: I had plenty of ID showing I was me, but I needed a government ID with nonexpired date and picture. In fact, I got on the plane because, in addition to lots of ID, I also had a county (government) bus pass, with expiration date and picture.
Nobody checked the current status of state IDs when the rules were made, but there was intelligence on the ground. These things can be handled.
Consider the royal FUBAR when the passport rules changed--the law made sense, but the passport people didn't do much to deal with the obviously predictable increase in passport applications, or the increased hassle which again was predictable.
(And having been in FL a lot, I agree there are a lot of annoying old people, but I have observed in my life that there are a lot of annoying people in general, and not just in Florida, btw).

Re: Thought that was standard

[ginger-rose.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I can understand some FUBARS and confusion right after 9-11, but it's been a while. ;) I've always checked what documentation was needed before showing up to an agency.

Marriage, divorce, adoption, or just legal name changes -- all have legal documentation to go with them. If you lose them, there are means of getting them replaced too. While I'll grant the staff was either ill trained or jerks, the information is out there. I can understand an old woman not being internet savvy in finding it, but to go back 4 times? That doesn't make sense.

I suppose the reason why this strikes me as catering to the ignorant is because I've gone through name changes a few times in my life, and while it has it's hassles, it's really not unreasonable. Yeah there are several places to update, but that's pretty standard too. Irritating? yeah, but I'd rather some irritation than anyone being able to cry their way into a false ID at the DMV.

In getting my daughters ID's it's been the same thing. When I went on a cruise with my youngest daughter (15) last June, our last names were different and we had to provide extra documentation. I completely understood because hey, how can they know she's my daughter if I don't have proof? What if she wasn't my kid and was running away and I was taking her against her parents consent? That's why these rules are in place. As we were sorting it all out, you know what they said? "wow, thanks for being so understanding -- usually people scream at us and freak out and create a huge scene." They were incredibly helpful and we were on our way, but it was sad to hear how my reaction (reasonable) was the exception, not the rule.

If I didn't know the process well myself, I'd probably be more sympathetic, but it seems that the reporter is making these people out to be the victims, and honestly...they're not. Victims of rude staff, sure, but I don't think they're victims of an unfair process. *shrug*

Re: Thought that was standard

[blueeowyn.livejournal.com]

let's see. The DMV in my state doesn't recognize a passport as legal ID to show a name change or proof of citizenship. In order to get my driver's license after my name change (first and last); I had to have my SSN card, my old drivers license, my birth certificate, marriage certificate, and change of name form. To get my new passport, I needed the old passport (which was still valid) + the change of name documentation. Heaven forfend that I get robbed and lose my license because then I won't have a valid photo ID to get a valid photo ID (unless my employee ID would count since I work for a subset of the state government).

Also, it took 4 visits, 8 pieces of documentation and 4 people to get a car transferred to me. My parents got divorced and my mother remarried (so her current name doesn't match my birth certificate). I got married (so my last name doesn't match my birth certificate). I legally changed my first name (whee). So we ended up at MVA with the title of the car, the 'notification of gift' certificate, my birth certificate, her divorce decree, her 2nd marriage license, my marriage license, my paperwork on change of name, my passport, my husband's license, and our insurance cards to show that A) I was her daughter, B) my husband is a legal relative; C) we had insurance available for the car in question. If they had told us the first time we went through line (waited from 8:15-10:30am) what all we needed rather than just telling us that we were missing X documentation (not XY and Z) it wouldn't have been so annoying.

Retitling something after a death is really fun as well. Since you need to prove it wasn't a sale.

Oh, and if a jointly owned car has vanity plates, there is a special form that has to be signed by the former co-owner giving you rights to the plates.

[queenmaggie.livejournal.com]

That's one of the reasons I didn't want to change my name.