REAL ID enforcement set for May 7
After years of being postponed, REAL ID enforcement will begin May 7.
That means U.S. citizens and permanent residents will need to present a REAL ID-compliant driver's license to board domestic flights, enter military bases and certain federal buildings. Federal buildings such as Social Security Administration and U.S. Postal offices will not require a REAL ID for access.
'If or when a person needs a REAL ID-compliant license, they can still get one after May 7,' said Allen Blair, deputy director of Public Affairs at Kentucky Transportation Cabinet. 'That is not a deadline, but the enforcement date when TSA will begin requiring a REAL ID to fly or visit a military base, for example. There are also options, as there are alternative forms of REAL ID that people can use — a passport, passport card, global entry card, military ID, and Veteran Health Identification Card (VHIC) are among the several forms of REAL ID that let you fly. We just want people to consider their needs, and have a plan.'
According to Blair, currently, more than 1.33 million Kentuckians (36.6%) have obtained their REAL IDs.
'In recent months, we have seen an increased interest from people wanting REAL IDs. We started issuing them when we began setting up regional offices after the legislature shifted licensing to the cabinet in 2020,' Blair said. '…It's important to note that by law Kentucky is a voluntary state, and you can choose between a REAL ID compliant license or a standard credential. Both provide the same daily needs for driving and identification. The REAL ID version meets federal security requirements set up after 9/11.'
In 2020, Kentucky House Bill 453, sponsored by Sal Santoro, a Florence Republican, made the KYTC the sole application and issuance entity for operator's licenses and personal identification cards while eliminating the requirements that these documents be applied for in one's county of residence. The bill also expanded the pre-existing list of documents an applicant can use when applying, and allow applicants to choose between four to eight years before renewal.
That led to the creation of REAL ID Regional Offices, which gradually removed all driver's license duties out of the hands of circuit court clerks.
Daviess County's regional office was opened in January 2021 inside the former Daviess County Operations Center at 2620 Kentucky 81. It took over all of the driver licenses and permit responsibilities from the Daviess circuit court clerk on Sept. 27, 2021.
In the past, residents had to be issued their driver's licenses in their home counties. However, regional offices can issue licenses to any resident regardless of where he or she lives in the state.
Before being issued a REAL ID, there are certain documents a person must possess. The first category is proof of identity — a certified birth certificate or a valid passport.
The second category is proof of Social Security — an original Social Security card or a W2, or a 1099 from this year or last year with name and Social Security listed.
The third category is proof of address — two bills with a name and address. Acceptable examples would be a medical bill, utility bill and a magazine subscription.
Driver's testing and written testing remain a function of the KSP.
Scheduling is through the KSP's website — kentuckystatepolice.org.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Los Angeles Times
4 hours ago
- Los Angeles Times
Letters to the Editor: The Democrats aren't the ones ‘more concerned with the interests of the few'
To the editor: Columnist Jonah Goldberg writes that the Democratic Party is 'a mess' because it is 'fairly perceived as more concerned with the interests of the few and less concerned with the welfare and rights of the many' ('Maybe the latest Democratic disarray means they're coming to their senses,' June 17). He then defines the 'few,' at least in part, as the teachers' and government employees' unions. Unfortunately, Goldberg misses the big picture. It's the Republican Party that consistently gives tax cuts to the rich and the corporations while they pay lip service to the middle class and are openly hostile to the poor. It's the Republican Party that seems to hate the unions — the economic movement that has most benefited the middle class and the working class. It's the Republican Party that is hostile to anything that helps consumers and the environment. It's the Republican Party that wants to dismantle Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, the Affordable Care Act, food stamps for children, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and the Environmental Protection Agency. Donald Trump conned millions of Americans into believing that he is a populist who is looking out for their interests. The White House's Department of Government Efficiency cut government funding and services for programs that help the middle class and the poor, and now Trump is seeking tax cuts for the rich and corporations. Trump's 'Big Beautiful Bill' will do more of the same. It should be obvious that Trump and the Republicans are not concerned with 'the welfare and rights of the many.' Michael Asher, Valley Village
Newsweek
8 hours ago
- Newsweek
Presidential Pardons Are a Dirty Business
In one of the most famous scenes of The Godfather, Don Corleone rejects a lucrative business opportunity because it involved narcotics. "Drugs," the Don explained, "are a dirty business." That quote came to mind when news broke about President Donald Trump's recent pardon of Paul Walczak. When I learned about Walczak—and the circumstances surrounding the president's exercise of his constitutional authority to liberate him—I instantly thought, "Pardons are a dirty business." According to the Justice Department, Walczak pled guilty in November 2024 to cheating on his taxes for years, amounting to nearly $11 million in stolen taxes. Beyond the large amount that he stole, the details of Walczak's fraud are even more sordid. President Donald Trump takes questions after signing a series of bills related to California's vehicle emissions standards during an event in the East Room of the White House on June 12, 2025, in Washington, D.C. President Donald Trump takes questions after signing a series of bills related to California's vehicle emissions standards during an event in the East Room of the White House on June 12, 2025, in Washington, has been an inveterate tax scofflaw since at least 2011. In short, he ran a web of health care companies, withheld $7.5 million of his employees' wages, and kept the money. He also pocketed $3.8 million of Social Security and Medicare taxes. He did all of this from 2016-2019, after he had already been penalized by the IRS for doing the exact same thing. To add insult to injury, Walczak also failed to pay his personal taxes for 2019 and 2020, even though he received a salary of $360,000 and transfers of nearly half a million dollars. To make matters worse, Walczak used those ill-gotten millions to spend lavishly on himself, including private flights and a yacht that cost over $2 million. "While Walczak was withholding taxes from the pay of his employees under the pretext of paying these funds to the IRS," the Justice Department stated in a press release, "he used over $1 million from his businesses' bank accounts to purchase a yacht, transferred hundreds of thousands of dollars to his personal bank accounts, and used the business accounts for personal purchases at retailers such as Bergdorf Goodman, Cartier, and Saks." Notably, the prosecutor reportedly told the court that Walczak did not act out of desperation—he was already rich. Rather, he took $10 million in taxes from the government "simply because he wasn't getting rich enough." Why would President Trump decide to use his special constitutional authority to liberate Walczak before he paid any penalty whatsoever? Now we know, thanks to reporting from The New York Times. Walczak's mother is reportedly a longtime Republican donor and Trump supporter, who just happened to attend a $1 million-per-person Trump fundraiser that "promised face-to-face access to Mr. Trump at his private Mar-a-Lago club in Palm Beach, Fla." Less than three weeks later, and shortly before Walczak was due to go to prison for his 18-month sentence, the president pardoned him. Despite his years-long abuse of the tax system, which he admitted, Walczak will get off scot-free. This should go down as another disgraceful star in the Constellation of Dirty Presidential Pardons, which features Barack Obama's pardon of Chelsea Manning, Bill Clinton's pardon of his half-brother Roger Clinton, and of course Joe Biden's unconscionable pardon of his son Hunter. The most analogous member of the Dirty Pardon Hall of Shame is Clinton's waiver of fugitive financier Marc Rich. Rich was indicted in 1983 for evading more than $48 million in taxes and charged with 51 counts of tax fraud, mail fraud, racketeering, as well as running illegal oil deals with Iran during a trade embargo. After his indictment, he fled the United States and remained a fugitive until Clinton pardoned him just hours before the president left the White House in 2001. The Rich pardon prompted a huge backlash because Rich's ex-wife had donated more than $1.3 million to Democratic party, including $70,000 to Hillary Clinton's Senate campaign, along with $450,000 to Clinton's presidential library. Within days, Republicans on Capitol Hill opened an investigation. Even Democratic stalwarts like Pat Leahy, Paul Wellstone, and Barney Frank roundly criticized President Clinton for the Rich pardon. The Walczak pardon, with its financial quid-pro-quo overtones, is on par with the Rich debacle. This is the stuff of banana republics, not great ones. Alexander Hamilton defended the president's broad pardon authority in the Constitution, writing in Federalist No. 74: "Humanity and good policy conspire to dictate, that the benign prerogative of pardoning should be as little as possible fettered or embarrassed. The criminal code of every country partakes so much of necessary severity, that without an easy access to exceptions in favor of unfortunate guilt, justice would wear a countenance too sanguinary and cruel." The key words there are "unfortunate guilt," which implies some sort of miscarriage of justice. But neither the Rich nor Walczak cases feature "unfortunate guilt." To the contrary, they reflect the sleazy reality of modern-day politics, one befitting a mob boss, not U.S presidents. Pardons are a dirty business. Mark Lee Greenblatt is an expert on government ethics and compliance, an attorney, and author. Most recently, he served as inspector general for the U.S. Department of the Interior. From 2019 to 2025, Mr. Greenblatt led a team of nearly 300 investigators, auditors, and attorneys responsible for oversight of more than 70,000 agency employees. The views expressed in this article are the writer's own.
Yahoo
9 hours ago
- Yahoo
Social Security Benefits Are an Estimated 8 Years Away From Being Slashed -- and the Cuts Are Even Bigger Than Initially Forecast
Most retirees rely on their Social Security income, to some varied degree, to make ends meet. The 2025 Social Security Board of Trustees Report is calling for an even steeper reduction to retired-worker and survivor benefits come 2033 than was forecast last year. Ongoing demographic shifts are (mostly) responsible for Social Security's financial woes. However, the longer Congress waits to implement reforms, the costlier it'll be on working Americans. The $23,760 Social Security bonus most retirees completely overlook › Social Security represents more than just a monthly check for most retirees. To many, it's a financial lifeline that surveys and studies have shown they'd struggle to make do without. For 23 consecutive years, national pollster Gallup surveyed retirees to determine how important their Social Security income was to covering their expenses. Every year, no fewer than 80% of respondents noted it was necessary, in some capacity, to cover their costs. A separate analysis from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities found that Social Security pulled 22 million people above the federal poverty line in 2023, including 16.3 million adults aged 65 and above. If the Social Security program didn't exist, the poverty rate for this group would be nearly four times higher (37.3%, estimated) than it was in 2023 (10.1%). For lawmakers, ensuring the financial health of Social Security should be of paramount importance. But based on the latest Social Security Board of Trustees Report, America's leading retirement program is on anything but stable ground. In January 1940, the Social Security program doled out its very first retired-worker benefit. Since then, the Social Security Board of Trustees has published an annual report intricately detailing how the program generates income, as well as where every dollar in outlays ends up. But what tends to garner even more attention is the Trustees' forecasts of what's to come for Social Security. Specifically, the short- (10-year) and long-term (75-year) projections, which are regularly updated to reflect fiscal policy changes, monetary policy shifts, and an assortment of demographic adjustments. Last week, the 2025 Social Security Board of Trustees Report was released -- and it contained some rather chilling news for current and future retirees. To begin with, the program's long-term unfunded obligation continues to widen. Every annual report since 1985 has pointed to a 75-year funding deficit between projected income to be collected and forecast outlays, which includes annual cost-of-living adjustments (COLAs). In present-day dollars, discounted to Jan. 1, 2025, this 75-year deficit stood at a staggering $25.1 trillion. However, the more worrisome news is the short-term forecast for the Old-Age and Survivors Insurance trust fund (OASI). This is the fund responsible for doling out monthly benefits to retired workers and survivors of deceased beneficiaries. Beginning in 2021, the OASI began outlaying more in benefits than was being collected in income. This outflow from the OASI's asset reserves is expected to grow with each passing year. By 2033, the OASI's asset reserves are projected to be completely exhausted. Before going any further, let's make clear that the OASI doesn't need a penny in asset reserves to remain solvent and continue to pay benefits to eligible recipients. With the lion's share of Social Security income collected from the 12.4% payroll tax on wages and salary, there will always be income to disburse to qualified beneficiaries. But if the OASI's asset reserves are depleted in eight years, as the latest Trustees Report predicts, the current payout schedule, inclusive of COLAs, won't be sustainable. The Trustees are forecasting a 23% cut to payouts may be necessary for retired workers and survivor beneficiaries by 2033 -- this is up from an estimated 21% cut outlined in the 2024 Trustees Report -- to sustain monthly benefits without the need for any further reductions through 2099. With Social Security providing a financial foundation to retirees for more than eight decades, the obvious question for current and future retirees is simple: How did Social Security get into this mess? What can be said with certainty is that "congressional theft" and "undocumented migrants receiving traditional Social Security benefits," which are two common myths/scapegoats mentioned by some people online, are the wrong answers. Rather, Social Security's worsening financial outlook is a function of numerous ongoing demographic shifts, as well as inaction on Capitol Hill. Some of these shifts are well-documented and understood by the public. For example, baby boomers reaching retirement age and leaving the workforce in larger numbers are weighing down the worker-to-beneficiary ratio. Likewise, people are living longer today than they were when Social Security initially began paying retired-worker benefits in 1940. To be somewhat blunt, the program wasn't designed to dish out payments to retirees for two or more decades, as is somewhat commonplace today. But a number of these demographic shifts aren't nearly as visible -- nevertheless, they're playing a key role in weakening the program. For starters, the U.S. fertility rate (i.e., hypothetical lifetime births per woman) hit an all-time low in 2023. A laundry list of factors, ranging from people waiting longer to get married and have children, to concerns about the health of the U.S. economy, have reduced the number of children being born and will, eventually, weigh down the worker-to-beneficiary ratio. Rising income inequality is another issue for Social Security. Based on data from the Social Security Administration, approximately 90% of all earned income (wages and salary, but not investment income) was subject to the 12.4% payroll tax in 1983. By 2023, only 83% of earned income was subject to this program-funding tax. In simple terms, the wages and salaries for high earners have been increasing at a faster pace than the National Average Wage Index, which determines the upper range of earned income exposed to the payroll tax. In short, more earned income is escaping the payroll tax as time passes. Insufficient net migration into the U.S. has been problematic, too. Social Security relies on younger people migrating to the U.S. and contributing to the program for decades via the payroll tax before earning a retirement benefit for themselves one day. Since 1997, the net migration rate into the U.S. has dropped off dramatically. The final culprit is the aforementioned lack of action by lawmakers in Washington, D.C. Although plenty of bills have been proposed, the cavernous ideological gap between Democrats and Republicans on Capitol Hill as to how best to strengthen Social Security has led to an ongoing stalemate. If there's a silver lining here, it's that lawmakers do have a knack for coming to Social Security's rescue in the 11th hour. But the longer Congress waits to tackle this issue, the costlier it's going to be on working Americans to fix. If you're like most Americans, you're a few years (or more) behind on your retirement savings. But a handful of little-known could help ensure a boost in your retirement income. One easy trick could pay you as much as $23,760 more... each year! Once you learn how to maximize your Social Security benefits, we think you could retire confidently with the peace of mind we're all after. Join Stock Advisor to learn more about these Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. Social Security Benefits Are an Estimated 8 Years Away From Being Slashed -- and the Cuts Are Even Bigger Than Initially Forecast was originally published by The Motley Fool Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
