A revision of Real ID should start with a debate on whether it’s needed

Plans to rewrite the fatally flawed Real ID law come as good news to anyone concerned about the security and privacy of the 245 million Americans who would be forced to use this de facto national ID.

Opposition at the state and federal levels has been growing since the law’s passage in 2005. States objected to it as an unfunded mandate that would cost them billions of dollars to implement and further bog down the process of issuing licenses by requiring onerous cross-checking and verification of source documents. Privacy advocates objected to the creation of interconnected state databases that would be developed with no requirements for securing personal data.

With Janet Napolitano — who as governor of Arizona opposed the law — now installed as homeland security secretary, new legislation is expected that would reduce some of the law's worst requirements.

Real ID, which would establish national standards for state driver's licenses and ID cards, was passed in the panicky aftermath of the 2001 terrorist attacks, when almost anything recommended by the 9/11 Commission carried a moral weight that Congress dared not ignore. But this law was so offensive and expensive that opposition began almost immediately, and deadlines for its implementation have been repeatedly extended. Some states, including Napolitano’s Arizona, flatly refused to have anything to do with it.

Under then-Secretary Michael Chertoff, the Homeland Security Department included some strong statements about its commitment to privacy and security in the final rules issued last year, but the statements were not backed up with any substance. Security guidelines for the vast stores of online data were to be issued at some future date, and there was no suggestion of where money for those security programs would come from when financially strapped states already are struggling with budget shortfalls.

House Homeland Security Committee Chairman Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.) complained when the rules were released that “a number of the federal databases that the states must use to authenticate source documents are incomplete, unreliable and in dire need of significant enhancements.”

According to reports at the time of this writing, new legislation would strengthen privacy controls, eliminate the interconnected databases and repeal the requirement that states query other states or verify birth certificates with the originating agencies.

Those are all welcome steps, but the most important thing Congress can do in reshaping the Real ID Act is to engage in a full debate on the value of a national ID. The law was passed without that debate; it was slipped into a spending bill that provided funding for troops and tsunami relief.

If the American people and their representatives agree that creation of some form of national ID makes sense, the government can then take steps to implement it in a way that is fair, reasonable and secure. But if we decide that people should not need papers to travel freely within the borders of their own country, the issue of creating and securing state databases of personally identifiable information becomes moot.

About the Author

William Jackson is a Maryland-based freelance writer.

inside gcn

  • power grid (elxeneize/

    Electric grid protection through low-cost sensors, machine learning

Reader Comments

Fri, Jul 10, 2009 Michael Harry St. Louis

American citizens have to balance the fear of terrorist activity and criminal illegal aliens with Big Brother's invasion of our privacy. Our rights are being trampled either way you go. The current administration, including Napolitano, appears to blame Americans for the world's problems. They need to proactively defend and protect us from our enemies.

Sun, Jul 5, 2009 Jeffrey A. Williams

State governments can't now even manage
their own budgets and have not been
able to for nearly a decade now. How
can the average citizen ever believe that the states or for that matter
DHS manage something as sensitive and
intragate as the so called "Real ID Act". Not going to happen on any
realistic basis.

Tue, Jun 30, 2009 Robert KY

re: "people should not need papers to travel freely within the borders of their own country,"
I agree that citizens should not need papers...BUT, so long as this country has open borders, we need to deal with the nuances of people traveling who have false IDs, and who have no license or insurance, and who do not care to comply with the laws and standards that legal citizens are expected to...
Will IDs fix the problem??? No.
But there is no fix without some means of detirmining/verifying identities...

Fri, Jun 26, 2009 pete

The REALLY big issue with REAL ID and PASS ID is that the "final rules" are not really final. Everyone would feel much more comfortable if whatever came out of the rulemaking process was static, and that a new Congressional bill and vote would be needed to change it. But when new rules can be issued by DHS 2, 3, or 4 years later after the final rules have come out, how much do the intitial set of rules really matter? All you are doing is delaying whatever DHSs final end game is.All they are doing is continuing to water down the intitial impact to make it more pallatable. These bills are really not so much about what the regulations will be; they are about putting someone else (DHS, AAMVA, whoever) permanently in charge of state's licenses. That is really what this is all about.

Please post your comments here. Comments are moderated, so they may not appear immediately after submitting. We will not post comments that we consider abusive or off-topic.

Please type the letters/numbers you see above

More from 1105 Public Sector Media Group