Seven Years Later, Real ID Still Real Stuck
Just before the holidays, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) issued a press release commending the states that have met the requirements of the Real ID Act of 2005 for driver’s licenses and identification cards.
In the wake of 9/11, you will recall, policymakers moved for stronger national standards to verify the identity of driver’s license applicants. This led to the Real ID Act which established requirements for a national identification system based on the driver’s license.
The act requires the states to comply with 18 specific benchmarks related to the issuance of personal identification cards. Since the law was enacted more than seven years ago, one would think that most would have signed on by now. But to date, only 13 states have done so: Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Iowa, Indiana, Maryland, Ohio, South Dakota, Tennessee, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming.
The remaining states have not provided DHS enough information to determine whether or not they are in compliance with the act’s requirements, according to the release. If those states fail to comply by January 15 of this year, they will get a temporary deferment. DHS will then follow up with the laggards to “develop a schedule for the phased enforcement of the Act’s statutory prohibitions to ensure that residents of all states are treated in a fair manner.”
But this may be easier said than done. Many of the uncooperative states have rejected Real ID through statute or legislative resolution, or have simply refused to comply. They cite a host of reasons including expense of implementation, the potential to bog down already stressed motor vehicle departments, as well as privacy concerns.
Groups from across the political spectrum have voiced opposition as well. The National Governors Association, ACLU, EPIC (Electronic Privacy Information Center) and many more have all come out against the measure. The ACLU’s dedicated Real ID website sums up the concerns here.
The NMA has opposed Real ID from the beginning. Our position is simple: The basic (and only legitimate) purpose of the driver’s license is to certify that the license holder is capable of operating a motor vehicle on public roads in a safe and responsible manner. The license should not be withheld for any reason other than the fact that the applicant could not pass a fair and objective driving test.
The driver’s license should not be demanded as a formal means of personal identification. The full implementation of Real ID would have real consequences for motorists:
•More government intrusion and control
•Increased threats to personal privacy
•Greater vulnerability to identify theft/fraud
•More difficulty in obtaining a driver’s license
Thankfully, the opposition has successfully stalled Real ID numerous times over the years, and DHS has reportedly extended the implementation deadline to 2017—12 years after enactment.
Not only is this a states rights against an unfunded mandate issue it is an attempt to gain more information in a government database. The truth is that many requirements in the “Real ID” have nothing to do with national security by invasion of privacy.
Why is there a requirement for a verified home address with documentation being verified? If I have a US Passport, or a Birth Certificate and Social Security Card should suffice. That would document that I am legally here and whatever tests required for driving should suffice.
Why is their a requirement to archive source documents? We don’t even do that for firearm purchases. Why should this data be store electronically so that the government or a hacker can get instant access to document to steal identity. Before you say that won’t happen there have been several stories of federal and state systems getting hacked and sensitive data accessed.
Why is it the Federal Government’s business to create a linked database to ensure that people have only “One ID”? If states want to do that and share information it is the individual states which should choose to or not to do. the Problem Driver Database is one such way that has limited information on people convicted of severe violations. It was set up by the states for use by the state DMV’s that participate.
Why should there be one standard for security protocols? This would make it easier to counterfeit and note harder. The ID theft rings would only have to circumvent the federal standard. Instead having 50 states charged with creating secure documents there will be new innovations to thwart criminals.
The bottom line is that this so called “Real ID” will make it easier for the Government to know where and track the citizens of this country. I have a huge problem with this as if I commit no crimes I should not be under surveillance and monitoring. This law is too expensive and will not make us safer and in the end will take away our liberty instead.
Have you ever heard of licenses being suspended for failure to pay child support?
I thought that was no better than suspending driver’s license for failure to pay household utilities.
How about shutting off utilities for failure to pay child support.? Shutting off utilities for failure to register or insure one’s vehicle.?