State legislatures are grappling with the tricky balance between
security and civil liberties. Last week, Maine became the first
state to reject a federal law mandating new standards for driver’s
licenses. While libertarians, privacy advocates, and a majority of
legislators in Augusta applauded the move, the father of a man
killed in the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks argued it was a
mistake.
“Driver’s licenses are a key terrorist tool that open doors to
places we cannot allow terrorists to enter again,” said Peter
Gadiel, president of 9/11 Families for a Secure America and a
member of the Coalition for a Secure Driver’s License. “The al
Qaeda cell that killed my son in the World Trade Center got its
licenses from Florida, Maryland, California and Virginia.”
All but one of the 9/11 hijackers acquired some form of U.S.
identification, some fraudulently, helping them board commercial
flights, rent cars — and kill Americans. Two of the terrorists
boarded a plane in Portland, Maine, the day of the attacks, before
transferring to another plane at Boston’s Logan Airport.
The Real ID Act was passed in May 2005 to fulfill a 9/11
commission recommendation that states issue nationally uniform
driver’s licenses. Supporters of the law say it will prevent
terrorism. The commission described entry points to vulnerable
facilities as “the last opportunity to ensure that people are who
they say they are and to check whether they are terrorists.” In the
commission’s final report card, the government earned one of its
better grades for enacting the law.
The measure requires states to comply with minimum security
standards for issuing state driver’s licenses by May 2008.
Otherwise, driver’s licenses from non-abiding states will not be
accepted for boarding flights or entering federal buildings.
Licenses must contain a digital photograph, be machine-readable,
and contain security features.
Real ID also requires proof that the applicant is legally
present in the country before a license or official identification
card is issued. The cards could only be issued to legal immigrants
for the period in which they are permitted to be in the country.
For those without such proof, states would be permitted to issue
driver’s licenses that could not be used for federal purposes, such
as presenting identification to board a flight.
But opponents say they are looking for a little security from
Big Brother. They contend the Real ID Act will lead to a national
ID card, violating states’ rights and personal privacy alike. They
are hoping Maine will live up to its state motto of “I lead” and
that other states will follow. If enough states reject Real ID,
Congress may be forced to change the law — though they risk
issuing driver’s licenses that aren’t recognized by the federal
government.
Privacy advocates are particularly concerned about the act’s
requirements that a state gather and store large quantities of
personal information in issuing the licenses, saying it would offer
a boon to identity thieves. States are required to store copies of
documents used to apply for the license. States must also provide
electronic access to other states to the information kept in their
databases.
Critics also say the cost of the Real ID Act is unreal, citing
estimates that compliance could cost more than $11 billion over the
first five years. That figure has been challenged by proponents of
the law, who point out that the specific requirements have yet to
be decided by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). They also
worry the law will lead to unlicensed drivers on the road because
illegal immigrants will be unable to comply.
Congressman James Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.), the sponsor of the
act, says many of these fears are overblown. “Real ID merely sets
out uniform security standards for state drivers’ licenses,” and by
improving their security it will weaken any movement to create a
national ID, he said. He added that the law included requirements
to protect the collected data from would-be identity thieves.
Amanda Bowman, a board member of the Coalition for a Secure
Driver’s License, also defended the Real ID Act. If just one state
continues issuing licenses lacking security, the whole nation will
remain vulnerable, she said. Bowman said “the privacy issue is a
bogus one here — you live in a world where you have to balance all
the time” privacy and security.
Sensenbrenner argued that similar legislation in Tennessee
hasn’t led to a flood of unlicensed illegal immigrant drivers. And
Bowman maintained that there is no legitimate states’ rights
concern because states still grant the licenses while they “play
off the same song sheet.”
As some states move to consider rejecting the Real ID Act, DHS
is expected to shortly give it another green light toward
implementation. It will propose the specific requirements for
driver’s licenses by the end of March, which will be followed by a
period of public comment before the proposal is finalized.
But more roadblocks may be ahead. Sen. Daniel Akaka (D-Hawaii)
has said he will “not hesitate to pursue a legislative change to
Real ID” if he finds DHS’s proposed rule sacrifices privacy and
unduly burdens the states.
Meanwhile, the law’s May 11, 2008 deadline is approaching. But
with the debate intensifying, you might be able to delay getting in
line for that new license.
