Ohmy news - US Real id Act poses Real Threats

[buckthesystem]

This is a commentary, but a good article.

http://english.ohmynews.com/articleview/ar...65&rel_no=1

U.S. Real ID Act Poses Real Threats

[Commentary] American privacy and the War on Terror

Jason Hahn

Americans saw their opportunity to speak out against or for the Real ID Act on Tuesday, when the deadline for public comment on the legislation ended. The act has been the object of controversy and major concern for many citizens who are raising personal privacy concerns. A handful of state governments are also voicing their dissent to the act, which would place huge financial burdens upon each participating state.

The Real ID Act was tacked onto a 2005 bill titled "Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for Defense, the Global War on Terror, and Tsunami Relief, 2005." The emergency bill was primarily meant to approve $82 billion for the war in Iraq and Asian tsunami financial aid, and was signed by President Bush on May 11, 2005. The Republican-driven House attached the Real ID Act to this bill, which landed on the president's desk without a Senate debate.

The act was meant to prevent terrorism by creating stricter and uniform standards for states to follow concerning state-issued IDs. It calls for states to revamp their state-issued drivers licenses and non-drivers identification cards in order to implement uniform security features across all states.

Right off the bat there is an obvious politically-charged nature to this debate. The current Congress is composed of a Democratic majority, which sets the stage for anger concerning how the bill was passed by the Republican-run Congress back in 2005.

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.) has been the driving force behind recent opposition to the Real ID Act.

During a hearing on Tuesday, May 8, Leahy said: "I think the days of Congress rubber-stamping any and every idea cooked up by the administration are over. You have the nation's governors, Republicans and Democrats, who say they want to have a voice in this. Should they be ignored, or is this a case where the federal government knows better than the states?"

Leahy's disapproval of the act is backed up by seven states which have already passed unusual legislation opposing the Real ID Act. The list includes Washington, Idaho, Montana, North Dakota, Colorado, Arkansas, and Maine. More than 30 states have called upon Congress to completely do away with the act or to fully fund it.

This is where the states' concerns arise. If the Real ID Act were to proceed as planned, states would be responsible for a sum of up to $23.1 billion, which is significantly higher than the $11 billion price tag estimated by the National Conference of State Legislatures and other state groups last year. Homeland Security says that the total cost of $23.1 billion, which includes the cost to individuals, would be spread out over a 10-year period.

Unfunded mandates are not unfamiliar to states. The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 was deemed as an unfunded mandate upon the states, many of which have made their displeasure of the act known, though none have actually dumped it. This is primarily because federal funds make up about 8 percent of public education funding, and would be rescinded from any state abandoning the act.

The Real ID Act is easier for states to openly reject because there are no funds to lose. States stand to shoulder heavy financial and administrative loads, and will be obliged to bow down to federal orders.

"State motor vehicle officials will be required to verify the legal status of applicants, adding to the responsibilities of already heavily burdened state offices," Leahy contended.

States can choose to turn their backs on the act, but their citizens would not be able to board an airplane or enter federal buildings. This penalty would take effect on May 11, 2008.

The primary concern for citizens is privacy related. Though Congress denies that this act would signal the dawn of national identity cards, many are not buying it.

This stems from the security aspects that will be required for these state-issued driver's license cards. These Real ID cards will feature a two-dimensional, non-encrypted barcode that will contain personal information such as the citizen's home address. Since the cards will not be encrypted (due to "operational complexity"), everyday businesses like bars and banks would be able to scan and store a customer's home address, among other pieces of personal information.

The potential for a privacy disaster is easily seen already, but the story does not end there. States would be required to scan all documentary evidence into a database shared with other states. Documentary evidence would include proofs of birthdates, legal status, and social security numbers.

Having all of this sensitive information merged together would create a hodgepodge of information, not to mention a headache waiting to happen, according to Bruce Schneier, a security technologist.

"The security risks of this database are enormous. It would be a kludge of existing databases that are incompatible, full of erroneous data and unreliable," he said.

He added: "A reliance on ID cards is based on a dangerous security myth, the idea that if only we knew who everyone was, we could pick the bad guys out of the crowd."

What's more, this merged database containing huge amounts of private information will be overseen by the Department of Homeland Security, which causes some to foresee a federal entity that would possess too much information and power.

To add to the already heightened apprehension concerning these ID cards, radio frequency identification (RFID) tags are being considered as well.

(for rest of article go to link)

[onetiggerroo]

Oh my is right!