Page 12 - the NOISE April 2015

REALLY, REAL ID?
ARIZONA PASSES A LONG ONE
STORY BY KENDALL PERKINSON
GRAPHIC BY OMAR VICTOR
According to the Department of Homeland Security, Arizona residents will no longer be able to board any commercial aircraft with their state drivers’ licenses in 2016. At that time, licenses will no longer meet the required standards to access most federally controlled facilities, including airports. Congress set these standards in 2005 with the Real ID Act, igniting a firestorm of debate and outright rebellion.
Years later, a looming deadline threatens to disrupt travel for Arizonans and residents of more than a dozen other states. One Arizona legislator is racing against the clock to provide residents with licenses that meet federal standards, but in a state that frequently finds itself in showdowns with the federal government, he may be biting off more than he can chew.
THE BASICS
“Real ID” is not a physical ID card itself, but rather a set of federal requirements for state drivers’ licenses. The act was a direct result of 9/11, when 19 hijackers with state-issued licenses changed the political landscape of the country. The Real ID provision did not receive a hearing or debate in either the House or the Senate, and was attached almost unnoticed as a rider on a military spend- ing bill. President Bush signed it into law in May 2005.
The new standards required that Americans applying for (or renewing) licenses provide: A photo ID, or a non-photo ID that includes full legal name and birth date, birth certificate, Social Security number/documentation of legal status and two forms of documentation proving a resi- dence address.
These documents were not just to prove identity, but were to be stored in government data- bases, able to be viewed by simply swiping the magnetic strip of the license through the sort of card readers that are already ubiquitous. The information is not required to be encrypted. Appli- cants must also be photographed by a camera that is compatible with facial recognition software or use other biometric identifiers like fingerprints that can be cross-referenced electronically.
The hostile reaction was swift and widespread, coming from a diverse coalition of organiza- tions dedicated to resisting enactment of the law. In 2008, Arizona became one of fifteen states that passed laws banning the implementation of Real ID.
A NATIONAL ID?
Many libertarians said that this program made a driver’s license into a de facto National ID card. For them, the famous opening scene of Casablanca remains emblematic of an oppressive state: “Your papers, please.” If residents are required to carry their citizenship papers to drive or board an
aircraft, they asked, how much different is America?
At the time of its passage, Real ID Act author Jim Sensenbrenner argued that this was a middle
ground of sorts. There were elements of the country, he claimed, that would demand an outright national identity card to prevent another 9/11 if these requirements weren’t made for drivers’ licenses. Arizona, rich in libertarian philosophy, balked at the prospect of the federal government forcing it to create an identity database of its citizens.
PRIVACY & SECURITY
By the time Arizona voted on whether to accept or reject Real ID, the nation had already seen the inherent danger to privacy represented by centralized data. Just one year earlier, a computer security breach had resulted in the theft of names and Social Security numbers of all 64,000 Ohio state employees and about 75,000 of their dependents. One year before that, the Department of Veteran’s Affairs had reported the theft of personal information on more than 26 million veterans and military personnel.
How safe was it to store copies of every American’s most sensitive documents in a computer system that would be accessible to every motor vehicles office in the country? According to DHS, it’s dangerous enough that smaller offices are considered “security vulnerabilities” and steps should be taken to close them. The Arizona chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union, a vocal critic of Real ID, argued that this would “inconvenience consumers ... and have a dispropor-
12 • APRIL 2015 • the NOISE arts & news • thenoise.us
tionate impact on Americans who live in rural communities.”
But their chief privacy concern was that DHS specifically acknowledged its inability to
keep the information from private enterprise. (“The REAL ID Act does not provide DHS with authority to prohibit third party private-sector uses of the information stored on the REAL ID card.”) In its policy scorecard on Real ID, the ACLU suggests that this endangers the personal information of everyone involved. “Already, many bars and clubs collect all their customers’ information by swiping driver’s licenses handed over to prove legal drinking age. There is concern that even if the states and federal government successfully protect the data, machine readability will result in a parallel, for-profit database on Americans, free from the limited privacy rules in effect for the government.”
Another privacy concern was “mission creep.” In the months and years following the passage of Real ID, there were Congressional proposals made to expand the requirement of Real ID to everything from government-backed loans to employment pre-screening. Second Amend- ment activists (a strong political contingent in Arizona) worry that it will one day be used as the basis for a national gun registry. The language of the act was intentionally left vague, stat- ing that Real ID shall be required for “any purposes that the Secretary [of Homeland Security] shall determine,” allowing unilateral regulation by the federal government in the future.
ECONOMICS
The Department of Homeland Security admitted that Real ID “carries with it significant cost and logistical burdens, for which Federal funds are generally not available.” Cost esti- mates to institute the program nationwide were about $10 billion, but the federal govern- ment only allocated $90 million (less than 1%) for the states to use. Arizona Department of Transportation estimated the cost for Arizona alone at $40 to $70 million the first year, with annual operating costs of $15 to $20 million for every following year.
Economics became the unifying issue for Arizona. Decrying the dangers of a national identification system may sound fringe to some, but everyone understood tax increases.
2677: THE BAN
Arizona’s House Bill 2677 was short and sweet: “The State shall not implement the Real ID Act of 2005, and shall report to the governor and the legislature any attempt by agencies or agents of the The United States Department of Homeland Security to secure the imple- mentation of the Real ID Act of 2005.”
Its success was a rare example of overwhelming bipartisan support, passing the state House with a landslide 51-1 vote in 2008. Governor Janet Napolitano signed it into law without hesitation, citing the program as an “unfunded mandate.” More than a dozen other states followed suit.
With so much nationwide resistance, Arizona is now waiting to see whether the TSA will actu- ally enforce Real ID standards in the state’s airports. DHS now says that Real ID will be required to board commercial aircraft “no sooner than 2016,” but still declines to set a firm deadline.
THE COMPROMISE?
Arizona state legislator Bob Worsley isn’t taking any chances. As Transportation Chair- man of the Senate, he’s currently working to make Real ID available in Arizona. He has introduced a bill this legislative session that slightly changes the language of 2677, making Real ID-compliant licenses optional for residents who request them. His bill (SB 1273) just passed the state Senate with a 20-10 win, but Senator Worsley expects the vote to be much closer in the House.
“There’s still a lot of Arizona legislators who are very upset and paranoid about the federal government,” Senator Worsley says. “They see them as introducing unfunded mandates and butting into our privacy issues. And that’s a very strong undertone of Arizona state politics, that we’re the rebellious state. We’re the ones who will stand strong and not cave into federal pressure.”
Senator Worsley believes that Real ID was rejected because of misinformation, but says his optional Real ID bill has the same strength as 2677: it appeals to the state’s libertarian ideals by offering a choice. “Nobody would be forced to have it, but if someone wants it, why do we make them go get a $200-$300 passport when they can pay $15 to get an Real ID-compliant Arizona driver’s license?”
The senator is hoping for public pressure from people who care less about the potential privacy and security concerns than the immediate costs and frustrations that come with acquiring and carrying other identification (like a passport) to board airplanes. He says the passage of 1273 has only a 50/50 chance of passing the House, but hopes that Arizona citizens will demand to be allowed access to the Real ID system. “It’s one thing to be a bel- ligerent child from 2008 to 2015, but I think our citizens are going to be really upset if we basically took our chances with the federal government and lost,” he says.
Senator Worsley’s biggest opposition may come from legislators who are concerned with that unifying issue of economics. His optional Real ID bill does not contain specifics about the costs of infrastructure and maintenance for such a program. It is unclear whether del- egates of the Arizona House will be willing to make their own constituents pay for any part of program they have already rejected in whole.
Get your passports ready, Arizona. It’s going to be a bumpy flight.
| Kendall Perkinson does make his way to the post office for a photo op from time to time. kendall@thenoise.us .
NEWSFEATURE