Statement Of Senator Patrick Leahy

On The Implementation Delays For The REAL ID Act

November 6, 2007

 

When the REAL ID Act was added to an emergency supplemental spending bill in 2005, with little debate or foresight, I believed that Congress had made a mistake.  I was not alone, and since that time 38 States have either introduced or passed legislation opposing the law.  Seventeen States having enacted laws in opposition.  I have joined Senators Akaka, Sununu, Tester, Baucus, and Alexander in introducing legislation to repeal the drivers' license provisions of the law, and to replace them with the negotiated rulemaking process that had been originally enacted in the 2004 Intelligence Reform and Terrorist Prevention Act.  That bill, which REAL ID superseded, was intended to improve the security of State driver's licenses through a cooperative partnership with the States and the private sector.   

 

The Judiciary Committee held a hearing on May 8 of this year to examine whether the REAL ID Act is actually an effective way to improve our security.  I agreed with many at the hearing who argued that the REAL ID Act was not an effective way to improve identity security, and the sacrifices Americans would be compelled to make in their personal privacy were unacceptable.  All agreed more could and should be done to ensure the integrity of identification documents, but many cautioned that the REAL ID Act is not the most effective way to do it. 

 

Opposition to the REAL ID Act has been bipartisan and widespread among the States and many Federal lawmakers.  In addition to the enormous financial burdens placed on the States, the law raises serious privacy concerns about the Federal government's interference in a responsibility traditionally left to the State.  Proponents of the law proclaim it is not a national ID card.  But when the Federal government directing how a State drivers’ license is issued, what characteristics the card must have, and conditioning access to Federal buildings and airplanes on possession of a REAL ID card, it is difficult to think this is anything but the first, big step toward a national identification card that so many Americans oppose.

 

But the reality of the dissatisfaction among the American people is catching up with the Administration.  The Washington Post recently reported that Secretary Chertoff is expected to announce yet another delay for REAL ID’s implementation deadline.  Secretary Chertoff previously waived the May 2008 compliance deadline and set a new target of 2013 for nationwide compliance.  Now Secretary Chertoff will reportedly extend this date to 2018 for drivers who are older than 40 or 50, and officials have said the Government will not bar those not possessing a REAL ID license from Federal facilities and airplanes. 

 

Nonetheless, despite being faced with determined opposition from the States and many Members of Congress, the Administration still refuses to reconsider implementation of the law and is ignoring the pleas of the States, which are urging a better way.  Without buy-in from the States and the American people, this program is doomed to failure.  Delaying the inevitable by pushing back deadlines is not the way we will improve identity security.  Had the negotiated rulemaking provisions enacted in the 2004 Intelligence Reform and Terrorist Prevention Act been left intact, it is likely meaningful identity security improvements would already be under way.  It is unfortunate that instead of addressing the fundamental problems this law poses for the States, the Administration appears content merely to prolong a contentious and unproductive battle to force the States to comply.  Rather than improved security, this course will result in resentment, litigation, and enormous costs that States will be forced to absorb.  The Administration would do much better to treat the States as partners, and forego the paternalistic mandates that the American people are rejecting.  That spirit of cooperation would result in much greater security than the Administration's go-it-alone strategy to force compliance with another ill-conceived policy. 

 

Like the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative, the REAL ID Act represents precisely the big-government interference the President's party claims to dislike.  The American people are demanding that the Federal government take a second look at the wisdom of charging ahead with a national ID card, and the Administration ought to listen carefully to what many have been saying since this law was enacted, before more time is wasted trying to force this unpopular and cumbersome law on the citizens of the United States.  And I welcome all Senators to join me and the other cosponsors of S. 717 in rejecting the burdensome mandates of REAL ID and advocating for a better system of securing our fundamental identification documents.