Although the law implementing REAL-ID was stealthily passed in 2005, as the deadline approaches, more and more states are rejecting the implementation of such a scheme.  More than half the states have legislation set to be debated about rejecting the plan, while several others have already passed resolutions against it.  The largest objections to REAL-ID remain the improbability of raising the estimated $17 billion to get the program started, as well as the massive privacy implications of such a huge database that, most likely, will not be managed well.

The nominal purpose of REAL ID was protecting national security, but this justification continues to fade as people learn the weaknesses of identity-based security. The remaining support for REAL ID comes from anti-immigrant groups who have yet to realize what a small margin of immigrant control they would get for the price they would pay. REAL ID would exact a heavy toll in dollars, convenience, privacy, and liberty from law-abiding, native-born American citizens.

But identification still remains a problem.  New York has created the Clear Card and it is being accepted in several airports as identification.

At the Orlando, Florida airport, for example, the U.S. Transportation Security Administration accepts the Clear Card issued by New York’s Verified Identity Pass as proof that a person is part of the TSA’s Registered Traveler program. The Clear Card comes with a key anti-surveillance feature: Users aren’t identified to the government and their uses of the cards aren’t recorded and stored. Biometric data stored on the Clear Card (but not in a database) ensure that only the owner can use it, and the proof that a person is a Registered Traveler is enough information for the TSA. That’s all the information TSA gets. No database of Americans’ travels is created.

Until we actually get secure, and non trackable ID, more states, such as Michigan, will join the fight to tell the federal government that REAL-ID is not acceptable.  The personal data that will be stored in the REAL-ID database will be mined and harvested by many agencies.

REAL ID’s costs in privacy and civil liberties are not to be ignored. A nationally standardized card would be used by governments and corporations alike to harvest data about all of us, increasing the power of organizations over individuals.

There will also be an increase in identity theft.  REAL-ID is supposed to be implemented to prevent terrorism, which it will not, but it will create more opportunities for an individual’s identity to stolen.  We have seen numerous stories of federal and corporate databases being hacked into in the past few years.  Placing all the information about an individual into one database will be overwhelmingly tempting to a hacker.

Montana has joined the list of states that do not want REAL-ID.  Their state legislature has formally rejected REAL-ID.

After little debate today, the House passed, 82 to 18, the Senate-amended version of Bozeman Democrat Brady Wiseman’s HB 287.

The Senate passed the bill unanimously last Tuesday, adding an amendment pushing the effective date of the law from kicking-in immediately to October.

The Senate opted to delay the effective date because the Dept. of Homeland Security recently opened up a public comment period for Real ID implementation and released 250 pages in proposed regulations, Wiseman said.

Montana’s Governor Schweitzer has signed HB 287 into law, making it one of the strongest objections to REAL-ID.

Though several states have either passed or are considering resolutions or bills against the act, Montana is the first state to outright deny its implementation, according to the American Civil Liberties Union.

“We also don’t think that bureaucrats in Washington, D.C., ought to tell us that if we’re going to get on a plane we have to carry their card, so when it’s scanned through they know where you went, when you got there and when you came home,” said Schweitzer, a Democrat.

With the increasing number of states joining the fight, Americans may well be able to overturn REAL-ID.  Unfortunately, the government opened up a public comment period far too late in the game.  REAL-ID was passed in Washington with no discussion whatsoever and the States themselves have opted to tell the government no.  It is now clear that the States have the best intentions for their citizens, not the US Congress.  They are saying no to forced identification.  They are saying no to paying for the forced identification.  They are shouting that we do not wish to be tracked in our every movement in life.

They are protecting our rights, something the Federal government has long ceased to do for the individual citizen.  The States are saying, “enough is enough” and are telling the Federal government that it’s time for them to know their place and return our 10th amendment rights.  The lines are drawn.  More states will reject REAL-ID.  Then, we can continue the debate of just what a proper ID card should be.