Government Fails to Enforce Privacy on New IDs

New ID program provides greater security, but at what cost?

ByABC News
January 25, 2008, 12:24 PM

Jan. 25, 2008 — -- Balancing national security and civil liberties requires delicate diplomacy to ensure a balance between legitimate security needs and the privacy rights of Americans. Since 9/11, preserving that balance has been ignored and forgotten. Earlier this month, the Department of Homeland Security had a chance to get it right when it released new rules for implementing the Real ID Act. But once again, privacy was kicked to the curb.

The goal of the Real ID Act, to make the driver's license a more reliable form of identity, is a good one. Setting minimum standards to ensure that the process of getting a driver's license is more secure and making it tougher to fake a driver's license isn't unreasonable; however, almost everything else associated with this program is.

Although the new rules roll out full implementation over the course of a decade, the impact on privacy won't get a reprieve. States that have not already done so will start collecting and storing more personal information from drivers and the development of a centralized repository of personal information on 240 million Americans will soon follow. But like the proverbial frog in boiling water, many of us may not fully feel the privacy loss until it's too late.

Most disappointing, the hard decisions on how to implement Real ID -- including how to protect privacy -- have been left to the states. Simply put, there are no privacy rules. States are simply encouraged to follow a set of "best practices" for protecting privacy. But there are no consequences if states choose not to do so and thus no guarantees that the personal information collected for Real ID won't be used for a variety of state and even federal uses, populating and repopulating numerous government databases and easily available to businesses and other interests.

While the government disavows the notion that Real ID will quickly become a national ID card, the failure to provide privacy rules and limitations on secondary uses gives lie to that assertion. Indeed the ink is not yet dry on the new regulation, and the department is already speculating on a variety of other government purposes for which a Real ID card may be required, such as buying cold medicines that contain ingredients used to create methamphetamines. And Congress has already thrown around proposals that would require a Real ID for employment or to receive federal housing benefits.