[Congressional Record Volume 153, Number 171 (Tuesday, November 6, 2007)]
[Senate]
[Page S13982]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                            MORNING BUSINESS

                                 ______
                                 

                              REAL ID ACT

  Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, 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 have enacted laws in 
opposition. I have joined Senators Akaka, Sununu, Tester, Baucus, and 
Alexander in introducing legislation to repeal the driver's 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rulemaking process that had been originally enacted in the 2004 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ID superseded, was intended to improve the security of State driver's 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 
begins directing how a State driver's 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.
  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. 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, meaningful 
identity security improvements could already be underway. 
Unfortunately, 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 forgo 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. 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.

                          ____________________