The Sept. 11 terrorist attacks revived some talk of a national identification card, though the idea was buried fairly quickly. It still strikes many people as a gross invasion of privacy. Instead, both houses of Congress are considering bills that propose something close: national standards for state driver’s licenses.
Driver’s licenses have become the most widely used instrument for verifying identity. Air travelers, for example, can be asked to show their license with a photo ID three or more times on the way from curbside to boarding.
Yet the states and the District of Columbia are far from consistent in their procedures for issuing licenses. Some states make it tough to get a license. Other states are extremely vulnerable to fraud through the use of false documents. One stark case in point: Eight of the 19 hijackers on Sept. 11 came to Virginia from other states to fraudulently obtain driver’s licenses. At least one of them had been turned down in nearby Maryland before he crossed the Potomac River to get a license in Virginia.
The proposals in Congress seek to close the gaps that allow people to scam their way to a driver’s license or state photo identification card. One proposal, to be introduced soon by Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), would push states to adopt uniform standards under the threat of losing federal highway funds if they fail to comply. A similar bill by Rep. Tom Davis (R-Va.) and Rep. Jim Moran (D-Va.) would require states to issue high-tech ID cards equipped with a computer chip and some other unique identifier, like a fingerprint reader.
It seems clear that a driver’s license confers far more than the right to operate a vehicle. It confers access to certain places, and it has become a tool in domestic security. One state’s laxity can create a dangerous situation in other states. Since driver’s licenses are issued by each state, yet used and accepted nationwide, the federal government can and should set reasonable national standards.
The current driver’s license and state ID card system gives Americans the worst of both worlds: The card is constantly requested and constantly shown, yet too easily faked to be constantly reliable.
Congress should create some standards, but it should proceed with extreme caution. Uniform standards sound less radical than a national ID card, but the proposed data-sharing aspects smell a lot like a national ID system with centralized databases and opportunities for abuse.
The Senate and House bills call for a system of interconnected databases. The House bill bars the use of the database to track individuals, yet allows police and other authorized government entities to store data, which means each license could give them access to a record of traffic stops, trips to the airport and other movements. How limited is that? One wonders. Once governments begin to collect and share data they almost never scale back. They usually tend to accumulate and share even more of it.
Deeper questions surround the issue of data sharing. Considering that Sept. 11 terrorist Mohamed Atta wound up on a CIA watch list, but the FBI and INS never learned about that, it is hard to argue in favor of strict rules against sharing essential data. The key is to limit that access to those who must be in the know.
Congress should not forget that police, federal agents, licensing clerks, tax collectors, private companies, illegal snoopers and identity thieves have the potential to abuse anything contained in databases.
A critical balance must be preserved between law enforcement and privacy protection or the remedy could create more problems than it solves.
