It’s rare that the Wall Street Journal contains an opinion piece I agree with. Rare, but not impossible, as an op-ed today (subscriber link) on RealID shows:
In California today, where a nation-high 25 million licenses are issued, residents can renew by mail. Real ID requires that you appear in person. So Americans can be grateful that DMVs nationwide are known as models of hassle-free efficiency; be sure to book a free afternoon.
Americans are rational. And in a post-9/11 world, they are willing to trade some freedom and convenience for more security. But it’s not at all clear that Real ID will make us safer. Deputizing motor vehicle office clerks, who would be entrusted with sensitive information and access to a national databank, also entails considerable privacy risk.
Fraud and security lapses at DMVs today are hardly uncommon. Just last month, a DMV official in North Carolina was arrested in connection with issuing fraudulent drivers licenses. And if the goal is to stop the next Mohammed Atta, it’s worth noting that, even under Real ID, people would be permitted to fly with identification other than licenses.
The piece also mentions that anti-RealID bills have passed at least one house of 14 state legislatures, and have at least been introduced in 11 other states.
The author of the column theorizes that a driving motivation in RealID is the current trend to be afraid of all the brown peoples crossing the Rio Grande without documentation. I don’t know that I necessarily agree with that sentiment.but I can, of course, point out that rationalizing immigration policy would alleviate those fears.