Thread: Support H.R.220 - Common Sense About Identity Theft & RE

Real ID creator: Law's been misunderstood
Republican politician who's a chief architect of federalized ID card law slams critics, aims to highlight how necessary the law really is.
By Anne Broache
Staff Writer, CNET News.com

Published: April 26, 2007, 9:16 AM PDT
TalkBack E-mail Print del.icio.us Digg this

ARLINGTON, Va.--One of the chief Republican architects of the controversial federal Real ID law on Thursday said the forthcoming nationalized identification cards are not an "unfunded mandate" and called for hearings to dispel myths about the proposed system.

Rep. Tom Davis (R-Va.), the ranking member of a U.S. House of Representatives government oversight panel, said he has asked committee chairman Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) to hold hearings to explore questions related to the requirements, which were approved by Congress as part of an emergency military-spending bill two years ago.

"States don't have to participate," Davis told attendees at a meeting here organized by the Information Technology Association of America. "They can issue driver's licenses to whoever they want under whatever standards."

But he acknowledged that only a Real ID-compliant license will allow Americans to do things like board airplanes or enter federal buildings. (A U.S. passport issued by the State Department--new ones have RFID tracking chips embedded--could be a substitute.) He emphasized the importance of pushing ahead with the new standards, which supporters say are necessary to keep terrorists and other dangerous people out of spaces where they could do harm.

Davis said he was confident that after thorough hearings, which he hopes will occur in the "not-too-distant future," "naysayers will have fewer specious arguments to hide behind."

The congressman's remarks come as more and more states have passed measures this year rejecting participation in the federal scheme. Earlier this month, governors in Montana and Washington joined other states in expressing varying degrees of opposition--all the way up to a complete refusal to participate--to Real ID.

A debate over encryption
The proposed plan for the cards published last month by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security also continues to attract concern from privacy and security experts--even some within the federal agency.

They have balked at the idea, for instance, that the information on the licenses' mandatory bar codes, which could be scanned by banks, bars and other businesses, is not currently required to be encrypted.

Two-dimensional bar codes can be easily photocopied and redistributed, so they are likely to become the "weakest link" in the system, said Kelly Emerick, executive director of the Secure ID Coalition, a group that pushes for greater adoption of secure "smart card" chips.

And even if bar code data is encrypted, it could be hacked by a brute force attack, subsequently allowing break-ins on every other card that's in the system, she said.

Toby Levin, a senior adviser to the Homeland Security Privacy Office, said she shared concerns about the use of that technique.

"The fact of the matter is that the 2D bar code does not protect privacy," she said.

But the department believes it cannot prohibit third parties from scanning information off the cards because Congress did not give it "express authorization" to do so in the law governing Real ID, Levin said.

She said the department's privacy advisers are nonetheless very concerned about protecting the information on the bar code and are exploring ways to limit the data stored there or encrypt it in a way that would not be objectionable to law enforcement authorities. If encryption isn't rejected, she suggested that a "huge educational campaign" will be needed to make sure Americans are aware of what information can be swiped from their cards by anyone with the proper reader.

Homeland Security's assistant secretary for policy development, Richard Barth, continued to defend the program at Thursday's event, saying he has grown to become "very passionate" about the cause. "A good ID, a driver's license, is virtually a weapon in the hands of a terrorist," he said.

Barth said he did not believe the new cards would diminish privacy at all. He also bristled at what he called a "misperception problem" that the Real ID-compatible cards would be required to contain any sort of radio-frequency identification chip that can be read without contact with a machine.

"RFID chip has nothing, nothing, nothing to do with the proposed rule, nor, I believe, the final rule for Real ID," he said. "Real ID and the word chip do not appear in the same sentence in anything I intend to implement."

Now on News.com:
PlayStation creator bows out at Sony
Photos: Carnegie Mellon's robot recipes
Microsoft adds security muscle
Extra: Web mashups are Washington watchdogs
The department believes data shared among states through their individual driver's license databases should be encrypted in transit, but it's still wary of encrypting the data on the bar codes, Barth said. That's because law enforcement officers want to be able to read the data at traffic stops, he said, and it would be too costly for them to carry special readers that had to be "rekeyed" frequently.

Department officials urged the public to submit comments about proposed rules for the cards until the May 8 deadline because the department is "in a very high listening mode." The department has also scheduled a "nationwide town hall" in Sacramento, Calif., on Tuesday and will allow people outside the area to participate in that forum by submitting questions and comments via the Web or a toll-free phone number.

After reviewing those comments, the department plans to release a final rule sometime during the summer, which Barth admitted could mean as soon as July or as late as September 21.

http://news.com.com/Real+ID+creator+Law ... 79476.html

"States don't have to participate," Davis told attendees at a meeting here organized by the Information Technology Association of America. "They can issue driver's licenses to whoever they want under whatever standards."

But he acknowledged that only a Real ID-compliant license will allow Americans to do things like board airplanes or enter federal buildings.

You don't have to pay the kidnapper, but he will kill your wife if you don't.

These guys crack me up with the way that they think that we are too stupid to see an unjustified federal intrusion for what it is.

Originally Posted by CrocketsGhost

"States don't have to participate," Davis told attendees at a meeting here organized by the Information Technology Association of America. "They can issue driver's licenses to whoever they want under whatever standards."

But he acknowledged that only a Real ID-compliant license will allow Americans to do things like board airplanes or enter federal buildings.

You don't have to pay the kidnapper, but he will kill your wife if you don't.

These guys crack me up with the way that they think that we are too stupid to see an unjustified federal intrusion for what it is.

Exactly

States find difficulty complying with Real ID Act
Sunday, April 29, 2007 12:14 AM CDT
Post a Comment | Email this story | Print this story



BY KATHERINE GLOVER
Medill News Service

The countdown is on. As of today, states have just 379 days to get their driver's licenses in compliance with the Real ID Act of 2005, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures Web site.

That means there's just more than a year to issue new driver's licenses and state IDs before the May 11, 2008, federal deadline -- even though the specifics of the new security standards have not been established yet.

To put it mildly, the states are not happy about it.

"It's a headache in many respects," said David Druker, press secretary for Illinois Secretary of State Jesse White.

Druker said the program will cost Illinois an estimated $150 million over five years, and so far the federal government has not offered a cent of help.

The Real ID Act sets minimum security standards for state identification cards, a response to the fact that several Sept. 11 hijackers had U.S. driver's licenses, some of them fraudulent. The act was tacked onto a military appropriations bill, and critics say it was passed with little debate by Congress and no input from the states, which will wind up footing 99 percent of a very big bill.

The Iowa Department of Transportation estimates costs of $22 million a year, plus start-up costs. Wisconsin has budgeted $22 million over two years, but that was before the Department of Homeland Security released preliminary standards on March 1.

"There were a number of things in those rules that we had not planned for in our budget," said Patrick Fernan, director of driver services for the Wisconsin Department of Motor Vehicles. "It's going to raise the costs."

Furthermore, everyone with a driver's license or state ID will have to renew it in person by May 11, 2013.

Illinois has about 8.5 million licensed drivers plus 3 million with non-driver's license photo IDs. The in-person renewal will strain the state's approximately 130 service centers. Druker said Illinois has worked hard to shorten lines and wait times at the state's approximately 130 driver service centers by offering license renewal online or by phone, but now these efforts will be undermined by the federal requirements.

Illinois is ahead of most states in tackling the Real ID changes, according to Druker, but there are still problems outside the state's control.

"One of the requirements is to have us confirm documents like birth certificates," Druker said. "But there's no national database of birth certificates, so how would you do that if someone comes from Alabama?"

The Illinois House of Representatives passed a resolution this month calling upon Congress to repeal the Real ID Act. At least 25 other states have passed or are considering similar bills. U.S. Senators Daniel Akaka, D-Hawaii, and John Sununu, R-N.H., have introduced a bill repealing Real ID, and Rep. Tom Allen, D-Maine, introduced a companion bill in the House.

The states will have to spend about $11 billion on Real ID, according to a September study by the National Conference on State Legislatures, the National Governors Association and the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators, all of which have expressed opposition to the requirements.

The federal government has appropriated only $40 million to help the states, and a proposed bill would allocate $300 million more over three years.


http://nwitimes.com/articles/2007/04/29 ... 645e44.txt

Vermont Extends Contract with Digimarc for Secure Driver License Solutions

BEAVERTON, Ore.-(Business Wire)-April 27, 2007 - Digimarc Corporation (NASDAQ: DMRC) today announced that Vermont, a long-time customer, has recently extended its contract with Digimarc for the supply of secure driver license solutions.

The State has signed a two-year extension with Digimarc providing for continued issuance of secure driver licenses, together with certain system upgrades, while meeting the Department of Motor Vehicles' demanding security and customer service goals.

"The Vermont Department of Motor Vehicles and Digimarc have a mutually supportive relationship that we are pleased to continue through this contract extension," said Bonnie Rutledge, commissioner, Vermont Department of Motor Vehicles. "As we prepare to address the forthcoming REAL ID requirements, Vermont is happy to have the support of Digimarc secure driver license solutions."

"Digimarc is happy that we have earned the continued trust of Vermont, a long-time customer and a leader among driver license issuers," said J. Scott Carr, executive vice president, Digimarc. "We look forward to working closely with Vermont as they prepare for the next-generation in secure driver license issuance."

About Digimarc

Digimarc Corporation (NASDAQ: DMRC), based in Beaverton, Oregon, is a leading supplier of secure identity and media management solutions. Digimarc provides products and services that enable the annual production of more than 60 million personal identification documents, including two-thirds of U.S. driver licenses and IDs for more than 25 countries. Digimarc's digital watermarking technology provides a persistent digital identity for various media content and is used to enhance the security of financial documents, identity documents and digital images, and support other media rights management applications.

Digimarc has an extensive intellectual property portfolio, with more than 300 issued U.S. patents with more than 6,000 claims, and more than 500 pending U.S. and foreign patent applications in digital watermarking, personal identification and related technologies. The Company is headquartered in Beaverton, Oregon, with other U.S. offices in Burlington, Massachusetts; Fort Wayne, Indiana; and the Washington DC area; and international offices in London and Mexico. Please go to www.digimarc.com for more company information.

Securities Safe Harbor

With the exception of historical information contained in this release, the matters described herein contain certain "forward-looking statements" that are made pursuant to the "safe harbor" provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Such forward-looking statements include statements containing the words "believes," "expects," "estimates," "anticipates," "will" or words of similar import or statements of management's opinion. These statements are subject to certain assumptions, risks, uncertainties and changes in circumstances. Actual results may vary materially from those expressed or implied from the statements herein or from historical results, due to changes in economic, business, competitive, technological and/or regulatory factors. More detailed information about risk factors that may affect actual results is set forth in filings by Digimarc with the Securities and Exchange Commission on Forms 10-K, 10-Q and 8-K, including but not limited to those described in the Company's Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006 in Part II, Item 7 thereof ("Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations") under the captions "Liquidity and Capital Resources" and "Factors Affecting Forward Looking Statements" and in Part II, Item 9A thereof ("Controls and Procedures"). Readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, which reflect management's opinions only as of the date of this release. Except as required by law, we undertake no obligation to revise or publicly release the results of any revision to these forward-looking statements.

http://digital50.com/news/
Gee, I feel safe already. Corporations having access to all of my private data, Um, gee NO THANKS. I wonder how many friends these corporations have in DC?

White House ID Theft Plan Soft on Industry, Critics Sayby Michelle Chen Apr. 27 – As stolen identities undercut the assets and privacy of Americans, public-interest groups say the White House’s new strategy to combat identity theft ignores core challenges of securing data in the Digital Age.


Your privacy is strictly respected. To privacy-rights and consumer groups, identity fraud reflects structural vulnerabilities, as technology casts sensitive records into more unknown hands. In response, groups are calling for much-tighter controls than those the White House proposes on how corporations and government agencies harvest personal information.

In recent years, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has recorded approximately 250,000 complaints of identity-theft fraud annually. A survey study by the data-analysis group Javelin Strategy and Research estimated total adult victims in the United States at nearly nine million in 2006, with the value of the fraud totaling $56.6 billion. Common violations, perpetrated by individuals as well as organized groups, range from credit-card forgery to assuming a new identity to cover up other crimes.

This week, a multi-agency White House task force led by the FTC and the Department of Justice released a plan to combat identity theft. Proposed measures include establishing national "breach-notification" requirements – procedures for notifying consumers when databases are broken into or improperly used – as well as a centralized "National Identity Theft Law Enforcement Center" to coordinate criminal investigations.

Privacy-rights groups say identity fraud reflects structural vulnerabilities, as technology casts sensitive records into more unknown hands.But overall, the report is light on explicit recommendations for new regulations on companies and agencies that handle sensitive information. Rather, it emphasizes further monitoring of the problem, such as studying how companies use social-security numbers.

Groups that have long tracked identity-theft issues say the plan shies away from glaring systemic problems.

David Sohn, counsel with the Center for Democracy and Technology (CDT), said the nation needs a "baseline privacy law" to replace the lattice of state and federal regulations that currently guard consumer data.

CDT and other groups are calling for national reforms to replace what they see as an outmoded federal regulatory regime. Currently, the Privacy Act of 1974 places limits on the exposure and management of records in government databases. And some companies that handle personal data, such as credit-reporting firms, are subject to various consumer-protection statutes, including safeguards for data-quality and confidentiality.

But Sohn said existing laws miss new security and privacy threats posed by the "revolution in data technology, in terms of the ability to gather, store and manipulate large quantities of data."

Reform advocates say consumer protections should not only keep people informed when data-security is breached, but also afford greater control over personal records before and after violations occur.

Groups like CDT say federal laws should explicitly guarantee consumers’ right to know what data is gathered about them, and the power to "freeze" credit reports to preempt fraud and misuse. As a preventative measure, they say, companies should be required to implement policies for securely storing and using data, backed with potential civil penalties for non-compliant firms.


Fundamentally, privacy and consumer groups say the most effective way to combat identity theft is to minimize the amount of data available for stealing. Groups such as the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC), for example, support strict limits on the use of social-security numbers as an identifier.

EPIC Executive Director Marc Rotenberg said fraud could also be deterred through laws that "make [companies] liable when harm results from the misuse of the data they collect." Forcing information-hording institutions to foot the cost of potential mishaps, he said, would be a built-in security check, as they would "internalize the real cost of collecting and using personal information."

The federal task force, however, does not support a "private right of action" for victims against companies involved in data-breaches. To report states that "the national standard should expressly call for actions that are reasonable… and should not adopt a one-size-fits-all approach to the implementation of safeguards."

Privacy advocates warn that a federal plan for mandatory national identification could impinge on, rather than shield, privacy. Jay Foley, executive director of the consumer and research group Identity Theft Resource Center, which is partially funded by ChoicePoint and other corporations, said imposing dramatic reforms on industry could backfire.

"If you were to take all these privacy rights and put them into one bill," he said, "you’re going to be fighting so much of the business community, from so many different directions, that the bill stands zero chance of getting anywhere."

But that potential resistance is precisely why others are trying to rein in companies.

Ed Mierzwinski, consumer-program director with the US Public Interest Research Group, criticized the task-force plan for not targeting loose credit-granting practices by retailers and other businesses. Companies recruit customers by extending credit as rapidly as possible, he said, which discourages data-security measures and invites identity theft.

On the lack of civil-liability provisions in the White House plan, Mierzwinski added, "There is no reason that the federal government should explicitly recommend against giving companies liability to consumers, unless it is in cahoots with industry."

Entanglement between the public and private sectors complicates regulatory issues, Sohn said. Though the Privacy Act guides the government’s handling of data and records, agencies today frequently investigate people using commercial databases. He said lawmakers must determine "to what extent those kind of protections should still apply when the government is relying on outsourcing to private-sector data brokers instead of doing it itself."

The data-screening firm ChoicePoint illustrates the high stakes of public-private cooperation. The company reported in 2005 that a massive data breach had affected the records of some 145,000 consumers. Yet soon afterward, ChoicePoint signed a five-year deal to help manage public records for the Internal Revenue Service. And its track record has not hindered it from becoming a service provider in assisting organizations with anti-terrorism background checks under the USA PATRIOT Act.

Ever-tightening links between information merchants and government bureaucracy helped prompt the recent introduction of the Personal Data Privacy and Security Act by Senator Bernie Sanders (I-Vermont) and Patrick Leahy (D-Vermont). The bill would authorize federal review of companies with government contracts with data brokers and impose penalties on them for failure to protect consumers.

The task-force plan has further alarmed critics by citing controversial security laws as deterrents to identity theft. For instance, the report touts extensive identity-verification rules under the REAL ID Act and related anti-terrorism statutes as consumer-protection measures, because they purportedly standardize how an individual’s data is documented and screened by authorities. Yet privacy groups oppose such laws, fearing they would lead to excessive surveillance under a single identification system and would create massive databases that were susceptible to inaccuracies or abuse.

In Rotenberg’s view, a federal plan for mandatory national identification could impinge on, rather than shield, privacy – especially when pursued under the rubric of national security.

"This administration has not aggressively enforced current privacy laws," he said, "and I think the consequence has been increasing risks to the privacy and security of the American public."


Sohn warned that entrusting too much data to any one system, private or government-run, is inherently dangerous. "Centralization and broad reliance on a single identifier," he said, "simply increases the risk of abuse by government, identity thieves, or others."

http://newstandardnews.net/content/index.cfm/items/4756

ID card hearing set at UCD
Controversial federal plan to standardize state driver's licenses to be aired in only national forum on Tuesday.
By Aurelio Rojas - Bee Capitol Bureau
Published 12:00 am PDT Sunday, April 29, 2007
Story appeared in MAIN NEWS section, Page A4

Print | E-Mail | Comments

Federal officials maintain that standardizing driver's licenses issued by states will improve national security. Opponents warn the proposed regulations would infringe on privacy rights and be exorbitantly costly.

On Tuesday, both sides will have their say when the U.S. Department of Homeland Security holds the nation's only public hearing on the 2005 Real ID Act on the campus of the University of California, Davis.

State officials from throughout the nation are scheduled to attend the four-hour town hall meeting, which begins at 10 a.m in Freeborn Hall.

Implementation of the Real ID Act, signed by President Bush in the aftermath of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, will lay the foundation for a de facto national identity card in a country that historically has been uneasy about such a document.

Final regulations are scheduled to be released sometime this year, giving states until May 2008 to comply. Residents of states that don't comply would not be able to use their licenses as identification when boarding a plane or entering a federal building.

Already two states -- Idaho and Maine -- have opted out, citing cost and privacy concerns. Other states are threatening to do so unless those issues are addressed.

No state is as critical to enactment of the law than California. Federal and state officials say that's a big reason why the state was chosen to host Tuesday's hearing.

There are about 25 million driver's licenses and identification cards issued in California by the Department of Motor Vehicles. The state also has some of the nation's most stringent privacy laws.

Californians can currently renew their licenses twice by mail, theoretically putting off a trip to the DMV for 15 years. But under the proposed Real ID regulations, drivers will have to renew their licenses in person and show proof of residency.

They would be required to present supporting documents, including certified birth certificates, unexpired passports, proof of Social Security numbers and proof of address documents.

DMV Director George Valverde said the proposed regulations would result in a crush of additional 2.5 million visitors to DMV field offices each year. It would also cost the state $500 million to $700 million over five years to comply, he said.

It's uncertain where the money will come from. The Real ID Act allows states to use some of their homeland security funding, but critics say this would increase vulnerability elsewhere.

"California's position continues to be that we believe this is a federal requirement," Valverde said. "Therefore, we are postponing any consideration for state funding, pending (additional) federal funding."

Valverde will deliver the opening remarks at the UCD hearing. He said he will ask Department of Homeland Security officials to phase in the regulations and give states flexibility on deciding which drivers are required to renew their licenses in person.

Real ID requires states to use federal verification systems to check birth certificates, passports, Social Security numbers and ID documents issued by foreign countries. But Valverde said not all these systems exist today.

He said California, which currently requires driver's license applicants to provide only a Social Security number and birth certificate, already "has a pretty high level of security."

But, he said, "we have some serious concerns about how personal information might be treated under the scope of the Real ID Act."

Valerie Small-Navarro, a legislative advocate for the American Civil Liberties Union in Sacramento, fears implementation of the regulations will lead to an increase in identity theft.

"They're creating this interlocking, 50-state database so that a DMV worker in Alabama, or a hacker in Nebraska, would have access to information on someone in California," Small-Navarro said.

The proposed regulations have brought together such strange bedfellows as the ACLU and conservative Eagle Forum, which argue there are insufficient safeguards to protect personal information.

Opponents are concerned that to satisfy the "electronically readable" provision in the law, licenses will be embedded with radio frequency identification chips that are already used in passports.

"We view this not as a slippery slope, but as a large water slide," said Sam Paredes, executive director of the 30,000-member Gun Owners of California, which maintains this technology allows information to easily be copied.

Opponents are lining up behind legislation introduced by U.S. Sens. John Sununu, R-N.H., and Daniel Akaka, D-Hawaii, that would repeal the Real ID Act's requirement for nationally standardized driver's license data and systems.

The legislation would create a rule-making body -- including representatives of motor vehicle agencies, elected state officials and Department of Homeland Security officials -- to establish minimum standards for states issuing driver's licenses.

Russ Kanocke, a spokesman for the Department of Homeland Security, said states and motor vehicle associations were significantly involved in drafting the proposed Real ID regulations.

He said the 60-day public comment period that began with the release of the guidelines on March 9 provides ample time for citizens to air their concerns.

"There's draft regulations that are available for the world to view and comment on in the Federal Register," Kanocke said. "And we encourage anyone with an opinion on Real ID to take advantage of that opportunity to provide their input to the federal government."



http://www.sacbee.com/111/story/163020.html

For those of you oppossed to this National ID Card Please Act Today after you complain about the Marching of the Illegals. Hurry, You mUST ACT TODAY ASAP!

http://www.alipac.us/modules.php?name=F ... c&p=343496

Groups Announce REAL ID Public Comment Campaign



WASHINGTON, May 1 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Citizens Against
Government Waste (CAGW) today joined with 43 diverse organizations to
launch a national campaign to solicit public comments to stop the nation's
first national ID system: REAL ID.

"REAL ID raises the specter of George Orwell's 1984 - the government
controlling a central database of personal information, which could be used
to monitor the coming and going of American citizens," said CAGW President Tom Schatz.

Passed quietly in May 2005, the REAL ID Act established strict and
costly federal minimum standards for state-issued drivers' licenses, even
though most states had already improved their methods of verifying and
securing IDs. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) estimates the total cost of implementing the proposed regulations will be $23 billion over 10 years. On January 25, Maine became the first state in the nation to demand repeal of the law and four others have followed since.

In March, CAGW declared a victory for taxpayers and drivers after DHS
released proposed regulations for personal identification that do not
mandate the use of radio-frequency identification (RFID) technology. CAGW has released two reports, Real ID: Big Brother Could Cost Big Money and Border Security: PASS Card Fails on Cost, Privacy, criticizing RFID-based identification.

"The rejection of an RFID chip was a positive development, but REAL ID
still threatens privacy and is a costly, unfunded mandate on the states.
Citizens must take the time to let DHS know they don't want Big Brother
watching," Schatz concluded.

The draft regulations to implement the REAL ID Act are open for comment until 5 p.m. EDT on May 8, 2007. To take action and submit comments against the fundamentally flawed national identification scheme, search http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main, under Docket No. DHS-2006-0030-0001.

Citizens Against Government Waste is a nonpartisan, nonprofit
organization dedicated to eliminating waste, fraud, mismanagement and abuse in government.



SOURCE Citizens Against Government Waste

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Related links:

http://www.cagw.org

http://link.toolbot.com/prnewswire.com/79524

Tuesday, May 01, 2007
DHS Honchos Get a Polite Earful on New ID Regulations
A combined online/ real-world townhall devoted to new federal standards for state-issued identification cards on Tuesday brought transgender activists, religious fundamentalists, anti-domestic violence groups together with the usual cast of civil liberties and consumer rights groups to criticize proposed rules that will make DMV visits around the country a more painful experience in hopes that future terrorists won't get real driver's licenses.

The rules will require individuals getting a new ID card or renewing their old one to acquire certified copies of documentation which DMVs will copy and store for years. States will also need to interconnect their databases.

Privacy groups say having DMVs store digital color copies of documents such as birth certificates will be a honey pot for identity thieves, while the database connecting all the states will be too tempting for data hungry feds.

Advocates for battered women say there's no reason that addresses should be printed on a driver's license and that any stalker with a friend at the local sheriff's office or DMV will be able to track down a target.

Transgender activists say the new rules about marking licenses male or female will make their already tough lives tougher when trying to explain to an airport security screener why their license says M when they dress F. Religious advocates see Real ID as just one more confirmation that the mark of the beast is nigh. Immigration rights groups protest the requirements will keep undocumented aliens from getting a license.

Throughout the four hours of questions and criticism, three Homeland Security officials kept their cool and stuck to the script that driver's licenses needed to be upgraded and that identification in the hands of a terrorist is a weapon.

Assistant Secretary Richard Barth, flanked by Jonathan Frankel and Darrell Williams, denied they were building a national identification card, and tried to empasize that the proposed requirements were intended to keep terrorists off airplanes.

But afterwards, Frankel told Wired News that applicants for Real ID licenses won't be compared against the government's centralized terrorist watchlist unless states choose to do so, a policy choice made to prevent people from feeling a heavy hand from the government.

The TSA provision that allows people to fly without identification so long as they agree to extra screening will also not be changed by the regulation, according to Frankel.

http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2007/0 ... s_get.html