Welcome, I'm Anastasia Glova and you're listening to the Cato Daily Podcast for Tuesday, April 3rd.

On March 26, Cato Scholar Jim Harper testified before the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs about the ugly realities of the Real ID Act,

signed into law in 2005.

For today's podcast, Jim explains why the Real ID Act is not only flawed, but completely misguided.

The Real ID Act came about as a response to a strong recommendation by the 9-11 Commission,

so why are you opposed to it?

Well, I have to reject the premise of your question, I'm sorry to say.

In fact, Real ID stripped out and replaced identification security provisions that were found in the Intelligence Reform and

Terrorism Prevention Act.

Now that was the product of the 911 Commission, but it's important to understand that the 911

Commission devoted about three quarters of a page in its 400 page report to the question of secure IDs and birth certificates and things like that.

So it was a weak recommendation of the 911 commission that was stripped out and replaced with real ID.

So we're quite a ways away from 9-1 Commission and National Security with the

Real ID Act. Then what is the Real ID Act meant to accomplish? Well the idea is

for the Real ID Act to make our driver's licenses and state-issued identification cards more secure

for alleged security benefits in response to terrorism.

And it's also, I think, intended sub-rosa to reduce illegal immigration.

That's the real support for it seems to come from folks who oppose illegal immigration.

So the idea is that if our identities are more carefully checked by state DMV's, the possession of an ID card

will prove that we're somehow more secure as to the society.

What are the costs of implementation for this law?

Well, the cost of implementation are very high and growing.

...