It was disappointing to read the misleading statements by Stewart Baker, assistant secretary of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, in his letter "Real ID offers real protection" (June 22).
As a Maryland state legislator who has been working closely with our Motor Vehicles Administration as well as with national state advocacy organizations on driver's licensing issues, I know that the Real ID Act is one of the largest unfunded federal mandates ever imposed on the states.
Furthermore, Real ID is not "simply a set of minimum security standards," as Mr. Baker claims.
The Real ID Act requires states to undertake expensive and substantive changes in the ways they license drivers.
But neither the act nor the federal government's final regulations on its implementation set out data security standards. Instead, they leave it to the states to determine and pay for the yet-unspecified level of security that will be required to protect residents' personal information.
In recent years, Maryland has invested more than $40 million to make our driver's license one of the most secure in the nation.
The Real ID law would force us to throw away that investment by Maryland taxpayers and supplant our existing security system with one that uses less-secure national databases and provides less protection of drivers' personal information.
Last week, Arizona became the 10th state to opt out of Real ID when Gov. Janet Napolitano, a Democrat, signed a bill passed by a Republican-led legislature.
Next year, I hope that Maryland will act in a bipartisan manner and follows the lead of our sister states that have said no to Real ID.
We can and should provide more secure driver's licenses without the costs and threats to privacy posed by the Real ID law.
Ana Sol Gutierrez
Chevy Chase
The writer represents District 18 in the Maryland House of Delegates.
No comments:
Post a Comment