Documents show Alabama Department of Public Safety has serious concerns about new driver’s license law
Jan. 13, 2006
MONTGOMERY -- Newly obtained documents reveal that Alabama state officials are concerned that federal legislation called the Real ID Act will require extensive changes to existing practices at the Department of Public Safety, will be extremely difficult to implement by the Act’s deadline, and will carry heavy expenses that have to be absorbed by Alabama taxpayers and license applicants. The Act, passed by Congress last spring, imposes federal regulations on the design, issuance and management of state driver’s licenses –turning them, for all practical purposes, into federal identity papers.
“Civil liberties groups, conservative groups, immigration groups – we’ve all been saying that Real ID will be a real disaster and needs to be revisited by Congress,” said Olivia Turner, Executive Director of the ACLU of Alabama. “These documents indicate that Alabama DPS officials – the people actually responsible for carrying out this ill-conceived law – also have serious problems with Real ID.”
The documents are part of a national survey of state motor vehicle officials conducted in August 2005 by the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators (AAMVA). The documents were first described yesterday in reporting by the Associated Press. A copy of Alabama’s response to the survey was obtained by the ACLU.
“Alabama officials are right to be concerned,” said Olivia Turner. “Real ID will likely mean higher taxes and fees, longer lines, repeat visits to drivers’ license offices, bureaucratic snafus, and, for some, the inability to obtain a license. To top it off, it will do little if anything to prevent terrorism.”
Ms. Turner noted that the national survey responses showed that the concerns expressed by Alabama officials are broadly shared by motor vehicles administrators around the country. For example, no state that responded to the survey seems to believe it is possible in the near future to link all the motor vehicle information databases between all states, as the statute requires. And 3 in 4 states reacted with “medium” to “high” concern to Real ID’s extensive new document-verification requirements, which they said would involve major systems changes and increased hiring – and that assumes that AAMVA or the federal government will build electronic systems for verification.
In responding to the survey, Alabama officials cited numerous serious concerns and raised significant questions about the practical effect of the law. Chief among them are worries stemming from requirements related to the mandate that identification presented by everyone seeking a driver’s license or non-driver’s license ID be verified with the source that issued it. One such requirement obliges the State to have a system capable of digitally capturing images of documents from the issuing entities or sources in a manner that allows them to be retained in electronic storage in a transferable format. According to Alabama officials, the impact of this requirement will be significant because the necessary equipment is available at only six district offices and the State does not have the resources to equip all seventy-nine offices.
Another provision requires the State to retain paper copies of these “verification at source” documents for seven years or digital images of them for ten years. In responding to survey questions about the impact of this particular requirement, DPS officials noted that the Department will not retain paper out of security and cost concerns and that the hardware and storage space required to meet this requirement will be extremely costly. Another of the law’s requirements, which DPS noted would have a massive impact on the Department, is the mandate that the State resolve discrepancies arising when social security numbers are associated with more than one person to whom any state has issued a driver’s license or non-driver’s license ID.
“This survey confirms the short-sightedness of Real ID,” said Lori Raphan, Staff Attorney for the ACLU of Alabama. “Fortunately, the opposition to this law is so broad – and is becoming broader as more people figure out what it will do and what it will cost – that there is a very good chance Congress will have to take it up again.”
“Congress needs to do this right and actually hold hearings, listen to all the different interests and real-world practical difficulties, and give it an up-or-down vote, none of which happened when it was rammed through last spring,” said Barry Steinhardt, Director of the national ACLU’s Technology and Liberty Project. “Alabamians need to join with others around the country and help block this disastrous law before it’s too late.”
Alabama’s response to the AAMVA survey along with other documents is online at www.realnightmare.org.
###