It isn't often that the liberal American Civil Liberties Union and the conservative Cato Institute agree on something.
But that's exactly what's happened in the heated debate over whether the state of New Hampshire should comply with the provisions of the federal Real ID Act.
And, in this case, we agree with both of them.
Last year, President Bush signed into law the Real ID Act of 2005, which emerged from the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission report on the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.
New Hampshire Reps. Charles Bass and Jeb Bradley were among the co-sponsors of the legislation, which passed the House, 261-161, and the Senate, 100-0.
Under the law, beginning in 2008 states will be required to verify birth certificates, Social Security numbers, passports and immigration status before issuing a state driver's license. The U.S. Department of Homeland Security would have final say on whether the licenses meet federal guidelines.
If a state refuses to comply, residents would not be able to use their licenses as proper identification to board a domestic flight, enter a federal courthouse or to engage in other federal business. In those cases, a passport might be needed.
Proponents argue the bill was necessary to close loopholes that made it possible for terrorists to obtain driver's licenses and birth certificates while living in the country prior to carrying out the Sept. 11 attacks.
Opponents argue on privacy grounds that the law essentially creates a national identification card and as such violates their civil liberties.
While many European and Asian countries have adopted the use of national ID cards, the United States historically has rejected any move in that direction. In fact, even the Clinton's administration's attempt to create a "Health Security Card" in 1993 ultimately was rejected.
New Hampshire is now in the national spotlight as it threatens to become the first state in the country to stand united in defiance of the federal law.
Last month, the state House of Representatives voted overwhelming on a voice vote to support HB 1582, which would block the state from participating in a national identification card system on the grounds that it is both "contrary and repugnant" to the state constitution.
On Wednesday, the Senate Public and Municipal Affairs Committee voted unanimously with no debate to recommend the bill's passage. The full Senate is expected to vote on the measure in two weeks, and Gov. John Lynch has indicated that he intends to sign the bill should it reach his desk.
To be clear, New Hampshire is not the only state opposed to the Real ID Act. Both the National Governors Association and the National Conference of State Legislatures have expressed strong reservations over certain aspects of the law, and there is some expectation that other states might be waiting in the wings to follow the state's lead.
While we are sympathetic to the intent of the law -- and certainly don't take lightly the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission ---- we believe the state Senate should give HB 1582 its stamp of approval and send it to the governor for his signature.
