What if Real ID cards are: too expensive?

Let's imagine a world in which real ID cards are required for the majority of the poplulation, in order to have any dealings with the government. And for the moment let's assume that states refuse to lose money on them. Real ID cards will cost about $150 to get or to renew.

A lot of people will simply not be able to afford Real ID cards, and yet must have dealings eith the federal government. The cards could be a hardship for every member of large families below the poverty level. (Everyone who gets social security benefits may have to have a Real ID card.) Who will pay for their Real ID cards?

It would be quite an irony if states are allowed to charge such costs back to the federal government, which has, for now, made Real ID an unfunded mandate.

What is "official purpose"?

The same article I quoted just previously raises, apparently, an important constitutional issue in the Real ID law. Apparently Real ID cards will be required for federal "official purposes," but that term is undefined in the law. The term could be interpreted to mean that you can not vote in a federal election without a Real ID card. (Such an interpretation would probably be unconstitutional, as the courts have repeatedly struck down laws that make it signifigantly harder to qualify to vote.) But basically, without a definition of the term, it's impossible to anticipate who must buy equipment and pay guards to enforce the law.

In any case, many definitions of "official purpose" will require each state to bite the cost of supplying Real ID cards to far more people than registered drivers. And it's clear states will be losing money to supply these cards unless they are incredibly expensive.

States are more aware of the painful wait for the DHS ...

A web article at ContactLess News discusses awareness of the wait for the DHS to properly define Real ID so that it can be implmented. (With obvious hindsight, congress should NEVER have passed this law without requiring DHS to add its specification to the law first.) The writer, Andy Williams, says:

The act gave states until May 11, 2008 to comply. But comply with what? A year has passed since the act's adoption and the overseeing federal agency, the Department of Homeland Security, has yet to develop rules that would spell out those compliance measures. For example, what kind of ID card will be required? Will it have to have an RFID chip? And, most importantly, when will the rules for complying with Real ID even be issued?

According to Jarrod Agen, DHS spokesman, the first draft of the regulations won't even be published in the Federal Register until the second half of 2006. Then, there must follow public hearings and public input, so final rules aren't likely until early next year, he added. That would give states just a little more than a year to meet the guidelines.

The article also mentions joint recommendations by three groups to the DHS (AAMVA, governors and state legislators):

• A potential 75% increase annually in visits to motor vehicle agencies.
  
• The need for additional staff, facilities, training and equipment.
  
• Only flexible regulations can ensure compliance.
  
• Even if the regulations were in place now, there still isn't enough time to implement the requirements as defined by the statute. "The absence of timely regulations, systems and resources will ultimately overwhelm all good intentions," the document notes.
  
• Implementation costs will be significant ... States are in the process of conducting a fiscal impact survey to accurately define the level of resources needed to meet federal standards.