Opposition continues to ‘Real ID’ driver’s license proposal

By Cy Ryan

Friday, April 23, 2010 | 3:43 p.m.

CARSON CITY – The state Department of Motor Vehicles has tried to modify its original higher-security driver's license system, but it ran into a barrage of criticism from citizens in Las Vegas, Carson City and Elko.

Diverse groups such as the American Civil Liberties Union, the Nevada Republican Party, the Independent American Party and Eagle Forum all testified against the regulation that calls for a dual system of an enhanced security “Real ID” driver's license and continuation of the current licenses.

Juanita Clark of Las Vegas called the proposed new license “a tightening of the government’s noose around our necks.” She said it’s “an assault on our liberties and a de facto national identification.”

Other speakers expressed similar comments.

The state agency initially proposed all citizens would have to get the new license. But after opposition at a hearing on Monday, the department changed the regulation to permit the present system to continue along with the new type of license.

Rebecca Gasca, public advocate for the ACLU, told the public hearing conducted by the DMV that Nevada is one of only three states moving ahead with the proposed regulation. She said 16 states have opposed it.

“Nevada should not be forced to enact a program – at a massive cost – that fails to serve Nevada’s interests,” she said.

Gasca complained that the proposed regulation permits the dual system to continue only until June 30, 2011, and then all citizens would be required to get the “Real ID” card that requires more identification and information.

That deadline in the regulation was inserted by the Legislative Counsel Bureau to allow the 2011 Legislature to decide whether it wants to continue with a dual system of drivers’ licenses.

Debbie Wilson, management analyst for the DMV, said the department was preparing a bill to submit to the 2011 Legislature to make the dual system permanent.

“We want to put the option in statute so it would not sunset,” Wilson told the public hearing.

More than 20 people testified against the proposed system. The most common complaint was that it would be a threat to privacy.

Jim Degraffenreid, chairman of the committee on legislation for the Nevada Republican Party, called the “Real ID” license a “federal intrusion on state issues” and “a dual system would be more expensive.”

Linda Bronstein of Las Vegas questioned the need for an emergency regulation. She and others suggested the issue should be up to the 2011 Legislature.

Bronstein complained there was “a lot of discretion by the director (of the DMV) to release the information to other bodies.”

She and other opposition speakers in Southern Nevada got applause each time from an overflow crowd at the Las Vegas session.

Janine Hansen, president of the Eagle Forum in Elko, called the DMV “tyrants” who “are unfit to be rulers of the people.” She called for the resignation or firing of Edgar Roberts, the director of motor vehicles department, for an “abuse of power.”

She complained that the present law would permit other government agencies access to the increased information required in the new driver's license format. She predicted the dual licensing system would result in an increase in the waiting times to conduct business with the state agency.

The department has spent $788,390 in state highway funds and $1.399 million in federal grants to develop the “Real ID” card. It says that returning only to the present system would cost an additional $410,000.

Other speakers said a “Real ID” system could cost citizens more. They would have to gain documents such as birth certificates from other states, which costs $30-$50.

The proposed regulation will go before the Legislative Subcommittee to Review Regulations on April 28. If approved, the regulation would become effective April 30, starting the dual system.

So far, 46,000 drivers have asked for the “Real ID” license.