Real ID controversy

The federal Real ID Act, barely in its infancy, may be on its last legs. Intended to standardize state driver's licenses under the guise of fighting terror, the legislation has run into opposition from various local lawmakers, civil libertarians and privacy advocates.

Nevada lawmakers this week also signaled their ambivalence.

The notion that individuals should have to show identification in order to obtain a driver's license remains sound. But the Real ID Act would force millions of American citizens to traipse down to the DMV with a passport or birth certificate every time they seek to simply renew an existing license.

In addition to the inconvenience, many critics worry this law will be the precursor to some sort of national ID program.

Several states oppose the mandate, though, because it will cost money.

Because of the vocal opposition, members of Congress may consider overhauling the law. But what they'll come up with remains anybody's guess.

With the future of the mandate unresolved, a Nevada legislative panel on Tuesday put the brakes on allocating more than $26 million to implement Real ID. Instead, the Senate Finance and Assembly Ways and Means budget subcommittee voted to seek an extension from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security to comply with the law. The panel also approved a $100,000 expenditure for a project manager who would submit the state's plan for compliance.

This was the correct move. As state Sen. Bob Beers noted, lawmakers "are shooting in the dark" until Washington issues the final regulations this summer.

And in the meantime, lawmakers should continue to pressure our congressional delegation to support modifications in the law that address privacy issues and the potential massive inconvenience.