In 2011, when the Republican-controlled General Assembly passed a bill thumbing its nose at the federal Homeland Security Agency's 2005 REAL-ID initiative, it was hailed as a bold in-your-face for states' rights.

Why should our residents have to pay for a multimillion-dollar unfunded mandate when we have a perfectly safe and secure ID system now, the legislators wanted to know.Well, after granting the state numerous extensions to comply with the regulation, the feds have run out of patience. Beginning Jan. 30, residents of Pennsylvania and four other states, which also are not in compliance, won't be able to use their driver's licenses to enter federal facilities. There will be an exception for residents who want to apply for such things as Social Security or veterans' benefits.But, wait, there's more: Starting in 2018, we won't be able to show our license as a form of legal ID to board commercial flights. That's when the real inconvenience will start. You'll have to use a passport or other form of ID acceptable under the REAL ID Act. These might include a military ID or a border-crossing card.This all came about after the 9/11 attacks as a way to bolster security. The hijackers got valid ID cards issued by several states, according to the FBI, and a committee formed to make recommendations in the aftermath of 9/11 encouraged the federal government to come up with national ID standards to help eliminate fraud and terrorism. The regulation requires states to develop licenses with anti-counterfeiting measures and to file photographs and other essential information into a federal database.In addition to the unfunded mandate issue, opponents of the federal act say it is an unwarranted assault on privacy. Pennsylvania officials say that it would cost upward of $300 million to replace the existing licensing system, which includes more than 9 million driver's licenses and nearly 1.7 million photo ID cards, and it could take up to 24 months to do it.The Department of Homeland Security also sent letters of noncompliance to Kentucky, Maine, Oklahoma and South Carolina. Pennsylvania, however, is the only state that adopted a law forbidding compliance.The state Department of Transportation finds itself between a rock and a hard place, because even if it did want to comply with the feds' regulation it can't because of the state law forbidding it."That will be a real burden on people if they can't use their license to get through airport security," said Rich Kirkpatrick, spokesman for PennDOT. "We've done everything we can do under state law," he explained, noting that some changes were made to the licenses. The federal government said it was not good enough.The sponsor of the state law, Sen. Mike Folmer, R-Lebanon, is unrepentant, even defiant. "I'm not apologizing for introducing that bill," Folmer told the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette earlier this year. "I just believe the feds are wrong. … It's an unfunded mandate that we can't afford at a time when we are having budget problems of our own."Folmer insists the current license system has safeguards in place to ensure security. He called the federal act an invasion of his freedom. "I wish someone would show me how this card would make me safer," he said.Folmer said he and other legislators never meant to inconvenience residents, but he insists that this is a matter of principle and a violation of the U.S. Constitution's 10th Amendment protecting states' rights. He said if one of his colleagues introduces a bill to attempt to comply with the federal directive, he will vote against it.We sympathize with our legislators about the issue involved here and agree that the financial burden to implement a compliant system without federal help is asinine. We, too, are concerned by the federal government's overreach in this case and its violation of the 10th Amendment.We applaud the American Civil Liberties Union's criticism of this regulation, citing more than 60 problems for states and individuals that it says the Homeland Security Agency refuses to address.There must be some common ground to be occupied by all parties involved, because if the federal government's position remains unchanged, the result will be a major burden and inconvenience for many Pennsylvania residents.By Bruce Frassinelli |

tneditor@tnonline.com