Thinking about Real ID

DHS has published the proposed details of the Real ID act and criticism is staring to pour on in from all sides.  The Real ID act is supposed to standardize the driver's licenses issued by the states.  Supporters say that this is necessary to improve security.  Critics usually focus on the weakening of privacy protections.  The arguments and counter-arguments usually don't bother to address each other and, lofted on volume not substance, quickly grow heated and dim.

There's a way to have a meaningful debate on this.  Any new security proposal must be compared to the status quo on four dimensions: Security, Privacy, Convenience and Cost.  If the new proposal is clearly better at all four, then it's a no brainer.  If the new program is worse on all four, then, well, it has no brains.  What if the new program is better on some dimensions but not on others?  Should we weigh the relative merits and compromise?  Yes, eventually, but not right away!  Since the new proposal enjoys the airy freedom of not actually existing yet, we should go back and rework the proposal until it is overwhelmingly better than the status quo. 

What is the status quo that Real ID is aiming to replace?  Basically, each state has their own standards for driver's licenses which differ on many of the important details.  The status quo sucks in terms of security and privacy and is lackluster in convenience and cost. Is Real ID overwhelmingly better?  Not yet, but it can be made so.

Let's.