Bob Barr talks Real ID

Stasi, the infamous East German secret police service that terrorized that country's citizens for decades until the Berlin Wall fell in the late 1980s, reportedly collected and maintained every conceivable type of intelligence on subjects and potential targets.

Discovered in its vaults following the reunification of Germany, for example, were sealed vials supposedly containing samples of scents that could be used at some point to identify particular people. The technology was such that at the time these samples were collected --- many in the 1950s and 1960s --- they were laughably worthless. The East Germans were simply ahead of their time.

The emerging science of "biometrics" --- the use of technology for measuring and analyzing a person's physiology or behavioral characteristics --- is now all the rage in Europe, the United States and elsewhere. It is being employed to develop recognition patterns for virtually every human characteristic, including one's gait and the veins in one's hand or other body parts, and --- you guessed it --- body odor.

While many of us can recall the unpleasant experience of having been placed in too-close proximity to someone with decidedly bad body odor on an elevator or, worse, on a transoceanic flight, probably few of us worried about the government gathering, analyzing and retaining digitized data on our body odor that could be someday used to identify us to a government agency without our knowledge. Yet, this could very well happen, and sooner than you think.

Serious problems are coming to light regarding the use of biometric data, particularly when it is digitized and stored in radio frequency identification chips that can be surreptitiously scanned or cloned. Even the U.S. State Department, which professes great concern for the safety of Americans who travel abroad, is moving ahead with plans to implant such devices in passports.

The Transportation Safety Administration is likewise hurtling forward with plans to develop a national identification card that virtually all Americans will have to carry within two years. This "Real ID" will contain biometric data on its holder, including most likely an RFID chip with all sorts of private data embedded therein.

Is anybody minding the store? Is anybody focusing on what this all means and how public policy-makers will pay at least passing attention to the very serious privacy problems inherent in biometric data gathering? The answer --- at least here in Georgia --- is yes.

In March, the General Assembly passed a resolution establishing a Study Committee on Biological Privacy. The committee is charged with studying "the conditions, needs, issues and uses of biological information and technology by government and private entities," and held its first public hearing June 30. Its next hearing is scheduled for Aug. 30, with additional hearings in the fall. The committee is chaired by state Rep. Ed Setzler (R-Acworth), a freshman legislator who is an engineer in his civilian life. Luckily, the committee counts among its four other members Rep. Barry Loudermilk (R-Cartersville), another privacy champion who authored Georgia's law repealing the mandatory fingerprinting of driver's license applicants.

Setzler and Loudermilk, and their colleagues, Reps. Calvin Hill (R-Canton), Sharon Cooper (R-Marietta) and Tyrone Brooks (D-Atlanta), have their work cut out for them. Even as the federal government moves rapidly forward with plans to digitize private data on and about all of its millions of subjects, with virtually no oversight, Georgia and other states are proceeding apace at their level. Myriad private companies are developing new ways to collect, store and manipulate biometric data. While some data-oriented companies, such as ChoicePoint, exhibit a laudable concern for the privacy of such data, many others do not. Looming offshore is the massive problem that foreign companies and governments --- not subject to even our country's inadequate laws to protect the privacy of data --- are gathering huge quantities of private data that move effortlessly and constantly across the Internet.

Setzler clearly grasps the need for a comprehensive and continuing focus on these emerging privacy issues, especially as it relates to biometrics. He emphasizes that his committee must "look into the future and proactively address emerging issues." Given the vital importance of these issues and knowing how difficult it is to put the biometric genie back in the bottle once it is released, it is hoped that both Gov. Sonny Perdue and our state Legislature will not only extend this committee beyond its Dec. 31 expiration date, but also give it subpoena and legislative powers so it can do more than simply study the issues it considers.

* Former congressman and U.S. Attorney Bob Barr practices law in Atlanta. Web site: www.bobarr.org.

mail@bobbarr.org

LOAD-DATE: August 23, 2006


****************************************

Copyright 2006 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
August 23, 2006 Wednesday
Main Edition
SECTION: EDITORIAL; Pg. 17A

LENGTH: 811 words

HEADLINE: Intelligence gets too close and personal

BYLINE: BOB BARR; For the Journal-Constitution