Much of the debate over Real ID is focused on cost, Big Brother-intrusions and what amounts to a national identity card -- all valid arguments against the new licenses. It's not government's place to keep tabs on citizens. An all-purpose identification card could be followed next by the requirement, as in most other countries, that individuals carry their papers at all times and present them on demand, with or without reason beyond the all-purpose justification of "security." The card, once just a license to drive (which is all it should be), becomes a required domestic passport. But whether one agrees with those arguments or not, there's a more valid reason to reject the new licenses: The federal government's rationale for Real ID doesn't hold up....
The editorial mentions why the REAL ID Act won't help us--based on the history of the 9/11 attacks. I encourage you to visit the site and follow the rest of the article.
Here's one more quote:
The attacks were preventable -- not with better driver's licenses, not even with such draconian laws as the USA Patriot Act or the domestic surveillance of e-mail and international calls, but with more intelligent, more imaginative, less juvenile intelligence work, and with more modern computer systems and analytical procedures in the nation's premier intelligence agencies. On those counts, the country is still behind. On Real ID's count, the country is rushing toward adoption of a national identification system that is neither necessary nor wise, all the while detracting from more serious vulnerabilities.
Read more here.