State lawmakers yesterday ended a nationally watched attempt to keep New Hampshire from participating in stricter federal drivers' licensing rules. As a result, New Hampshire will likely become a testing ground for the new program, known as Real ID, which requires states to verify drivers' birth certificates, addresses and immigration status and to enter that information into a shared database.

Congress designed the system last year to reduce illegal immigration and deter terrorists, but opponents believe it's an invasion of privacy and the first step towards a national identification card.

After a complicated series of votes and hours of debate, lawmakers rejected two versions of a bill that would have barred New Hampshire from participating in Real ID. Lawmakers have been at odds for weeks over the plan: The Senate wanted to accept a $3 million federal grant in exchange for trying out the program. The House, meanwhile, was gaining national attention for trying to pass a law against it.

Yesterday, the Senate won, but victory came at a cost: The demise of a bill that would have granted the health commissioner broad emergency powers in the event of a pandemic.

"This is a classic case of legislative chicken between the House and the Senate,"said Rep. Neal Kurk, before leading his colleagues through a parliamentary gamble aimed at getting the Senate to change its opinion of Real ID.

Kurk, a Weare Republican, has been among the most vocal opponents of Real ID. When two-thirds of the House voted in favor of bucking the program, he earned the praise of privacy advocates, those who favor limited government and a group of Christians who believe a national ID card is the Biblical "mark of the beast" and, thus, a harbinger of the Apocalypse.

Real ID has also upset the National Governor's Association and the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators, who predict it will be too costly and time-consuming for many states.

At the same time the Real ID opposition was gaining furor in the House, senators were crafting a bill to help the state prepare for a health emergency, such as a pandemic flu. The proposal would have allowed the health commission, with the governor's approval, to seize and ration drugs, close buildings and prohibit public assemblies.

When the Senate voted to send the Real ID bill to a study committee instead of condemning the program, Kurk decided to use the pandemic proposal as an insurance policy. Yesterday, Kurk persuaded the House to vote down the pandemic bill in an effort to force the Senate to negotiate over Real ID. But the Senate called his bluff and refused to budge.

"A message was sent to the Senate, and a message was sent to the people of New Hampshire that their representatives have heard them," Kurk said. "This is not an extremist position. This is where, I believe, the heart of America is, not just New Hampshire."

Once the speeches were over and the dust had settled, both bills were dead, and plenty of lawmakers were unhappy. Top Senate Republicans chastised Kurk for putting privacy concerns over public safety, and they accused him of siding with groups like the Free State Project, a movement of libertarians who are migrating to New Hampshire to lobby for small government.

"He chose the Free-Staters over the health of the citizens of New Hampshire," said Majority Leader Bob Clegg, of Hudson. "That's wrong."

Clegg stressed that, before accepting the federal money, the state's Fiscal Committee would likely examine how to preserve privacy while tightening security. New Hampshire, like other states, has until 2008 to comply with the federal guidelines, which will be issued by the Department of Homeland Security this summer.

"There is nothing that stops us from forming an ad hoc committee," Clegg said.

Senate Democrats, who also oppose Real ID, said the House was forced into an impossible situation by senators who are out of touch with their constituents. Sen. Peter Burling, a Cornish Democrat, warned that the $3 million grant would cover just a fraction of the cost of Real ID. The federal law, he said, allows the government to change the rules, and could eventually to lead to licenses with computer chips or a national database of citizens.

Single page