I think Paul is overreacting. We already have social security cards, so why is adding a photo to it such a bad idea? What is the big difference between a Voter ID card with a photo and a social security card with a photo? The only objection I can think of is cost, because the photos would need to be updated periodically.
Some of the phony duplication is quite good. Some of the duplication of phony IDs has become so good it is indistinguishable from those given out by governments worldwide. If an FBI person was to come to my door and show me their ID to gain entry into my home ... I could not be certain the ID was legitimate. The criminal forces producing duplicate IDs have become that good with their production methods.
Biometrics are not foolproof as has been mentioned. Biometrics can be reproduced in lab conditions. Retina scans may possibly be the only foolproof method but that information would have to be encoded on the card as well. Then we set the situation to be ripe for new technology to reproduce retina information for the monitor. It seems like nothing can be done with to lower astronomical costs and then there is no foolproof method, regrettably. Becomes a No win in this approach of photos because the ID could be stolen and is for certain duplication can be done.
Same with the money. No method exists to keep counterfeiters from making duplications that can pass as legitimate, if the counterfeiter is good enough to understand the necessary methods to reproduce something phony. Jobs are created though and the criminal element produces jobs to counter. Is always a vicious cycle and no I do not hold the answer as how to stop this vicious cycle. Wish I did hold the answer. I'd be rich.