Today's Seattle Times reports on the federal REAL ID law -- "REAL ID's cost angers state leaders"
The law, billed as an anti-terrorism measure, requires states to get proof that applicants for a driver's license or state identification card are U.S. citizens or legal residents of the United States.Those who reject the concepts of "citizenship" and "immigration laws" are upset:
"I think it will be hugely controversial," Senate Majority Leader Lisa Brown, D-Spokane, said yesterday. Brown said that in addition to money worries, there are also concerns about privacy and whether the law provides much of a benefit in return.Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at August 17, 2005 09:25 AM | Email This
"A little-noticed federal law passed earlier this year to create what amounts to a national ID card is expected to cost Washington state around $250 million over five years and spark a public outcry."
Nothing like some sensationalism to give a news article some zip, huh? How does the REAL ID Act "create what amounts to a national ID card"? It requires that the states actually do their homework before issuing an authoritive ID card.
Its time that the states quit whining about doing their duty and living up to their responsibilities. This supposed concern about citizens' privacy is a crock. If most people would consider how much information they readily volunteer to financial institutions they would have less of a problem with needing to prove who they are in order to drive and vote.
Posted by: Gary on August 17, 2005 10:05 AMThink about it long and hard: Do you really want the burden of proof to be on you to convince a government, any government, that you are who you say you are, just because such a policy might satisfy some short-term political goal?
When the political tides change in Washington DC, as they surely will someday, as they always have in this county, do readers of this blog want those policies in place, that might be used against them?
Does anyone really believe, for example, that RealID eventually wouldn't be used against gun owners?
RealID is the enemy of freedom, and true conservatives should oppose it, just as true liberals should. None of this should want this government, or any future government, to be that powerful.
Doncha kinda think the government already knows you exist? If you are in this country legally and pay taxes, work, own property and/or apply for credit, they've already got you fingered. Financial institutions and all levels of government probably know more about you than YOU do.
So let's get on with identifying the people who DON"T belong here so we can purge voter rolls, deny welfare benefits and ultimately ship illegal immigrants back where they came from.
To assist agricultural production, provide short-term work permits to those who can prove they have employment prospects in the U.S. and turn the rest back from closed and guarded borders.
Posted by: Saltherring on August 17, 2005 10:38 AM
When the lack of that burden creates a huge hole that is exploited to take away my rights and risk national security, and when that burden is a very small one: yes, I do.
Does anyone really believe, for example, that RealID eventually wouldn't be used against gun owners?
No moreso than the IRS is used against gun owners. That is no reason to abolish the federal income tax. (Though there are plenty of other reasons to do so ...)
RealID is the enemy of freedom, and true conservatives should oppose it
Oo, oo, I know, I can play this game too! How about this: It is un-American to favor policies that encourage noncitizens to have the same rights as citizens, and real conservatives therefore support RealID.
Oh, and this business about financial institutions is bogus. I don't have to deal with financial institutions if I don't like their business practices. That's a business decision I make as a private individual. I don't pay taxes to those financial institutions, and they don't answer to me.
I do, however, pay taxes to my government, and as you do, I demand that my government answer to me.
So it appears you guys are more statist than libertarian on this issue. Like I said, that's your choice. Enjoy it.
Posted by: Ivan on August 17, 2005 10:50 AMThis will have very marginal effects on illegal immigration and will effect the privacy of the law abiding.
Just like gun control... it has nothing to do about guns and everything to do with control. Just because a republican president signed a republican bill doesn't necessarily make it right or prudent.
Posted by: Bryan on August 17, 2005 11:04 AMGregoire Approval rating:
"Governor Christine Gregoire is viewed favorably by 51%"
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/2005/Washington%20Senate.htm
The poll mostly shows how strong Cantwell is doing.
"Cantwell is viewed favorably by 57% of Washington voters and unfavorably by 36%."
You have to wonder what the numbers might be like if we had an unbiased poller like Elway, or a Democratic poller cover the state. Given that most of the GOP is not even backing I-912, it would look like a bad election night ahead for the Grand Old Party in '06.
Posted by: JDB on August 17, 2005 11:22 AM
If you support closed borders, then you have to ask...how do we enforce it?
Their platform, and their futile votes for Ruth Bennett in last November's election (handing King County Elections the opportunity to steal the governor's office) will condemn the "Losertarians" status to that of the "Greens".
Posted by: Saltherring on August 17, 2005 11:53 AMSo bringing in the Libertarian Party is just confusing the issue. We're all libertarian on some issues, communitarian on others, and flat-out statist on others.
This RealID is just flat-out statist and authoritarian, and I haven't heard anyone here even try to deny it. Some of you appear to think that's OK.
That's your choice. But as one American to another, better hide the guns.
Posted by: Ivan on August 17, 2005 12:18 PMOh, surrrrrre...ROFL!!!
Posted by: South County on August 17, 2005 12:21 PM"A lot of big business interests, especially in agriculture, are opposed to immigration law enforcement as well. The antipathy towards immigration enforcement is widespread in both parties. We could easily enforce immigration in employment laws, but we don't do this."
Posted by: mel on August 17, 2005 12:44 PMFor the rest of you all who may not know yet - the whole libertarin/Libertarin schict is nothing but another liberal attempt to hijack otherwise intelligent people by promising them total freedom - something for everyone - Oh how so inclusive and immature -- IE - ANARCHY -- the Bolsheviks goal and tool toward seizure and control - just who were those guys in the masks at the Seattle WTO shindigs anyway???
Bill:
The intelligent people who read Sound Politics understand that this is issue by issue, and those are who I'm speaking to.
I sure didn't say anything about total freedom and anarchy. That's not what I'm for, or anything close.
So if that's all you can contribute, I have better things to do than respond to that.
Posted by: Ivan on August 17, 2005 01:10 PMDo you then also have an issue with folks having to get a concealed pistol permit in order to carry a pistol?
Posted by: Mike H on August 17, 2005 01:41 PMAgain, I predict the powers-that-be (Democrats, liberals, MSM) in our state fight this tooth and nail. IF this state complies at all, it will be at the last minute, and their punishment to us will be excessive cost. If they really cared about serving the people, or what we want, this would be on the ballot. Instead, we are going to see alot of wailing and gnashing from liberal soapboxes.
Good point duhh...we show ID for many everyday activities, ie. checking out library books, paying cash for auto tabs, walking through an airport, dvd rentals, medical care, the list goes on...but it is too intrusive to have to prove citizenship, or show ID, to vote. Truely twisted.
Posted by: dl on August 17, 2005 02:28 PMFirst.....They grab a Republican politician to denounce the REAL ID law....as though some RINO's
criticism of a common sense law would bring the true republicans over to the side of the liberal left!...... (Sorry - true Republicans know the importance of not rewarding illegal immigrants with legal ID's)
Second...The media tries to combine the REAL ID issue with the Supreme Courts ruling on Eminent Domain! Huh? As though somehow both of these issue are related? That is a liberal scare tactic!
Our state's Eminent Domain laws are supposed to be some of the strictest in the country! They have NOTHING to do with our *Liberal* Drivers License laws. Of course - if one were to truly explore what's been going on in our state with the oppressive CAO rules - one would probably reach the conclusion that our state's laws on Eminent Domain are not being followed and we, as citizens, are losing our property rights more than most other states!
I am all for implementing the REAL ID laws! Just watch the mass exodus of illegals from our state! Traffic will be lighter, school class sizes will be smaller, crime will go down, etc....I'm looking forward to it! Let Oregon and California deal with them!
As far as Eminent Domain laws in our state being changed by the feds due to the Supreme Court rulings? No. And I would think that this is a GREAT time to review our state laws on the matter of Domain and to end and repeal the illegal Critical Area Ordinance's completely!
Posted by: Deborah on August 17, 2005 02:34 PMThis is the state with the home owner associations who tell you when to put your trash cans out and when and what color you can paint your house. Most of those associations have covenants banning satelite dishes, American flags and political signs in your yard!
The legislature had to pass a law to override the covenants for the flags and the signs.
What liberty is left in Washington State? Oh, yeah, I forgot, the insance peace-nics can destroy property at the Port of Olympia, the lunatic left can riot in the streets of Seattle and the deliquents going to Evergreen can mud wrestle, smoke dope and have sex on the streets of Olympia for May Day!
Give me a break, it's hypocritical for the democrats to complain about this good law, when they want to control every other damn thing in your life!
It's all about illegal aliens, nothing else. I had to show my birth certificate to get my driver's license as proof that I was 16, they don't do that here??????????
Posted by: sgmmac on August 17, 2005 03:04 PMA driver's license is a privilege.
Being in a homeowner's association is a privilege.
A library card is a privilege.
Having a job is a privilege.
Doing business is a privilege.
Citizenship is an inalienable right for those of us who are born with it.
Thanks for demonstrating that some of you don't know the difference, or worse, yet, don't care.
Posted by: Ivan on August 17, 2005 03:20 PMTranslation: "Nobody has told us how we are going to replace all of the illegal votes."
Amazing that these idiots thumb their nose at such basic requirements, such as proof of citizenship in order to vote or get a driver's license. Meanwhile, they love pushing bad law, the the CAO, down our throats. Or, worse, VAWA.
Posted by: BananaLand (aka Iguana) on August 17, 2005 04:03 PMLiberals (and the RINOs who love them) use this word to characterize any measure, policy, activity, literary work, survey result, commentary, or fact that threatens their ability to maintain the status quo of misery and corruption that the pukedogs have foisted upon the population.
So when a liberal pukedog calls anything controversial, you can bet that it would be a good idea to put your support behind it for the good of society.
Posted by: ERNurse on August 17, 2005 06:51 PMGee… It “angers state leaders?”
Democrats are totally opposed to this requirement because it’s just one more step on the road of requiring proof of citizenship not only for a license, but for voter registration as well.
Democrats benefit from the fraud vote. They will oppose any action, law or regulation that will reduce the fraud vote because, ipso facto, that reduces their benefit.
Oh, they’ll never say that. They’ll come across like neo-comm democrat Sen. Lisa Brown, Majority Leader from Spokane, who is quoted in this story as saying
"’I think it will be hugely controversial,’ Brown said that in addition to money worries, there are also concerns about privacy and whether the law provides much of a benefit in return."
Nothing there about those BENEFITS might be, you understand. Just a bunch of nonsense about costs that they have absolutely NO idea will be required.
Some idiot claims a cost of $250 million over 5 years, apparently for ashington State alone. That’s a crock, for so many reasons.
First of all, once an individual’s citizenship IS established, it will not ever have to be RE-ESTABLISHED. Thus, the costs will NOT be repetitive. Second, what, exactly, will it take to establish that citizenship? That’s not mentioned, BECAUSE THESE PEOPLE DO NOT YET KNOW.
But let’s pick Joe Sixpack, from Seattle. Joe gets a copy of his birth certificate, which we already have to pay some absurd figure for, or some other form of ID, like a passport or military ID card. He has a Social Security Number as well.
He provides that ID to a counter worker at DMV. Counterworker copies everything and runs the Social Security Number for validity. The number comes back legit (You know, no more then one person using it and that one isn’t dead) or ilegit, in which case, INS is notified and the person is arrested.
How can a system like that cost $50 million per year?
Leftist goofballs hide behind a smokescreen of “cost” as a reason to oppose this issue. “As the word gets out about the law, the protest will snowball, predicts Jennifer Shaw, legislative director for the American Civil Liberties Union of Washington state. Lawmakers ‘are going to look at this budget request and hit the roof,’ she said.”
Like they “hit the roof” at democrat Rep. Deb Wallace’s $50 million-for-a-study-of-replacing-a-bridge-we-already-have “budget request?”
Nonsense.
Expect to see the scum of the ultra-left do all they can to fight this, although, in reality, there really isn’t anything they CAN do. The citizenship requirements for licenses, like the citizenship requirement for registering to vote are BOTH long overdue. And the people of this state and this country will SUPPORT these measures.
As for the leftists… they’ll just need to find another way to benefit from the fraud vote they so covet. Right, Governor?
Posted by: Who.... me? on August 17, 2005 07:00 PMThose who oppose proof of citizenship for voting would NOT want someone boldly trespassing in their back yard or helping themselves to their open house door & refrigerator--they would scream "private property!"
How about having some illegal alien (not working with you) have a say on your performance review at your job? And yet you would let them vote?
Valid ID (when actually asked for) is a driver's license, government photo id.... or utility bill.
What in any of the processes of these forms of ID GUARANTEE compliance with the Constitution and voting laws?
I haven't looked into RealID yet, but if our elected politicians and government workers follow that law as well as they follow the current laws, how will anything really be any different?
Citizens can vote.
Immigrants should be legal and not vote.
Illegal immigrants should not be encouraged to stay here illegally.
You don't have to look any farther than that.
Posted by: JCM on August 17, 2005 07:52 PMHow about immigrants that come to this country and become citizens? They have the right to vote.
I'm not sure I understand why you are opposed to having to show proof of citizenship to get a drivers license or ID card for those that do not drive (not a huge population here, but in NYC big). Those pieces of identification are used to gain all sorts of benefits in our country. Wouldn't it make sense then to make sure that those that have one are legal citizens?
Are you saying that for voting not to have to use a DL for identification? Fine. What would you use? I have my SS card and birth cert. I also have my voters card. I would bring all to validate who I am. I would expect the rest of americans to do the same. Don't give me some BS about it being a hassle or unfair or racist (not that you've stated that, but it has been by many).
We need to protect our right to vote and that ONLY American Citizens do. Without that all our liberties are taken away. Why? Cause those people are casting votes for people and those people win elections. Then you're stuck with them and the stupid laws they enact. (Sound like last fall yes, but not where I want to go).
Please don't be a freak and worry about big brother. Worry about the little brother who came across the border and is ruining our country.
Posted by: Dengle on August 17, 2005 09:15 PMI hear you on that. The moveon.org/WTO protester types that don't care about laws or ethics are the ones that would cheat because "its for the greater good comrades!".
The last part on ruining the country is votes and the fact that we spend all the extra money on healthcare, schools and welfare for illegals. If we had that money back, we'd be better off.
BTW - do you think Queen Christine will declare WA an emergency like Richardson in NM? Wait the legislature already did that...we're out of coffee emergency bill, no free cell phones? emergency! Corrupt elections, ah who cares.
Posted by: Dengle on August 18, 2005 08:46 AMhttp://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:BkW2DIMF4rYJ:www.toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article%3FAID%3D/20041019/NEWS09/410190343+chad+staton&hl=en
And when the Democrat officials are getting jailed for buying votes in Illinois:
http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/stories.nsf/0/26499957AE19ED438625702F0013FB5A?OpenDocument
They are having a tough time rigging elections these days!