CTHB

« Gung Hay Fat Choy! | Main | Life as a Rowboat »

February 11, 2005

Real ID Act of 2005

For the most part, I go about my daily business much like any other American, which includes the various privileges that someone with a decent-paying job would enjoy. Under those circumstances, it's not hard to forget how shenanigans in Washington can affect me and my environment.

Enter the Real ID Act of 2005, which purports to increase security by making it harder for terrorists to obtain driver's licences. For the most part, I'd largely ignored the issue as a "sucks to be them" thing for the undocumented immigrants that need a licence to go about their (mostly) legitimate business of earning a living.

That was until I found out that driver's licences would expire along with any visa that you might hold. In my case, I have to obtain a new visa every year. This implies that I would have to get a new driver's licence every year.

That would be a real pain in the ass.

So, selfishly motivated to read up more on this, I really see very little merit in this piece of legislation. This doesn't come from a knee-jerk reaction, but from a decent amount of research and assessment. A very concise summary of the bill's shortcomings can be read at the People for the American Way.

The basic gist of it is this:

• The proposed measures would not have prevented any of the 9/11 terrorists from obtaining their driver's licences. They did that with "legal" documents that were fraudulently obtained. The proposed measures do not address how to prevent being suckered in by this method.
• Immigrants who aren't able to obtain driver's licences aren't going to stop driving to continue to make their incomes. The unintentional consequence would be a giant slew of unlicensed drivers. Irresponsible driving would be another unintentional consequence as the unlicensed driver would have an incentive to run after an accident, lest they get caught unlicensed.
• It puts a strain on state motor vehicle departments to play "immigration officer". The cost of implementing the plans would presumably come from state budgets.
• States that are unwilling or unable to comply would have their highway funds withheld. There's a double whammy. Spend money or lose money, and there's no guarantee that there's going to be an equitable trade in there at all. If nothing else, the highway system loses out as money that could have gone toward their upkeep would be diverted to maintaining the interlinked database system that is proposed.
• This is one step closer to a national ID card system.
• Oh, and it gives the Secretary of Homeland Security sweeping powers to waive laws without judicial review along the borders. Ostensibly, this is so that DHS can circumvent EPA laws that apply to a certain stretch of USA-Mexico fencing, but the law would mean it would apply to up to 7500 miles or so of border.

Bottom line, I see all these negative side effects for a drug that doesn't even solve the problem that it's supposed to solve.

Just what are they smoking over there?

Posted by KinCross at February 11, 2005 12:37 PM

Comments

Posted by: Fred Wolke at February 15, 2005 12:45 PM

Posted by: jlc johnson at February 28, 2005 01:59 PM

Posted by: Ian at February 28, 2005 03:53 PM

Post a comment

Name:

Email Address:

URL:
Remember Me? YesNo

Comments: