As we all know, many illegal immigrants are now establishing residency using an illegally obtained fraudulent driver's license to gain home loans for mortagages - and banks are giving it to them. But only if they can show proof of residency via a valid driver's license.
1) using an illegally obtained fraudulent driver's license
2) a valid driver's license.
so which is it? 1 or 2? it can't be both. sounds to me like the banks are breaking the law there.
Then prosecute them for fraud/forgery/perjury/etc. Hard.
Then prosecute them for violating immigration law. Hard.
There are laws. When someone violates them (serious crimes like ID fraud), prosecute the offender. Don't just go "oh well, we'll just have to inconvenience everyone else".
to gain home loans for mortagages - and banks are giving it to them. But only if they can show proof of residency via a valid driver's license.
That's the bank's problem. If they want to use unrelated IDs, they'll get wierd results. A mortgage has nothing to do with driving, so why do they accept driver's licenses? And so long as the mortgage gets paid, what's the problem as far as the bank is concerned? Of course, if the mortgage doesn't get paid, prosecute!
The thing that irks me about all this is the problem has nothing to do with driving. We're talking about driver's licenses: what the heck is a driver's license being used for non-driving issues for? And when using a driver's license to "secure" something (mortgage application, drinker's age, gov't benefits, etc.) are we, as conservatives, REALLY interested in securing the something in question? or is the problem the by-product of a socialist bureaucracy gone bad? Methinks turning driver's licenses into a National ID is a consequence of much worse problems: government control gone amuck.