States May Disobey Drivers License Rules

Newsday ^ | May 10, 2005 | Suzanne Gamboa

[auzerais]

States May Disobey Driver's License Rules

By SUZANNE GAMBOA Associated Press Writer May 10, 2005, 8:19 AM EDT

WASHINGTON -- States are threatening to challenge in court and even disobey new orders from Congress to start issuing more uniform driver's licenses and verify the citizenship or legal status of people getting them.

There is concern among some states that they'll get stuck with a large tab to pay for implementing the new rules and that getting a driver's license will become a bigger headache for law-abiding residents.

"Governors are looking at all their options. If more than half of the governors agree we're not going

[ArmyTeach]

"just another way to get a federal ID card without legislating it." And getting the states to do the work and foot the bill...Having said that, I have no problem with providing proof of identity, residency and citizenship. Don't think that's anything new, at least not in places where state gov'ts are doing their job.

[afnamvet]

Well, if the government had secured our borders after 9/11 and the states just didn't issue licenses to just anyone, and the social security admin verified a person's citizenship before handing out a number, and illegals we detained and deported always, then maybe such a thing would not come to pass. Americans are not forcing this issue. The government not enforcing its own laws are causing the problem.

Very precise and well said.

[GrandEagle]

have no problem with providing proof of identity, residency and citizenship.
I agree. It is in fact stunning that these would not be requirements. I do believe that it is a state responsibility though.

Cordially,
GE

[RSmithOpt]

Thank you and thank you for your service to this great country when called.

31st Fighter Wing Tuy Hoa AB RVN 68-69

You fly/support the Thud and or Phantom?

[iopscusa]

What do you mean, you and I are already monitored in many ways, if we use credit cards, driver license, cell phones...this is just another layer to pull it all together and make it eeefficient for the foot patrols!

[weaponeer]

I said - there is no such thing as reciprocity anymore

You said -There is in many areas such as marriage and driving.

Do you think Alabama is going to recognize a Mass. same sex marriage? If two gays "married" in Mass. move to Alabama, do you think AL is going to recognize it for state income tax purposes? Or probate? I don't think so.

[dirtboy]

Do you think Alabama is going to recognize a Mass. same sex marriage?

'bama would recognize a hetero marriage from another state. Like any system, reciprocity will face challenges from idiots like the Mass Supreme Court from time to time.

[Paleo Conservative]

And what constitutionally, enumerated Congressional power would you like to cite as justification for such a prohibition.?

Last I checked the US Constitution gave the federal government the power to regulate interstate commerce. While it doesn't say anything specifically about a power to regulate airplanes and aerial navigation (the airplane wasn't invented till 114 years after the Constitution came into effect in 1789), it very specifically gives Congress the power to legislate with respect to navigable waters.

Any plane with enough fuel on board to allow it to overfly the airspace of another state is potentially a hazard to people on the ground in that states. According to some of the engineering experts interviewed after 9/11, the force of the explosions caused by the 767s that crashed into the WTC were equivalent to a 1-2 kiloton explosion. That's as powerful as a tactical nuclear weapon. To say that the federal government should have no power to regulate such a potential hazard is ridiculous.

If states want to allow illegal aliens to have drivers licenses, I don't care, but I think other states ought to be allowed to not recognize drivers licenses from states that issue them to illegal immigrants. The Congress under the full faith and credit clause can write legislation regulating how official acts of states can or must be treated by other states. The federal government is well within its authority to ban the use of substandard state issued identification documents for boarding aircraft.

[muawiyah]

Let's see ~ "papers please" happened to me this morning at a restaurant, then at a grocery store.

Where are you guys talking about?

[muawiyah]

BTW, as you've no doubt discovered from other posts, Congress sets the law regarding immigration and citizenship. It's been that way since the adoption of the Constitution.

You must have missed it at the time, eh?!

[muawiyah]

Government Check points I've managed to hit the last few days:

1. Bursar's Office at Indiana University

2. Post office mailing 3 parcels

3. Pennsylvania Turnpike

[muawiyah]

BTW, the driver's license once upon a time attested to your driving skills. It changed character long before I was born many decades ago. In more recent times state motor vehicle drivers licensing operations have begun identification documents to non-drivers.

It's good to keep up on the news you know.

[muawiyah]

Hey, my original answer said the money was raised with a federal tax ~ not that the money came from Washington. You guys are straying off into an issue that's not germane to this thread.

[muawiyah]

The bureaucracies do not suck up half the money ~ Social Security beneficiaries do that!

[muawiyah]

Did you know resident aliens (including foreign students) MUST be issued a social security number so that IRS can make sure that if they owe any federal taxes, collection may ensue with reasonable levels of efficiency.

Same with 2 year olds ~ gotta' get them a social security number.

I remember when resident aliens and babies didn't have to have those numbers.

Not sure why you guys think checking citizenship would do something when it comes to numbers that even non-citizens are required to have!

You might explain a citizenship check of any kind would "do something"!

[Paleo Conservative]

Let me take a run at it. A drivers license verifies that the person to whom it was issued is a competent driver. Whether or not he's a citizen, or who he says he is, isn't really germane; the only question is "can he, whoever he is, meet the standards set for being a safe driver?"

Not true. In Texas and probably most other states, the address listed on the drivers licence must be the real physical address of the person to whom it is issued. If someone specifies a phoney address, it will not be delivered and it will be sent back to the DPS. The last time I got my license renewed, I also had to have both of my thumbs scanned on a fingerprint reader. At least in Texas a drivers license not only is a document stating that the person is qualified to operate particular types of motor vehicles with particular restrictions but also a document verifying that the person is who he says he is and lives where he says he lives.

[freepatriot32]

Libertarian ping.To be added or removed from my ping list freepmail me or post a message here

[tahiti]

"If the founding fathers did not mean for the federal government to regulate this type of commerce, why did they ever put that clause in the Constitution?"

Regulate to the founding fathers, did not mean "prohibit."

A scholarly work has been done on this subject of regulation versus prohibition.

THE ORIGINAL MEANING(not to be confused with "original intent") OF THE COMMERCE CLAUSE Copyright (c) 2001 University of Chicago University of Chicago Law Review - Winter, 2001 - 68 U. Chi. L. Rev. 101

Randy E. Barnett

The gist of Prof. Barnett's work is the the founding fathers acknowledged that rights could be regulated but not prohibited unless the right exerted was a wrongful act.

Since the right to "keep and bear arms" is an enumerated right, obviously not a wrongful act, then Congress can regulate but not prohibit.

[tahiti]

"Last I checked the US Constitution gave the federal government the power to regulate interstate commerce."

See post numbers 62 and 118.

[CharlesWayneCT]

And how exactly does giving you a secure ID which proves you are who you say you are limit your freedom?

It's the NEXT step. It's Always the NEXT step.

Let's believe in freedom. Lets REALLY believe in freedom. Remove the joke we call security at the airport. Stop making us get driver licenses to drive a car -- that just limits my freedom. Tear down the border fence, it limits freedom.

Get rid of Social Security, it's a number that identifies us and allows someone to track our every dollar earned for our entire lives.

I'm serious. I like freedom, and if we are willing to really GO for freedom then let's do it.

We won't win any votes, but we'll hang on principle.

If on the other hand you don't want to take freedom to its limits, lets not pretend a slightly more standardized driver's license is the death-knell of liberty.

I'm sorry, that got a little too passionate.....