License? We Don't Need No Steenkin' License!

There are a few scenes in classic movies that are so effective that the dialogue has passed into the common language. One of those is in The Treasure of Sierra Madre. Mexican bandits have confronted American gold miners, including Humphrey Bogart. The bandits claim to be federal police.

Challenged to produce their badges, one gives the memorable reply, “Badges? We don’t need no steenkin’ badges.” And then they begin shooting.

Well a situation began in New Jersey, then played out in the Court of Appeals of Maryland, which justifies the modified use of that line. It also should concern all citizens of the US who care about where this nation is headed.

Ramiro Silba Alavez, a citizen of Mexico, got a drivers license in New Jersey by presenting false documents which represented that he was a US citizen and a resident of New Jersey. NJ required that anyone seeking a drivers licence there show proof of citizenship. Somehow, NJ got word of his false documents and “withdrew” his license after it expired in 1991.

Senor Alavez, being both cheeky and resourceful, then moved to Maryland, which doesn’t bother to check whether a license applicant has a legal right to be there. Alavez applied for a Maryland license. That was denied because Maryland does prohibit granting a license to anyone whose license has been suspended in another state.

Alavez doesn’t sound like a man of means, but with the help of support groups for illegal immigrants, he took his case to the highest court in Maryland, the Court of Appeals. The majority there just ruled on 9 January that the DMV was correct to deny a license to Alavez, not because he was an illegal immigrant, but because his license was suspended in another state.

It was six years ago that I was invited to meet with a group of state legislators from around the country, on the subject of drivers licenses. Keep in mind the reciprocal rule, that anyone who has a license from one state could go to any other and get a new license there.

That made the entire process of issuing drivers licenses as weak as the laws of the weakest state. That’s why all of the 9/11 highjackers were carrying multiple licenses from many states. I told those state legislators that either they would work with each other to establish minimum standards for proof of citizenship, or Congress would set a standard and compel the states to follow.

The states did not act together. Congress has forced the issue, and the Homeland Security Department has just issued the final regulations for all states to adopt those minimum standards.

Our northern and southern borders are still as porous as Swiss cheese. We don’t have a big problem with Canadians sneaking across the border because their standard of living is about the same as ours. But we have a huge problem with Mexicans because the US has become the ad hoc welfare department for Mexico (and a hundred other nations).

This presents a related set of problems: higher costs for education, welfare, hospitals, police departments, prisons, plus the dangers from drug dealers and terrorists, plus the problem of foreigners voting in American elections. All of these problems are made worse by the issuance of drivers licenses to illegal aliens. These points are all obvious, but not obvious enough for the Governor of New York, the California legislature (and several others), plus some pathetic positions on this issue taken by certain Democrat and Republican candidates for President.

It ought to be obvious that American elections, hospitals, schools and the like are paid for by American taxpayers for the benefit of American citizens. The idea that any aliens who sneak across the border are entitled to the same things simply because they’ve got a bad deal in whatever third-world nation they come from, will bankrupt local, state and national governments in the US, as well as challenge the integrity of our elections.

The answer to the question in the title is that we DO “need steenkin’ licenses.” To vote, to drive, to board an airplane, we need to restrict licenses to actual, live, American citizens. Anyone who thinks otherwise is participating in the piecemeal destruction of America.

People who hold public office, or who aspire to public office, have as their first duty the preservation of the United States of America. Those who do not understand this, should be driven out of public life as quickly as humanly possible.

About the Author: John Armor practiced in the US Supreme Court for 33 years. John_Armor@aya.yale.edu He lives in the 11th District of North Carolina.

I appreciate your opinion on the matter of licensure, and in my estimation it does touch on a number of important issues. In the end, I do not agree with your final conclusion, but let me explain why before you express your reasons for disagreement with me further.

What are the main issues that spur this sudden demand for rock solid identity these days? It is my opinion that the contributing factors were each problems in their own right, and being ignored or the result of ill-advised decision, and yet they are forcing something that should not be forced at this time or ever.

Why do we need solid identification at the polls? We need that solid identification because our dear legislators loosened the laws governing voter registration to the point that we now must identify ourselves before voting. It used to be we had to register to vote more than a month before the election. We had to do so in a manner that proved who we were. And we did that once. Once we were registered, we were registered. You didn’t have to prove your identity after that. You stay registered for twenty years, you don’t have to provide your papers again. Why? In most instances it was because folks at your local precinct knew you. You were their neighbor.

We now allow motor voter and mail in registrations. We allow same day registrations. This opens us up to all manner of fraud. We knew it was going to up front. We still know it ‘s problematic, but we allow it anyway. And the result is, that we now find ourselves in the situation where citizens must prove they are.

IMO, we would be much better off to roll back the laws. Reduce the size of our precincts to the point that people running the polls knew their clientelle. And increase the penalties for voting fraudulently to make it clear we weren’t messing around. Anyone defrauding the electoral system should serve five to ten years for having done so. This is the very core of our self-representation. We have allowed it to be subverted through ignorance.

Don’t make this a ‘show me your papers please’ moment just because we couldn’t use better judgement. IMO, this only compounds the problem. We don’t care to fix the problem we created, so lets create another problem on top of it. No.

We now allow people from nations like Saudi Arabia to come to the United States for extended periods of time. On 09/11 a significant portion of the 09/11 perps came from there. Now U.S. Citizens must show their I.D. when boarding an aircraft. Why? Because our leaders passed laws that allow problematic foreign nationals to flood our nation. That was another terrible decision, but instead of correcting that problem, our leaders now want to (and have) create(d) another ‘show us your papers’ momment. Once again, we fix a very flawed process by creating another problem. No!

We allow illegal immigrants to flood our nation. No problem. “We must have them.” And once again, instead of using good judgement, we come up with a ‘show us your papers’ moment to fix it. Once again, we fix a problem by creating another. No!

Today we have come up with a number of reasons why we must have ‘show us your papers’ moments. And guess what, we’re just getting started. Pretty soon it will be trains, buses, car license and facial recognition cameras and software watching our every move. We already have a federal government that is developing a massieve dosier on every citizen, and now the FBI wants my genetic code in it’s files. What is to stop them for freezing that code and cloning my person at will? To set up a situation where that could be done, is just plain madd. But that’s what is now on the radar.

Folks, I emplore you. Please take a look at where we are headed. Lets address the root problems and quite setting up more ‘show us your papers’ moments.

I am a Christian. I do believe that a demand for identity will come back to bite us in ways we may not even be able to imagine. It won’t matter, because when it does, we will have deemed so many great ideas to fix problems we created to be reasonable, that we will be helpless to prevent it at that point.

Please do not be sucked into these damands for ever increasing controls on U.S. Citizens.

Somehow we survived the 1960s and 70s without becoming a police state in reaction to voting problems and hijacked aircraft. We remained a free society then, and we can now. If we didn’t have the electronic capabilities that we do today, this would all be academic, because we would live with sanity because we wouldn’t have the ability to do otherwise.

Well today we do have the ability to do what we are doing. And I think we’re growing extremely short sighted. We indeed do not need no stinking badges. What’s more, we could use a hell of a lot less stinking badges, and to that end I urge folks to gain some perspective about what they are signing on to.

If we could survive as a people to this point without a police state, we can survive now without one. Fix the periferal causel effects, and leave our citizens alone.

In Missouri, we are now required to show a Birth Certificate upon renewal or issuance of a Drivers License.

Even if we have had a license for decades, we still have to show proof of birth. Needless to say, this has provided the government with a new, fee based cottage industry of supplying duplicate birth certificates. Many residents are unable to locate birth records. Out of state birth certificates require even another layer of bureaucracy.
This requirement is certainly inconvenient.

But in the present age where we must verify our legal residency, I guess it is a necessary evil. But it seems more simple to verify non-residents and illegal immigrants, simply because of their smaller numbers.

We already pretty much know who belongs and who is suspect.
But when the government “powers that be” ignore the obvious and fail to enforce the law of the land, the burden of enforcement and verification falls upon the states. Federal immigration laws are a moot point if the feds do not enforce the laws, regardless of their excuse.

Just the simple fact that the Federal Government has shunned it’s assumed responsibility by it’s failure to enforce the laws of the land should disqualify the Feds from any actions barring States from acting on their own citizens behalf.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

:-)