Does Barak Obama Support Driver's Licenses for Illegals?
About two months ago I wrote an SC Diary titled: Does Hillary Clinton Support Driver’s Licenses for Illegals? .
here
Several weeks after my Diary, at a national debate, HRC walked into my exact question posed by Tim Russert. We all know what happened next: She dissembled at the debate, was much criticized for not taking a definitive position, and it became a big issue in the campaign. Polls showed that even in NY State 75% of the public was against Spitzer’s plan and he is now one unpopular Governor. After several weeks HRC gave in on the issue by instructing Gov. Spitzer (who complied) to make a statement saying he is no longer for the plan. Then, at the next debate following Spitzer‘s change of mind, in response to the very same question about driver‘s licenses for illegals, HRC answered: “No“, she is now against the plan. Aside from noting how prescient your diarist Sandbox was about this then upcoming campaign issue, is there anything else to be said about issuing driver’s licenses for illegals?
Yes.
Follow this: You will recall that at the same debate where HRC managed to say “No” the question of licenses for illegals was also asked of Barak Obama. After a series of unresponsive back-and-forths between Obama and debate moderator Wolf Blitzer, Obama finally gave in and answered the question. He said “yes”. He favored granting driver’s licenses to illegals. This is now on video tape.
At the time of his response, except for making Obama look somewhat silly, it didn’t much matter what Obama said about driver‘s licenses, because the conventional wisdom held that HRC would be easily nominated as the Dem candidate. Now the race between HRC and Obama has become closer. So the press and campaign ops are looking at Obama’s personal history. This week one of HRC’s operatives in New Hampshire said there might be things about Obama we don’t know that will sink him in the general election against those nasty Repubs, who will bring out any personal dirty laundry and/or policy faux pas which can be found.
But the Repubs don’t have to go back to Barak Obama’s teenage years, or college times, or his office tenure in the Illinois State Senate to find something to discredit Obama in the general election. All they have to do is go back about four weeks to Obama’s statement where he clearly said he favored Gov. Spitzer’s plan to give driver’s licenses to illegals. Expect HRC’s campaign to point this out.
- sandbox's diary
- Login or register to post comments
Comments :
I don't know
Assuming you have hit on a key wedge issue, one has to wonder at why Tom Tancredo's popularity as a Presidential candidate isn't drastically higher.
I'm only half stupid
Because he's a nut? [nt]
What's wrong
with illegal aliens having driver's licenses? Wouldn't it make deportation process easier if their last know address was known? Not that it's going to matter as Immigration doesn't seem to be able to even keep track of legal aliens who stay past their visas. In some countries if you stay one day longer they'll call the place where you were supposed to be and ask why are you still there.
This issue as irrelevant as making a big thing out of a leaky faucet in a house that has structural problems.
Sic semper tyrannis
Several possible issues
1. Motor Voter. How do you stop them from registering to vote at the same time?
2. There is a general presumption (not always accurate) that a driver's license establishes not only the right to drive but also identity and legal residence. A driver's license allows you to do a lot of things. Do we now have to start requiring that people present passports, etc. more often, with the value of a driver's license somewhat degraded?
3. What documents are they going to present to prove their identity and residence to *get* the license? They may not have any acceptable documents in the first place. (To get a Texas driver's license, for example, I had to present my CA DL, my passport, and my Social Security card.)
4. In general, it's very odd for the government to have policies where one agency discovers that a law is being broken and doesn't report it to the appropriate agency. The only case where I can see this sort of thing being appropriate is for taxes -- the IRS should offer drug dealers, etc. strict privacy guarantees ("we won't turn you in") if they pay their taxes.
I understand your doubts
1. By requiring a proof of citizenship for voter registration - DL never was or is such a proof. It's completely beyond me why why in order to participate in activity that POSITIVELY requires citizenship a person is not asked to provide a POSITIVE proof of it?!?
2. DL is DL - if people want the National ID like they have in France, Germany, etc. they can press their representatives to start legislative action. The only way to make sure that residence addresses are current is to pass a new law that punishes people who don't register with the police every time they change their address. Bit too totalitarian for my taste if you ask me.
3. I don't know about other states, but in Illinois you had to bring specific documents listed in 72 point print over information desk. So, no utility bill, no two picture IDs - no DL - that simple. BTW no proof of citizenship was required for DL. But elsewhere, where it was required, standard request was for: Birth Certificate, Passport, Naturalization Certificate.
4. It's not odd if the agency has no business finding out whether you broke certain law or not. It should not be DOTs business to ascertain the citizenship unless someone passes law that requires them to do so.
I agree with your IRS comment, provided that the drug dealers make all purchases using credit cards and checks - and keep proper receipts for all payoffs. Alas, banks and politicians who make tons of cash on drug trade would never let it pass.
Sic semper tyrannis
I was attempting in the Diary
to get into the political ramifications for Obama of supporting driver's licenses for illegals. While I oppose granting licenses to illegals, I acknowledge that there is a case to be made for granting such licenses. My point is that Obama, who may actually be nominated by the Dems, has publicly tied himself to a very unpopolar issue, which may hurt him the the general election.
BTW, I favor a national ID card, but that is a discussion for another post.
name the enemy, win the war
Great...
So let's require definitive proof of residency and citizenship to register to vote, and proof of identity in order to vote. I'd add on top of that: voter registration should expire in 2 years if you don't use it (it would auto-renew each time you vote in an election). Unfortunately the left has been fighting laws to try to require a photo ID to vote...
Actually we do have a national ID law now -- it's called REAL ID.
In any event, whether you like it or not, drivers' licenses *have* been overloaded in this country to be our everyday form of photo ID. They are not just about driving. I use my DL probably at least once a day on average to establish ID for something completely unrelated to driving -- say, to get into my gym. I've used my DL for driving-related reasons probably fewer than 10 times, whereas I've used it for non-driving-related reasons well over 1000 times.
Passports are too big and clumsy. They won't work as an everyday form of photo ID.
This isn't just a legal issue. It's a cultural issue to change what a driver's license means. And, to those of conservative temperament, such a change is something to be skeptical of.
I don't think
anyone would oppose these voter photo IDs if they were provided for free. But it seems like just one more way to milk the taxpayer and possibly involve a private contractor at the trough.
Sic semper tyrannis
The usual complaint
(one I happen to agree with) is that voter ID is usually just a tactic to disenfranchise the poor, naturalized immigrants, and the elderly.
I've said before that if the government wants to run a program to provide an ID for free to all US citizens that I'm happy to let them use it as required proof of citizenship once they can reliably show that >95% of the populous has them.
I came. I saw. I posted.
Veni, Vidi, Bitchy.
It cost me a whole 20 bucks to get my new DL...
I just don't have any sympathy for this argument. It costs money to produce those cards, so it's only right that they charge a nominal fee to get one.
The number of people who honestly can't afford to shell out a $20-ish fee for a DL every few years is pretty tiny.
If a few of those people happen to be "disenfranchised" by a photo ID law, so be it. Whoop diddly. Remember, you're talking to someone who favors giving people one vote per dollar of taxes paid...
*shrug*
Alright then. I think I see where you are coming from. Just don't hold your breath.
I came. I saw. I posted.
Veni, Vidi, Bitchy.
I wouldn't give
a flying frog if the DL cost $200 - if you can afford a car and gas and maintenance and license plates and stickers and insurance, you could probably afford to pay even more. Voter ID would be required of everyone, even, imagine that, of people who could not afford one tankful of gas every five years. In addition a fee for the ID could be construed as a poll tax...
Sic semper tyrannis
License plates, stickers, insurance?
Illegal immigrants tend to forgo those as well or purchase black market varieties.
"The human race divides politically into those who want people to be controlled and those who have no such desire." --R. Heinlein
License plates, stickers, insurance
Is it possible to purchase any of the above without a valid DL?
Sic semper tyrannis
two out of three
yes
"The human race divides politically into those who want people to be controlled and those who have no such desire." --R. Heinlein
Aren't some
dependent on having others? Some smart states might not sell you plates if you have no insurance
Sic semper tyrannis
I had to show insurance to get Texas plates
Overall, it seemed like they had their act together in terms of verifying things when I moved here. In fact it was slightly annoying when I had to present my Social Security card (which I didn't previously have with me in California) just to get the DL... a passport wasn't good enough.
Double checking on renewals
We just got our renewal form in the mail, and they want proof of insurance and a DL number on the check -- but I bet you they still process it if I forget to put the DL on the check, or don't cross check it for validity.
Inspection stickers now require proof of insurance too, if you get them at a legal shop, but most illegals don't. They buy them underground. There's a fairly thriving black market in those. Probably in plate tags as well now, although I've not had any personal experience with that.
Insurance, well, that might depend on where you buy it. If you pay a high enough premium, there are companies that don't look too closely. But if all you need it for is your inspection sticker, and you get that on the black market, you don't need to go through the hassle of buying insurance.
Folks with little money don't see spending it on insurance as a higher priority than, say, diapers or groceries.
"The human race divides politically into those who want people to be controlled and those who have no such desire." --R. Heinlein
If people are driving
without insurance with counterfeit stickers and plates, that to me, is far greater problem than whether they can or cannot get legal DL.
Sic semper tyrannis
Absolutely, that is a problem
Unfortunately, the number of uninsured drivers is estimated to be high enough that it cannot be explained just as a function of illegal immigrants. That may be a contributing factor, but it's hardly the only factor.
You can pass a law mandating something, but that doesn't mean people are actually going to do it!
LOL, DUH
It just seems so obvious to require proof of insurance in order to get vehicle tags, even require special stickers on the windshield so they can be inspected anytime. And automatic notification if the policy lapses, of course.
There is an efficient way to run a bureaucracy and a lousy one. I can't say that a country that allows, what is it - 11 million illegal aliens, live within it's borders to be running an efficient bureaucracy. Is there a pattern here? One can get vehicle tags without insurance, register to vote without citizenship but god forbid an alien get a driver's license.
I'd rather stop paying the uninsured motorist premium tacked onto my policy than worry about some illegal aliens (who should be all deported - and why aren't they?) driving with a legal DL. I guess it's just hard to make a hot, divisive political issue out of something that targets not only non-Americans but also, and primarily, a whole lot of of mom and apple pie neighbors.
Sic semper tyrannis
Or we could just outlaw cars!
That would solve it! Think of all the money we'd save if we didn't have to buy cars or gas.
We could :)
And the only people who would not try to violently overthrow the government then, would be Mennonites, Amish, Buddhists and Quakers. OR, we could use common sense, and set up rules and regulations in a way that follows logic (e.g. If there is a rule that says a car cannot be driven without insurance the only way to extend or get new tags for that car would be to have a proof of insurance for the same period as validity of the tags. )
Sic semper tyrannis
Agree
And it's happening everywhere. We are a nation that relies heavily upon voluntary compliance with the law, as we cannot create and do not want a police state large enough to "make sure."
So why are our leaders worried about drivers licenses?
Bandaid politics.
But sandbox is right. This may come back to bite Obama.
"The human race divides politically into those who want people to be controlled and those who have no such desire." --R. Heinlein