« Testifying about Cybersecurity legislation | Main | Yet another reason to keep the lawyers out of cyberwar »

Mar 25, 2012

Comments

Advancing a FREE society? Really? The last time I read it, the Declaration of Independence read "Life, LIBERTY, and the Pursuit of Happiness", not "Existence, Government Regulation, and the Pursuit of Safety". Why were no opponents of REAL ID such as Jim Harper allowed to testify at the "hearing"?

I'll boil this down to just two of the many issues with REAL ID.

1. It's unconstitutional. Just as Justice Scalia ruled in Printz vs. US, local DMVs cannot be made to perform federal functions any more than local law enforcement officers can. Article 1 Section 8 is very clear that things made within a state (such as a license or ID card) and sold in that state are not subject to interstate commerce. Accordingly, the 10th Amendment reserves this power to the states, or to the people.

2. It has failed to prevent any terror plots. A reading of the pro-REAL ID Heritage Foundation's review of 39 failed terror plots in May 2011 shows that had REAL ID been in place, it would not have prevented any of them. What Mr. Sensenbrenner does not tell people is that 16 of the 19 9/11 hijackers were here legally. REAL ID deals with "legal presence" so they would have been eligible.

There are many more points to ponder such as the cost, the unlimited power of the DHS Secretary, and security of placing scanned documents into a single state database, but in the interest of brevity I'll skip them for now. Google Floridians Against REAL ID and read more from the perspective of a retired law enforcement officer that has worked ID theft and license fraud cases.

The comments to this entry are closed.