<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Tenth Amendment Center &#187; drivers-license</title>
	<atom:link href="http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/tag/drivers-license/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://tenthamendmentcenter.com</link>
	<description>Concordia res Parvae Crescunt</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 24 May 2012 01:25:39 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>States Rights and REAL Id</title>
		<link>http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2007/02/06/states-rights-and-real-id/</link>
		<comments>http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2007/02/06/states-rights-and-real-id/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Feb 2007 16:01:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Tenth Amendment</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[State Sovereignty]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Congress]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[dhs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[drivers-license]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Guest Commentary]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[maine]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[national-id]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Real ID]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Thomas Andrew Olson]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2007/02/06/states-rights-and-real-id/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Guest Commentary by Thomas Andrew Olson Published with Permission from LewRockwell.com Recently, I watched Lou Dobbs, and his handmaiden, Kitty Pilgrim, get all hot, bothered, and appalled by the Maine state legislature voting overwhelmingly to refuse to enforce any provisions of the REAL ID act, an unfunded mandate passed by Congress in 2005, and which [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><em><span style="font-size: xx-small;">Guest Commentary by Thomas Andrew Olson<br />
Published with Permission from <a href="http://www.lewrockwell.com/" target="_blank">LewRockwell.com</a></span></em></p>
<p>Recently,                I watched Lou Dobbs, and his handmaiden, Kitty Pilgrim, get all                hot, bothered, and appalled by the Maine state legislature voting                overwhelmingly to refuse to enforce any provisions of the <a href="http://www.epic.org/privacy/id_cards/real_id_act.pdf">REAL                ID</a> act, an unfunded mandate passed by Congress in 2005, and                which is supposed to go into force in May of next year.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.realidrebellion.com/">REAL                ID</a> is the complex workaround to Congressâ€™ failure to sell a                national ID card outright, to a frightened public, in the wake of                9/11. Instead they now insist the <em>states</em> individually comply                with precise federal standards (standards yet to be fully developed                by the Dept. of Homeland Security) for driver licensing. These will                probably include the requirement that residents produce birth certificates                upon renewal, plus the collection of biometric data. Then, that                state DMV database has to able to be accessed not only by the feds,                but all the other states. This is supposed to help us fight terrorism,                somehow, because the 19 hijackers had driverâ€™s licenses.</p>
<p>States like                Maine protested that not only was this law an unwarranted intrusion                on the privacy rights of their residents, but it was a de facto                national ID card in its own right, yet another foot in the door                towards a totalitarian police state. The costs of implementation                would be too high, projected to be in the tens of millions in each                state, and would have to be passed on to the citizens somehow.</p>
<p>As usual, there                was no federal &#8220;carrot&#8221; with such legislation, only a                &#8220;stick.&#8221; The stick, in this case, was that residents of                states who failed to comply would either have to show a passport                in order to fly, or they simply <em>would not fly</em>. This reminder                was delivered, again, on Dobbâ€™s show, by a sneering angry sycophant                from DHS.</p>
<p>But this is                standard operating procedure. The feds levy high taxes on the residents                of the states, make sweeping, unfunded policy edicts, then enforce                them by warning the state governments that failure to comply fully                will result in those states not getting their own residentsâ€™ tax                dollars <em>returned</em> to them (minus a cut) in the form of various                subsidies.</p>
<div style="padding-right: 5px; padding-top: 10px; float: left"><!--adsense--></div>
<p>But take heart                â€“ history has shown us that resistance is not futile. From 1973                to 1988 we were saddled by a particularly egregious and corrupting                federal edict demanding that speed limits on highways be reduced                to 55mph, ostensibly as a fuel-saving initiative. It was corrupt                in that it was a total failure â€“ non-compliance was legion, especially                in western states with lots of wide-open spaces, low traffic, and                too few cops. Car companies that produced vehicles with better gas                mileage did more to save fuel than any federal speed law. But the                stick remained: failure to enforce the &#8220;double-nickel&#8221;                would result in a loss of federal highway funding.</p>
<p>In early 1987,                then Arizona <a href="http://www.answers.com/topic/evan-mecham">governor                Evan Mecham</a>, <a href="http://jeff.scott.tripod.com/mecham.html">no                stranger to controversy</a>, had finally had enough, and told Washington                they could <em>keep</em> their highway funding â€“ he was raising the                limits on all AZ roads to 65mph, and he didnâ€™t care what Washington                thought about it. Then, as now, feds and media talking heads alike                were appalled by the audacity of a lowly state governor standing                up for the rights of his state residents against the needs of the                federal government. But his action enabled other states â€“ and their                residents â€“ to stand up and cry &#8220;enough is enough!&#8221;</p>
<p>By 1988, 55                was history â€“ Congress bumped it to 65. A few years later, it was                bumped again to 75 in Midwest and Western rural areas, and allowed                states far greater leeway to set standards that they believed worked                best for them. In the late 90â€™s, Montana went so far as to revive                their original &#8220;reasonable and prudent&#8221; rule for daytime                travel â€“ which essentially meant, &#8220;whatever speed you felt                was safe under the circumstances.&#8221; (That was a bit of a rush,                believe me, to go 115 mph on a dry, straight, open road, and cops                wouldnâ€™t bat an eye â€“ sadly, a federal judge later put a stop to                that one.)</p>
<p>Therefore,                itâ€™s possible, despite all the posturing by the national-security                jackboots in the Congress and DHS, that Maineâ€™s action may have                opened the door for other states to follow suit. Similar bills are                pending right now in Georgia, Massachusetts, Montana, New Mexico,                and Washington state. The question remains whether that door will                ultimately become a floodgate.</p>
<p><em>Thomas Andrew                Olson [</em><a href="mailto:taocfi@gmail.com?subject=Lew%20Rockwell%20article"><em>send                him mail</em></a><em>] is a technology consultant, writer and speaker                in New York City.</em></p>
<p>Copyright                Â© 2007 LewRockwell.com</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2007/02/06/states-rights-and-real-id/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>8</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>REAL IDiocy</title>
		<link>http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2007/02/01/real-idiocy/</link>
		<comments>http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2007/02/01/real-idiocy/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Feb 2007 23:32:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Tenth Amendment</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[State Sovereignty]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Becky Akers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[drivers-license]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[drivers-licenses]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Guest Commentary]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[national-id]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Real ID]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2007/02/01/real-idiocy/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Guest Commentary by Becky Akers Published with Permission from LewRockwell.com Maineâ€™s state legislature &#8220;RESOLVED&#8221; almost unanimously last week that it will &#8220;refuse&#8230; to implement the REAL ID Act&#8230;.&#8221; As if that werenâ€™t enough, it &#8220;implores the United States Congress to repeal the REAL ID Act&#8230;&#8221; What? Go ahead and re-read it. Took me a few [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><em><span style="font-size: xx-small;">Guest Commentary by Becky Akers<br />
Published with Permission from <a href="http://www.lewrockwell.com" target="_blank">LewRockwell.com</a></span></em></p>
<p>Maineâ€™s state legislature  &#8220;<a href="http://www.mainesenate.org/mitchell/realid.htm">RESOLVED</a>&#8221; almost  unanimously last week that it will &#8220;refuse&#8230; to implement the REAL ID Act&#8230;.&#8221;  As if that werenâ€™t enough, it &#8220;implores the United States Congress to repeal the  REAL ID Act&#8230;&#8221;</p>
<p><em>What?</em></p>
<p>Go ahead and re-read it.  Took me a few tries, too. Such stunningly good news knocks oneâ€™s comprehension  for a loop. Itâ€™s like sunshine at midnight: so freak a treat that one can only  blink and gibber. When was the last time we had news this good? Heck, when was  the last time we had good news, period, from the political world?</p>
<p>The <a href="http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:HR01268:@@@T">REAL ID  Act</a>, for those of you lacking the time and stomach to analyze Leviathanâ€™s  droppings, might better be titled &#8220;Papers, Please.&#8221; Passed in 2005, due to take  effect in 2008, it finishes the job of turning Amerika into a police state by  making driverâ€™s licenses into national ID cards.</p>
<p>The Act requires all  licenses to carry the same information, whether theyâ€™re issued in Alaska,  Florida, or somewhere in between. Those who concede that free people should ask  Their Rulersâ€™ permission before driving cars they own on roads they pay for  probably wonâ€™t object to providing their name, address, date of birth, gender, a  &#8220;digital photograph,&#8221; and their signature â€“ the usual data that good citizens  are conditioned to yield without thinking.</p>
<p>But then comes this  explosive little mandate: the license must also include &#8220;a common  machine-readable technology, with defined minimum data elements.&#8221; Who gets to  &#8220;define&#8221; those &#8220;elements&#8221;? The Department of Homeland Security (DHS), of course,  the busybodies who brought us airport screeners and the <a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/10/05/60minutes/main2066624.shtml">infamous  No-Fly List</a>. Ergo, look for our new and improved licenses to feature <a href="http://www.independent.org/newsroom/article.asp?id=1475">fingerprints and  a microchip </a>that tracks our movements. And, while the DHS is at it, why not  include our financial transactions (banks already report these anyway since the  Feds claim to recognize a terrorist by his moneybags), medical history (hey,  keeping tabs on the psychotics protects the rest of us), and the &#8220;<a href="http://www.govexec.com/dailyfed/1104/111504c1.htm">passenger name records  (PNRâ€™s)</a>&#8221; airlines compile. The states must also &#8220;provide electronic access  to all other States to information contained in the motor vehicle database of  the State.&#8221; In other words, a national database puts everything at the Fedsâ€™  fingertips.</p>
<div style="padding-right: 5px; padding-top: 10px; float: left"><!--adsense--></div>
<p>A nightmare, right? But it  gets worse. Try obtaining or renewing a driverâ€™s license under REAL ID. Youâ€™ll  have to show four documents, everything from a birth certificate to a Social  Security card. Only Felix Unger and welfare mamas keep stuff like that around.  Then thereâ€™s the pleasure of paying for this: REAL ID is now priced at <a href="http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,127419-c,techrelatedlegislation/article.html">$11  billion</a>, over 100 times its original $100 million estimate. Those numbers  will continue climbing as more details are settled, more glitches detected.  Expect to pay hundreds of dollars for your new ID â€“ and higher state taxes, too.</p>
<p>The Feds will force us to  flash our licenses each time we interact with them â€“ when we board a plane (ha!  Thereâ€™s news!), enter a federal building (hmmm. Even jurors?), file legal  papers, or collect any sort of government payout. Even folks who donâ€™t drive  will need a license lest they become legal pariahs. And economic ones, too, as  the mania spreads. How else will retailers prove theyâ€™re patriotic Americans,  doing their part to catch terrorists, if they donâ€™t scrutinize our papers at  every transaction? It wonâ€™t be long until supermarkets ID us before selling so  much as a loaf of bread. Imagine the quandary of the poor sap whose license is  lost or stolen. And what about those whose licenses are suspended for speeding,  drunk driving&#8230; or, one fine day, for political dissent&#8230;?</p>
<p>Our Rulers claim REAL ID is  another tactic in the War on (Non-Governmental) Terror. But only Leviathan and  its cheerleaders in the Mainstream Media believe that papers protect us. Such  naÃ¯vetÃ© makes<a href="http://www.schneier.com/essay-034.html"> experts in  security </a>laugh. They realize that knowing the name of your attacker may add  a personal touch to your interaction but does zilch to keep you safe. Thatâ€™s why  God made guns and target practice, barbed wire, mace and self-defense classes,  window alarms, bullet-proof doors, and common sense: those things actually  protect us, all without asking the assailantâ€™s name first.</p>
<p>Expensive, ineffective,  totalitarian: no wonder Maineâ€™s legislature rejected REAL ID. We might ask why  they chose this particular expensive, ineffective, totalitarian measure out of  the boatload dumped on us the last few years, but letâ€™s not quibble. Nor is  Maine alone. <a href="http://www.lcsun-news.com/ci_5072842">New Mexicoâ€™s House  Majority Floor Leader</a> introduced a memorial denouncing REAL ID. A Republican  state representative in Montana sponsored a bill that &#8220;nullifies&#8221; REAL ID while  her Democratic colleagueâ€™s competing legislation &#8220;opposes&#8221; it. <a href="http://www.accessnorthga.com/news/ap_newfullstory.asp?ID=86479">The  Republican uttered words </a>seldom heard anywhere, at any time, in politics:  &#8220;She would have no problem, she said, if [the Democratâ€™s] bill passed and not  hers. â€˜It&#8217;s that important,â€™ she said.&#8221; Similar legislation is pending in <a href="http://www.columbian.com/news/localNews/01242007news96526.cfm">Washington  State</a>, <a href="http://news.com.com/2100-7348_3-6153532.html">Georgia, and  Massachusetts</a>.</p>
<p align="left">Back in Maine,<a href="http://www.public-cio.com/newsStory.php?id=2007.01.26-103580"> Senate  Majority Leader Libby Mitchell</a> believes that &#8220;&#8230;it is our job as state  Legislators to protect the people&#8230;from just this sort of dangerous federal  mandate.&#8221; <em>Bravissimo!</em> Better late than never.</p>
<p align="left"><em>Becky Akers  [<a href="mailto:libertatem@netzero.com">send her mail</a>] writes primarily  about the American Revolution.</em></p>
<p align="left">Copyright Â© 2007  LewRockwell.com</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2007/02/01/real-idiocy/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

