<?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; maine</title>
	<atom:link href="http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/tag/maine/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://tenthamendmentcenter.com</link>
	<description>Concordia res Parvae Crescunt</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 12 Feb 2012 17:40:31 +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>
	</channel>
</rss>

