The Director of the California Department of Motor Vehicles, George Valverde, was dispatched to Washington, D.C., last week – presumably at the direction of Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger – to express grave concerns that the State of California Government (read: the Governor) has with the implementation of the REAL ID Act passed by Congress and signed by the President back in 2005. This law established federal standards for drivers’ licenses. If you want a license, you have to show demonstrate something that should be pretty simple: proof of legal residency (SS# or birth certificate).
It would appear that the main objections that states all around America have is the tremendous costs associated with implementing the ACT (the National Governors Assocation pegs it upwards of $11 billion collectively for the 50 states to come up to snuff).
The law gives states from 2008 – 2013 to check out drivers for their proper documents and re-issue new licences for the roughly 250 million currently licenced drivers nationwide.
The penalty to states if they do not comply? Licenses in a non-compliant state cannot be used as identification at airports, federal buildings, or to obtain an federal benefits (medicare, welfare, veterans benefits, etcetera).
Of course, the first blush that a rather libertarian (small "L") fellow such takes on legislation like this is that it represents yet another mandate on the states, and represents an expansion of the federal government’s authority over the states, and the people.
That said, there is a gut level initial inclination to love this law because in our own State of California, the legislature doesn’t have the political will, on their own, to pass a bill to require these standards for proof of legal residency for a drivers license.
But then I think about it, and the federalist in me says, my legislature may be wrong on this issue, but we live in a country where each state should be left to make such decisions.
But then you step back, and look at things from the 30,000 foot level, and you quickly realize why the Real ID Act of 2005 passed on an overwhelmingly partisan vote, with Republicans putting it on the Republican President’s desk for his signature (remember, what "small L" libertarians there are in the Congress are Republicans) — and that is national security.
It is clearly enumerated in the United States Constitution that the federal government has the authority to take action to protect our borders and to secure this nation against dangers from abroad. And that is the trump card that makes the Real ID act a necessary reality.
In this country, it is the Drivers’ License (or similarly issued State ID card) that is used for routinely identifying people for just about anything you do. And, frankly, for those of us who prefer the idea of 50 different states issuing their own identifications, because it reinforces the fact that we are a nation made up of 50 distinct, different states — I wouldn’t want to go the other route, which would literally be a federal identification card, issue by the United States Government.
If we are going to deal with the issue of protection of our borders and protection of the American people from foreign national who would do us harm, we have to be able to know "who is who in the zoo" so to speak. Whether that danger comes from a terrorist who wants to cause direct violent harm to Americans, or whether it is a criminal alien who stealthily crosses over our borders, in violation of our laws, for the purposes of receiving government subsidies or ensuring that their children enjoy citizenship in this amazing country, the Real ID Act will help the federal government to be able to fight these law-breakers.
So while there may be legitimate issues to discuss about the funding of the implementatin of the Real ID act, let’s make sure that we all recognize that these are different times than those America has faced in the past. And I fully recognize that there is always a tradeoff where to have more security, there is a necessary sacrifice of freedom. To be honest, there are a lot of measures out there that I oppose because I think they sacrifice too much freedom, but the Real ID act is not one of them.
Governor Schwarzenegger should make it clear in his upcoming trip to Washington, D.C., that while he, and his fellow Governors, have concerns about the funding of implementation about this law, that the core principles and actions contained within the Real ID Act are sound, and should be implemented.
Care to read comments, or make your own about today’s Daily Commentary?
Just click here to go to the FR Weblog, where this Commentary has its own blog post, and where you can read and make comments.