Dept. Homeland Security trying to keep hispanics from registering to vote

[zimv20]

link (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A40122-2004Sep21.html?referrer=emailarticle)


Blocking the Latino Ballot?

To an immigrant, Arnold Schwarzenegger told delegates at the Republican convention last month, there is no country "more welcoming than the United States of America." And most of the time, that's true.

But it wasn't true last week in Miami Beach, where the Department of Homeland Security attempted to ban a nonpartisan voter registration operation from setting up tables on the sidewalk outside a massive naturalization ceremony at that city's convention center. The DHS complained that Mi Familia Vota would be blocking the doors at the swearing-in. But last Thursday, U.S. District Judge Adalberto Jordan ruled that the right to register voters was protected by the First Amendment, though he did stipulate how much space the group's tables could take up.

If that arrangement seems to you the kind of compromise that Mi Familia Vota and the DHS could have arrived at themselves without making a literal federal case out of it, you underestimate the Bush administration's aversion to voting by new immigrants -- particularly new Hispanic immigrants. (The DHS didn't respond to Mi Familia Vota's request for a meeting.) In states such as Florida and Nevada -- battleground states with Republican election officials and burgeoning Hispanic populations -- the activities of groups such as Mi Familia Vota have been challenged by GOP officeholders, though it's a new wrinkle to have the DHS join the fray.

It's not hard to understand the Republicans' concern. Working in Hispanic neighborhoods across the state, Mi Familia Vota has already registered 58,000 new Florida voters, says Jorge Mursuli, its executive director. Though the operation is strictly nonpartisan, both its sponsors (which include groups such as the liberal People for the American Way) and the Republicans know that new Hispanic voters no longer hail preponderantly from Cuba, and they are likely to give most of their votes to the Democrats.


And down Florida way and in the Southwest, the administration, for all of Schwarzenegger's welcoming words, is trying to keep the Hispanization of the electorate from happening quite so fast. There, the Department of Homeland Security, charged with securing the republic from its enemies, is busy securing the Republicans from the newest Americans.

[Thanatoast]

This country is going to become more multi-cultural over the next twenty years. Certain America-first elements need to pull their heads out of the sand and adapt to changing times.

[sorryiwasdreami]

The Bush administration is turning America "the land of the free" into America "the home of the slave."

Our civil freedoms are being jeopardized as much as they were in the 60's. Now I know what Peter, Paul, and Mary (http://phobos.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewAlbum?playlistId=168189&selectedItemId=168163) were talking about when they said "How many years can some people exist before they're allowed to be free."

[mactastic]

Go figure... the list of shenanigans that has happened in Florida goes on and on. And it's governed by who again?

Keeping the minority vote down is no new tactic to the right though.
*Detroit - Democrats on Wednesday denounced a Republican lawmaker quoted in a newspaper as saying the GOP would fare poorly in this year's elections if it failed to "suppress the Detroit vote."

****State Rep. John Pappageorge, R-Troy, acknowledged using "a bad choice of words" but said his remark shouldn't be construed as racist.

****Pappageorge, 73, was quoted in July 16 editions of the Detroit Free Press as saying, "If we do not suppress the Detroit vote, we're going to have a tough time in this election."

Detroit's populace is what racial makeup? And the most offensive thing isn't the racial implications of what this guy said, it's the idea that 'suppressing' certian voters you feel will vote against you is an acceptable method of campaigning, as opposed to turning out your own supporters in large numbers.

The GOP is scared of high voter turnout. If only the elites vote, the GOP wins. If the regular folk vote, the GOP loses.

[IJ Reilly]

We should be grateful for these little moments of candor. It's not often we get to hear what the people in power really think, and what they're capable of doing to hold onto it.

[continuum]

This country is going to become more multi-cultural over the next twenty years. Certain America-first elements need to pull their heads out of the sand and adapt to changing times.

California is probably in the lead as is Florida for multi-cultural. I think caucasians are the minority in California.

[IJ Reilly]

California is probably in the lead as is Florida for multi-cultural. I think caucasians are the minority in California.

No longer the majority but the largest plurality (depending on how ethnicity is defined).

[continuum]

No longer the majority but the largest plurality (depending on how ethnicity is defined).

One vodka tonic and 3 heinekens. Please explain.

[IJ Reilly]

One vodka tonic and 3 heinekens. Please explain.

If you've had that much to drink it would probably be useless to try.

[kuyu]

Quick question. Do you guys think that illegal's should be able to vote? Supposedly, only 10 states require proof of citizenship to vote. Seems like a non-issue, but apparantly it's causing quite a stir.

Was the DHS trying to keep Hispanic Americans or Hispanics from registering???

[pseudobrit]

Was the DHS trying to keep Hispanic Americans or Hispanics from registering???

You're totally changing the subject. Perhaps you missed it in the article, but the registrations were being held adjacent to a naturalisation ceremony.

And secondly (and most importantly), what the hell is the Department of Homeland Security doing fussing with voter registrations at naturalisation ceremonies? How do they begin to justify this as being within their juristiction or scope of their charge?

It's frickin' bizarre!

[continuum]

Actually it was only 2 Heinekens. I decided not to open the third. One thing I am thankful for is that my Governator, Mr. Schwarzenegger, vetoed the bill giving illegal aliens a driver's license. I can't even believe this was an option or was trying to be passed.

Sure, come on in to our country, get a license and run. It's one thing to capture them walking across the desert and crossing the border but it's another to have a high speed chase on I-10 or something similar to catch them. I'm all for the "melting pot" that America is, but let's do it right.

[mischief]

Come now.... It's all a marketing ploy... If you didn't make the USA somewhat exclusive would anyone want to come here? ;)

Actually I'm all for reforming the immigration policies and border control measures in this country.

I'm also for getting Mexico to get off it's economic ass so folks will stay there voluntarilly.

[continuum]

Exclusive would be earning your driver's license by taking the steps necessary starting with citizenship.

[mischief]

Exclusive would be earning your driver's license by taking the steps necessary starting with citizenship.

I always thought that Exclusivity involved a DMZ, razor-wire, attack dogs and armed thugs with sensory-enhancement gear.

Maybe I'm sneaking into the wrong nightclubs.... :eek:

Aren't the best nightclubs the ones on the millitary bases with the most expensive hardware? :cool: :p ;)

[continuum]

That too.

[IJ Reilly]

Exclusive would be earning your driver's license by taking the steps necessary starting with citizenship.

Citizenship has never been a prerequisite for obtaining a driver's license. Even knowing how to drive isn't, apparently.

[kuyu]

Even knowing how to drive isn't, apparently.

I didn't know you'd been Lex! Our drivers test is a 3 minute, once around the block POS that keeps idiots on the road.

[pseudobrit]

Citizenship has never been a prerequisite for obtaining a driver's license.

Aw, man, you mean when I visited Montréal, I went and got my Canadian citizenship and Quebec driver's license for nothing?!

[stubeeef]

Citizenship is not a requirement, and shouldn't be, maybe a visa or greencard would be helpful instead of handing them out like condoms to 5th graders (no questions asked).

[mischief]

Aw, man, you mean when I visited Montréal, I went and got my Canadian citizenship and Quebec driver's license for nothing?!

Did you know that if you don't follow a very specific protocol in getting foriegn citizenship the US State Dept will revoke your US citizenship... Native born or not?

The bastards did it to my dad years ago and it was a helluva fiasco getting it all sorted out.

[continuum]

Well, citizenship should be a requirement. Who's going to insure an illegal alien? If I get hit by a car with an alien driving it I'm going to kill if I haven't been killed (not literally). Giving a license to anyone is like giving candy to kids in the eyes of Mexicans crossing the border. I've heard that they make up a majority of the work force in California, which they do, so this is a way to pay them back. That's B.S. HAVE THEM GET RESIDENCY AND CITIZENSHIP FIRST. When I go to Mexico in my vehicle my insurance isn't the same as when driving in the U.S. I'm only covered for so many miles after crossing the border and I still think I need to obtain a permit of some sort. Above and beyond this mileage and I'm driving uninsured. Again, what U.S. insurance company is going to insure an illegal alien.

[mischief]

Well, citizenship should be a requirement. Who's going to insure an illegal alien? If I get hit by a car with an alien driving it I'm going to kill if I haven't been killed (not literally). Giving a license to anyone is like giving candy to kids in the eyes of Mexicans crossing the border. I've heard that they make up a majority of the work force in California, which they do, so this is a way to pay them back. That's B.S. HAVE THEM GET RESIDENCY AND CITIZENSHIP FIRST. When I go to Mexico in my vehicle my insurance isn't the same as when driving in the U.S. I'm only covered for so many miles after crossing the border and I still think I need to obtain a permit of some sort. Above and beyond this mileage and I'm driving uninsured. Again, what U.S. insurance company is going to insure an illegal alien.

As I recall, in the state of California you currently do have to be a US Citizen or Registered Resident Alien.

A good point about insurance... If you have a CDL but can't register your car (lack of Insurance) exactly how good is that?

Better to clean up the immigration laws. Canada and the US have numerous "Work-pass" programs so folks who live in border communities can cross to work but not live. As I recall there's a payback feature that allows Canadians to have healthcare costs incurred in the USA to be paid for by their healthcare system as usual.

[continuum]

That's something that is agreeable. It's not abusing a privilege. Driving is not our right...it's a privilege. I live in the Mojave desert, Palm Springs area, and I just wonder how many people would be driving uninsured if this happened. Hell, a lot of them probably drive regardless of license. It's bad enough having to worry about all the Grayhairs (retirees, seniors) white-knuckling it around here while driving. They can't even see over the dashboard. My boss got T-boned about 4 months ago by an 80 yr old man and she is going through hell. The police officer didn't even issue this man a citation because he would have lost his license and not been able to take his wife to the doctor every week. Let's fix this before giving a license to an alien.

[wwworry]

going back to the original post: The issue about setting up a table on the sidewalk is totally covered in local zoning ordinances. They are very specific in that matter. I have no idea why the DHS would get involved in an issue like that unless it was politically motivated.

[IJ Reilly]

Well, citizenship should be a requirement.

So, even legal, resident aliens should not be allowed to drive? Isn't that lunacy?

[continuum]

So, even legal, resident aliens should not be allowed to drive? Isn't that lunacy?

The next sentence in that statement reflects my true thought...
"Well, citizenship should be a requirement. Who's going to insure an illegal alien?" The key word is 'illegal'.

[IJ Reilly]

You said "citizenship" should be a requirement. This is a very different status than legal residence.

[continuum]

OK ok ok. You got me. But I hope you see my point about the insurance issues.

I've just got to say that California comes up with some strange laws or attempts to. I'm from Pennsylvania and have been here about 2 years and saw the whole Gray Davis mess. I don't know if he attributed to a lot of the mess as far as California's budget/economy.... That's a whole other thread. But I think he passed this license thing in the past. I'm almost positive I heard that this existed once before. I'm not sure though.

[IJ Reilly]

OK ok ok. You got me. But I hope you see my point about the insurance issues.

Actually, no, I don't entirely see that point. Illegal aliens will still be driving, but without US driver's licenses, and without insurance. As it stands now, they are completely outside of the system. I can't see how issuing valid driver's licenses to the undocumented changes anything for the worse. I'm not sure it changes anything for the better, either, but I'd be interested to know the law enforcement view of this question -- which to my mind, is the only one that really matters. (The rest being mainly so much political frothing at the mouth.)

[continuum]

Oooh, looky, let's run for the border and get us a driver's license. It definitely isn't making things better (yes, in my opinion) and would make things worse by having more uninsured motorists. It's the idea of having a drivers license that could be persuasive. It's just my thought. I'll go away now. Or maybe not. :)

[IJ Reilly]

Oooh, looky, let's run for the border and get us a driver's license.

Like I said, so much political frothing at the mouth. You seem to be expressing the warped but all to common view that immigrants come to the US for something other than a better life.

[continuum]

i'm trying to express the view that i think things need to be thought through better. let's try to get them placed legally where they provide proof of insurance before obtaining the license. and, yes, i would apply that to the rest of the country. it might cause major havoc within the country but at least everyone would be covered when an accident happens regardless of fault. no insurance, no drive. it all ties in to insurance premiums. you don't think our premiums are being affected by uninsured drivers? pardon my froth, wouldn't want you to step in it.

btw, i'm all for letting people in to better their lives. we were all let in - unless you are native american.

[IJ Reilly]

I prefer things to not be thought through at all. Yeah, that must be it...

As far as what uninsured drivers cost you in terms of premiums, I suggest you take a look at the "uninsured motorist" section of your policy. I'll bet it's less than 10% of your total premium. This is how the industry rates your risk of a loss from an uninsured driver -- e.g., not very large.

Incidentally, drivers do not need to be insured in California. Cars do. Whether illegal aliens get licenses or not will have no direct impact on who is driving with or without insurance. Mixing up these two things is just one of the ways people get themselves into a needless lather over this issue.

[mda01aqt]

i thought most of the hispanics were republicans, due the extreme policies the republican governement had to one of the most medically advanced nations in the world......cuba.

please let me know this isnt true and they are democrats........pretty please!!

[zimv20]

i thought most of the hispanics were republicans, due the extreme policies the republican governement had to one of the most medically advanced nations in the world......cuba.

please let me know this isnt true and they are democrats........pretty please!!
in general, the cubans tend to vote GOP, all other hispanic groups lean dem.

[continuum]

I prefer things to not be thought through at all. Yeah, that must be it...

As far as what uninsured drivers cost you in terms of premiums, I suggest you take a look at the "uninsured motorist" section of your policy. I'll bet it's less than 10% of your total premium. This is how the industry rates your risk of a loss from an uninsured driver -- e.g., not very large.

Incidentally, drivers do not need to be insured in California. Cars do. Whether illegal aliens get licenses or not will have no direct impact on who is driving with or without insurance. Mixing up these two things is just one of the ways people get themselves into a needless lather over this issue.

tell me why you support this or do not support it. i'd like to hear that as opposed to you just countering everything i say.

[IJ Reilly]

tell me why you support this or do not support it. i'd like to hear that as opposed to you just countering everything i say.

I am not "countering" everything you say, but simply correcting errors of fact, which when repeated as though they were gospel truth tend to obscure the real issues. I don't have a definite opinion on whether illegal aliens should be allowed to obtain driver's licenses. As I said above, I'd like to know law enforcement's views on this matter before making up my mind. Would it make their jobs easier or more difficult? Everything else is just politics.

[continuum]

and what about how it affects you?

[IJ Reilly]

How what affects me? I'm I really supposed to understand this question?

[continuum]

You mentioned that you wondered how it would affect law enforcement and if it would make their jobs easier or harder. What about your opinion on how you might be affected by this. C'mon now. I know you don't have all the facts that you might need to chew on it but you must have something swirling in your head. If you don't, then I suggest you stop replying to me because I only wanted to voice my thoughts....not preach the frothy gospel of political babble. You seem bothered.

[IJ Reilly]

Bothered? Yes, I suppose you're right -- I am bothered when people seem to need to express opinions about things when they don't have or misunderstand the basic facts of the matter. This is what I am attempting to point out to you. Sorry if this bothers you, but that's just the way it's going to be.

[continuum]

Bothered? Yes, I suppose you're right -- I am bothered when people seem to need to express opinions about things when they don't have or misunderstand the basic facts of the matter. This is what I am attempting to point out to you. Sorry if this bothers you, but that's just the way it's going to be.

Please, please, please tell me what the basic facts are then. Explain what I have missed. Give me some feedback about the issue at hand. Not what you think I am doing or saying. I think the basic facts would be giving a driver's license to illegal aliens. Sure, there are other things that go along with it from a political, law enforcement, and whatever else standpoint. You must drop in on hundreds of posts here and do this because there are a lot of other threads that are just people's opinions who don't necessarily have all the info needed for you to contribute anything other than whatever you are contributing here which is not much of anything. You still haven't contributed anything to this thread. You are skirting the issue. skirter.

You mentioned that you wondered how it would affect law enforcement and if it would make their jobs easier or harder. What about your opinion on how you might be affected by this. C'mon now. I know you don't have all the facts that you might need to chew on it but you must have something swirling in your head. <----- what about this part of my last post. you still haven't shared anything.

I'm going home. Skirt you later.

[continuum]

my work productivity level just dropped with that one

[IJ Reilly]

It's all been said. Please read back.

[pseudobrit]

You must drop in on hundreds of posts here and do this because there are a lot of other threads that are just people's opinions who don't necessarily have all the info needed for you to contribute anything other than whatever you are contributing here which is not much of anything. You still haven't contributed anything to this thread. You are skirting the issue. skirter.

...

my work productivity level just dropped with that one

My brain cell count just dropped with that one.

[continuum]

Yawn. Recap....nothing said. Vague.

[pseudobrit]

Yawn. Recap....nothing said. Vague.

I agree. You said nothing. At least nothing that made any sense.

[mactastic]

Well this thread's about played out. Perhaps it should be closed if we're just going to be discussing how nothing has been discussed.

What was the original topic anyway? It wasn't giving illegal immigrants drivers licenses, I know that... :D

[pseudobrit]

In other news, the FBI provided the gate security at a little league game on Sunday night.

[mischief]

Well this thread's about played out. Perhaps it should be closed if we're just going to be discussing how nothing has been discussed.

What was the original topic anyway? It wasn't giving illegal immigrants drivers licenses, I know that... :D

Being a legal Immegrant, who has Citizenship AND has a parent who's a permanent Resident Alien I'll just say that I'd feel more than a little disinfranchised by the state offering an official ID with priviledges to those who don't go through the process.

Plus: If Mexico is ever to have a real economy they have to confront the fact that their workforce has to go elsewhere to make a living.

[IJ Reilly]

Mischief, in what ways would you feel disenfranchised, and what official privileges go along with being in possession of a driver's license (other than the obvious)?

[mischief]

Mischief, in what ways would you feel disenfranchised, and what official privileges go along with being in possession of a driver's license (other than the obvious)?

Here in CA your CDL is used as a form of official ID. It's been a requirement for a few years now that you have a SSN before you can get a CDL. As a result it's become a de-facto proof of citizenship if you're travelling inter-state by plane or (more relevant) crossing the border by car from either Canada or Mexico.

If the Licenses had been proposed as being part of a non-immigrant work program whereby they're a distinctly different ID I'd be fine with it.

As it is I've had an incredible amount of bull **** to deal with because of the homoginization of INS, State Dept, HSA, etc.:

My Citizenship is paperless... Because I immigrated as a Minor on my Mother's Visa (Canadian) while in my Father's custody (Natural-Born American), having been continuously in my Father's custody all my life and remained in the USA continuously until now (nearly 30, been here since I was 10) I am considered an American Citizen.

Because we followed a process similar to the one proposed for the CDL I have to spend $300.00 for the DHS to send me certification of something their original process never sent me proof of nor required proof of before I can apply to any County, State, or Federal job. I'm looking into Firefighting so this will directly effect my life.

I would feel disinfranchised because the system would have a fat loophole in it that only one nationality could exploit and could be used to lever expidited immigration status when fully legal folks like me still have to pay through the ass to prove we can stay.

[mactastic]

Don't California ID cards and CDL's perform the same as far as identification goes?

[mischief]

Don't California ID cards and CDL's perform the same as far as identification goes?

CDL's are given more weight because there's more beurocracy involved in getting one (Testing, etc.) and because there are more ways to lose one (DUI, etc.).

[mactastic]

CDL's are given more weight because there's more beurocracy involved in getting one (Testing, etc.) and because there are more ways to lose one (DUI, etc.).

But those only affect your ability to drive a car, right? I mean, you can't lose any non-driving related priviledges if you only have an ID, right? I thought that was the rationale behind them?

[IJ Reilly]

Here in CA your CDL is used as a form of official ID. It's been a requirement for a few years now that you have a SSN before you can get a CDL. As a result it's become a de-facto proof of citizenship if you're travelling inter-state by plane or (more relevant) crossing the border by car from either Canada or Mexico.

It's not a de facto proof of citizenship or even evidence of citizenship because a resident alien can under the current rules obtain a valid driver's license in California. (I think you are confusing residency with citizenship.)

[mischief]

It's not a de facto proof of citizenship or even evidence of citizenship because a resident alien can under the current rules obtain a valid driver's license in California. (I think you are confusing residency with citizenship.)

I'm fully aware of that. It's a pairing of practices that makes for the confusion. Even Permanent RA's get SSN's. A SSN is NOT proof of Citizenship... it's proof of residency. A CDL is, however often used as Proof of Citizenship for "casual" crossings of US borders like Canada and Mexico.

The combination of the two, particularly when combined with the popular misconception that a SSN IS proof of Citizenship (even among those that should know better) makes for a very sketchy situation for an undifferentiated CDL if applied to non-immigrants who work in the USA. Many agencies will take either a SSN or CDL as proof of Citizenship... Regardless of whether it is or not.

This seems to stem from the fact that Driver's Licenses/State ID's and SSN are the only commonly-held forms of Gvt.-issued ID in the USA. If there was a REAL Federally-issued ID other than a Passport that was easy to obtain the issue would be moot. Of course, Americans are truly PARANOID about such efficiencies and therefore will continue under a system that has gaping holes and a rediculously confusing set of Citizenship statutes.

[IJ Reilly]

I'm not sure I understand the relevance of popular misconceptions to this issue. I'm certain the INS agents working at the Canadian and Mexican borders are aware of the appropriate distinctions. I get asked for my California driver's license quite often, but not because it's an official ID, but because it's the only card I carry that has both my photo and my name on it. In that respect, it's just plain useful. A national ID card would be even more useful.

I agree, the immigration laws in the US are Byzantine (as you probably know better than I), but I hate to see the State of California all mixed up in those issues, because the state has no authority to solve them. This is why I say that the question of whether undocumented aliens should be eligible for driver's licenses should be mainly a state law enforcement issue. Will it help the police do their jobs, or no? It shouldn't have anything to do with immigration policy because the state doesn't have any authority to fix the federal mess.

[pseudobrit]

I'm not sure I understand the relevance of popular misconceptions to this issue. I'm certain the INS agents working at the Canadian and Mexican borders are aware of the appropriate distinctions.

I can't vouch for the Mexican border, but you need proof of citizenship and a photo ID to cross the Canadian border into the US. I took my birth certificate.

[slughead]

I can't vouch for the Mexican border, but you need proof of citizenship and a photo ID to cross the Canadian border into the US. I took my birth certificate.

To get from Mexico to the US at the border you need a passport... well I haven't crossed since 2001 so I'm not sure what it's like now

[mischief]

I'm not sure I understand the relevance of popular misconceptions to this issue. I'm certain the INS agents working at the Canadian and Mexican borders are aware of the appropriate distinctions. I get asked for my California driver's license quite often, but not because it's an official ID, but because it's the only card I carry that has both my photo and my name on it. In that respect, it's just plain useful. A national ID card would be even more useful.

I agree, the immigration laws in the US are Byzantine (as you probably know better than I), but I hate to see the State of California all mixed up in those issues, because the state has no authority to solve them. This is why I say that the question of whether undocumented aliens should be eligible for driver's licenses should be mainly a state law enforcement issue. Will it help the police do their jobs, or no? It shouldn't have anything to do with immigration policy because the state doesn't have any authority to fix the federal mess.

Most likely it wouldn't help the police unless the DL was both VERY different from the usual one AND tied into the Mexican justice system so they could check Wants and Warrants. It would also be effectively useless unless the Registration was tied in for W&W as well so the moving "spot checks" that most police agencies use as a first line when suspicious about a driver.

Like it or not, the border states are and will continoue to be embroiled in this mess untill it's really fixed at the federal level.

The relevance of the popular misconception is that it's perpetuated by how state services work:

Valid Phone #, Valid CDL#, Valid SSN, Valid Addy. If 2 of those 4 were covered (Cell Phone + CDL) it would make "fudging" the system MUCH easier.

In terms of the borders themselves: They're honestly pretty Racist.

At the Canadian border (If you're caucasian) all you need is a CDL and to remember to answer the question:"What is your citizenship status?" with: " 'Mer'cun" rather than an Oxfordized "American." The Jarhead in the armored box is typically not the brightest bulb on the shelf.

At the Mexican border it's roughly the same but there's extra scrutiny for the dark-skinned... this wouldn't change with CDL's... would likely get worse.

[IJ Reilly]

I'm not suggesting that state and local police (or the DMV) should be involved with immigration issues -- quite the opposite in fact. The purpose of a driver's license is (ostensibly) that each person who carries a valid one has met some minimal standards of fitness for driving. That is the card's entire designated purpose (how it's been pressed into other duties is a separate issue I think). Do you need eyeglasses while driving? The license will say so. If I were a local cop on a traffic stop, this is what I'd probably want to know -- not your immigration status. I could also run your number to find out if you've got any priors. This takes the police out of being an immigration officer, which isn't his job anyway, and lets him or her do their real job. Forcing people who are currently in the shadows into a law enforcement system doesn't seem to have any potential downside that I can determine.

[Rower_CPU]

I've crossed at Tijuana several times in either direction both before and after 9/11 - there's a random vehicle check going south and only a cursory photo ID check coming back. If you act suspicious, or are "too mexican" w/out good ID you'll get taken to secondary.

But given the college kid bar industry in Tijuana, I'm not surprised it's not tougher. ;)

[continuum]

What about the possible cost to the state to process and maintain an extended database of names of people who have obtained these licenses. This cost would not be supplemented by every single person receiving these licenses. Many of them work illegally and contribute nothing in taxes.

[mactastic]

...and contribute nothing in taxes.

Bullflops. Maybe not in income taxes, but they still pay lots of other taxes. You are perpetuating the 'worthless immigrant' stereotype.

[continuum]

I'm not perpetuating anything. I'm seeing some of the scenarios out there, not stating that "this is how it is" and "they're all the same". Not at all.

I agree with many things said in this thread. This could be beneficial to all or it could place further strain on the state(s).

[IJ Reilly]

Hmm, maybe nobody should be required to carry a driver's license. After all, they do cost the state money.

[takao]

Hmm, maybe nobody should be required to carry a driver's license. After all, they do cost the state money.

perhaps they are too cheap in the US ;)

i payed roughly 1.500 € for mine including all theoretical + practical hours and tests and the fee for the driving license itself...

[continuum]

Hmm, maybe nobody should be required to carry a driver's license. After all, they do cost the state money.

Umm....no.

[IJ Reilly]

Umm....no.

Then you've answered your own question. States issue driver's licenses as a function of enforcing their motor vehicle laws.

[continuum]

Then you've answered your own question. States issue driver's licenses as a function of enforcing their motor vehicle laws.

Really? i thought it was to give you something to talk about. What's your point?

[blackfox]

I'm not sure I understand the relevance of popular misconceptions to this issue. I'm certain the INS agents working at the Canadian and Mexican borders are aware of the appropriate distinctions. I get asked for my California driver's license quite often, but not because it's an official ID, but because it's the only card I carry that has both my photo and my name on it. In that respect, it's just plain useful. A national ID card would be even more useful.

I agree, the immigration laws in the US are Byzantine (as you probably know better than I), but I hate to see the State of California all mixed up in those issues, because the state has no authority to solve them. This is why I say that the question of whether undocumented aliens should be eligible for driver's licenses should be mainly a state law enforcement issue. Will it help the police do their jobs, or no? It shouldn't have anything to do with immigration policy because the state doesn't have any authority to fix the federal mess.

Continuum...read this post again. Damn.

[continuum]

Continuum...read this post again. Damn.

Thanks blackfox. This post was directly addressing someone else though. Either way... Thanks IJ. This is the clarification I was looking for. You weren't quite as detailed in earlier posts.

[mischief]

(snip) The purpose of a driver's license is (ostensibly) that each person who carries a valid one has met some minimal standards of fitness for driving. That is the card's entire designated purpose (snip). Do you need eyeglasses while driving? The license will say so. If I were a local cop on a traffic stop, this is what I'd probably want to know(snip). I could also run your number to find out if you've got any priors. This (snip)lets him or her do their real job. Forcing people who are currently in the shadows into a law enforcement system doesn't seem to have any potential downside that I can determine.

That's exactly it: With no other references attatched to the License itself and no correlation between the License and the License plate of the car you've rendered it useless for law enforcement while confusing the officer with a card that had no designated signifyer that it was for someone who was effectively invisible to the system.

Illegals are adept at not remembering details about themselves (like the fact that they have a license for instance). If any of these folks actually got these licenses it wouldn't make the routine lookup easier, it'd make it harder.

The existing system checks for Wants & Warrants referenced via the CDL # as well as the name itself AND the same info for the registered owner of the vehicle. I'll paint you a detailed picture:

The officer making the stop begins by running the plate. He makes a note of the name (if there is one) of the registered owner and any wants & warrants that go with the car. At this point he's made some judgement calls about what he's getting into. Provided there's no "Do Not Approach" tag on the owner he'll come up via the passenger side with his hand on his gun and lay his free hand on the door handle while he questions the driver. He'll ask for License, Registration and Proof of Insurance. In CA the lack of any of those three can lead to impound.

He'll then take all 3 back to his cruiser and call in the Registration, comparing the make, model, owner, expiration and other factors. He'll call in the license next and the following occurs at dispatch: The Federal database is checked using CDL#, Name, Adress; the State and local databases are checked as well. Provided that this individual has been honest and has identified himself with the same info as is on the CDL for any priors he may come up. Most likely any priors he has will not line up with the ID anyway as it's effectiveness is based on voluntary participation and flimsy initial ID.

Now, if the whole thing was designed to fully integrate it'd be effective: If the ID was plainly a non-resident CDL; If the Mexican Federal and State databases were on the same system as the American ones for lookup; if the minnimum requirements for ID going in were a valid passport (may have been); If the same process were done throughout DMV so vehicles are registered to non-residents the same as the above hypothetical CDL's.

Basically, I feel that the bill wasn't thought out very clearly. It reminds me very much of the original Brady bill.... It sounded good, it had the best of intentions but when it came down to practice it was a joke that just complicated things.

[IJ Reilly]

You're never going to get a useful correlation between vehicle registrations and driver's licenses unless the state makes it illegal for anyone to drive a car they don't own. That would be slightly impractical, to say the least. Otherwise, you may be entirely correct in what you say; I honestly don't know. I never heard the opinions of law enforcement agencies expressed in this debate over driver's licenses, just a lot of people trying to get the state drawn into the process of making immigration policy. Quite a few people are making what sounds to me like bogus arguments intended to obscure problems and potential solutions with emotional rhetoric and dubious facts.

I know my city Police Chief pretty well. Maybe I'll ask his opinion the next time I see him.

[mischief]

You're never going to get a useful correlation between vehicle registrations and driver's licenses unless the state makes it illegal for anyone to drive a car they don't own. (snip)
I know my city Police Chief pretty well. Maybe I'll ask his opinion the next time I see him.

Not so. The ownsership is an incredibly useful front-line-defence from the Officer's perspective. If the owner is listed as "Do Not Approach" the officer will call for backup and WAIT because he knows that the primary listed operator of that vehicle is considered armed and extremely dangerous, dangerous enough to kill officers if caught alone. That one technique has saved more officer's lives than you would guess and reduced the # of dead CHP officers quite measurably. There are, in fact folks out there who practice disarm techniques and literally make a game of killing cops. We had one in Capitola who was caught on foot (No DNA possible) and nearly killed his THIRD officer before being shot himself by the extremely lucky (left handed) and fast-drawing officer who detained him.

DO ask your police chief. I think you'll be suprised at just how the ID lookup works and how significant it is to California Peace Officers.

If you're in California I'd advise also that you register at your local JC and take a PC832 course. It covers all the basics of the Arrest and pre-Arrest procedures as well as Firearms, structure of the law, etc. Very good course. ;)

[IJ Reilly]

You've got me a little confused. I was responding to your comment:

That's exactly it: With no other references attatched to the License itself and no correlation between the License and the License plate of the car you've rendered it useless for law enforcement while confusing the officer with a card that had no designated signifyer that it was for someone who was effectively invisible to the system.

Anyway, what I might ask my local chief if the situation presents itself, is whether issuing driver's licenses to undocumented aliens would or would not help him do his job.

[mischief]

You've got me a little confused. I was responding to your comment:



Anyway, what I might ask my local chief if the situation presents itself, is whether issuing driver's licenses to undocumented aliens would or would not help him do his job.


I'll clarify thusly:

Adding one document to an otherwise undocumented nonresident is a little like herding cats. With a lifestyle based on anonymity the addition of a CDL just adds a way to cite for CDL-related offenses. It's extremely unlikely that the current system of records and lookup would catch any criminal activity because foreign nationals' records go to the State Department, not the FBI database or the State databases.

[IJ Reilly]

The only criminal activity I thought it might help curtail is of the misdemeanor motor vehicle code variety.

[mischief]

The only criminal activity I thought it might help curtail is of the misdemeanor motor vehicle code variety.

Ah. The irony is that Motor Vehicle stops lead to so many other kinds of arrests in so many cases that the emphasis in the mind of the officer is rarely on the immediate offense. It's a good rule of thumb that speeding or driving erratically often corrolates to a DUI or some other nastiness for example.

Plus there's the valid question of Insurance and ability to verify Regisration. Kind of silly to get a CDL if it just makes it easier to get cited for lacking proof of insurance and/or proper registration.

[continuum]

Ah. The irony is that Motor Vehicle stops lead to so many other kinds of arrests in so many cases that the emphasis in the mind of the officer is rarely on the immediate offense. It's a good rule of thumb that speeding or driving erratically often corrolates to a DUI or some other nastiness for example.

Plus there's the valid question of Insurance and ability to verify Regisration. Kind of silly to get a CDL if it just makes it easier to get cited for lacking proof of insurance and/or proper registration.

This was my thought earlier...they will be able to get the license but in some instances will not have the insurance to go along with it. It could quite possibly add to the workload of law enforcement. IJ, you said earlier that there are uninsured drivers out there regardless...true, but this could just add more.

[IJ Reilly]

Plus there's the valid question of Insurance and ability to verify Regisration. Kind of silly to get a CDL if it just makes it easier to get cited for lacking proof of insurance and/or proper registration.

As I pointed out before, the insurance requirement isn't tied to the driver's license, it's tied to vehicle registration. Come to think of it, I doubt the DMV checks the legal residency status of a vehicle owner when they register it in California. I wonder why nobody is making a big stink over that (probably because it's always been that way and nobody believes it would make the roads safer to have fewer cars registered).

[mischief]

As I pointed out before, the insurance requirement isn't tied to the driver's license, it's tied to vehicle registration. Come to think of it, I doubt the DMV checks the legal residency status of a vehicle owner when they register it in California. I wonder why nobody is making a big stink over that (probably because it's always been that way and nobody believes it would make the roads safer to have fewer cars registered).

It isn't tied to the license but it is ABSOLUTELY REQUIRED. Allthough the residency check is a joke (got a mailing addy that isn't a PO box?) the vehicle can't be registered OR operated without insurance.

Your confusion is exactly the point I'm trying to make. This is a complex and nuanced issue that simply issuing CDL's would only complicate further.

If this was a "total package" legal-driving initiative that covered insurance, registration & CDL and/or a real nonresident expidited work-visa program I'd be all for it. As it is, the bill is just an excuse to argue about racism and inequality when the issue is really xenophobia and procrastination.

[IJ Reilly]

I can't ascribe any motives to whomever brought up this proposal in the first place because I honestly don't know what they were. Pandering to the interests of people who can't vote? I don't think so. What I think the proposed change does in actual effect is to remove the DMV from any role as adjuncts of the INS by taking the legal residency question off the license application. It's never been on the vehicle registration application, AFAIK.

This honestly should not turn into such a big stink, IMO. But people do seem to get very emotional when it comes to immigration issues. I see a lot of evidence of not very clear thinking here as elsewhere whenever this subject is raised. I'm not claiming to have the authoritative answer, but I do dislike when questions like this are framed in terms of "what illegal immigrants deserve." If that's our mode of analysis, then we're bound to get the answer wrong every time.

[mischief]

(snip) but I do dislike when questions like this are framed in terms of "what illegal immigrants deserve." If that's our mode of analysis, then we're bound to get the answer wrong every time.

That was NEVER on my mind. I just take issue with yet another FUBAR bill with a PC name and framing.

The greatest harm can be caused by the best of intentions.

[continuum]

That was NEVER on my mind. I just take issue with yet another FUBAR bill with a PC name and framing.

The greatest harm can be caused by the best of intentions.

You've gone a lot further with this than I have since you are more educated on the topic than I am. I admit I don't have all facts but I do have an opinion on this subject with the knowledge that I do have....my word to you is that this person (IJReilly) will pull words out of your mouth that you didn't say. You never said anything about what illegal immigrants deserve but he thinks you did and he must be right. ;)

I like being on the sidelines now so I can watch him heckle someone else.

[mischief]

You've gone a lot further with this than I have since you are more educated on the topic than I am. I admit I don't have all facts but I do have an opinion on this subject with the knowledge that I do have....my word to you is that this person (IJReilly) will pull words out of your mouth that you didn't say. You never said anything about what illegal immigrants deserve but he thinks you did and he must be right. ;)

I like being on the sidelines now so I can watch him heckle someone else.


IJ's OK. He just gets a little hot sometimes. I do to with the right stimulus. We all go Cornholio occasionally (" Are you threatening me??!!? You do not want to face the wrath of my Bunghole!!!").

[continuum]

IJ's OK. He just gets a little hot sometimes. I do to with the right stimulus. We all go Cornholio occasionally (" Are you threatening me??!!? You do not want to face the wrath of my Bunghole!!!").

I certainly don't want anything to do with your bung? :) haha... i have no problem with the guy, i just don't like when people pull words out of your mouth. maybe it's what i get for not having ALL the facts...either way, all in good fun.

[IJ Reilly]

That was NEVER on my mind. I just take issue with yet another FUBAR bill with a PC name and framing.

The greatest harm can be caused by the best of intentions.

Sure, but have you seen the bill? I haven't. I also haven't heard anyone who was in favor of it explain the rationale behind it. So I will refrain from ascribing any intentions beyond what I actually know, which at this point, isn't very much. I hope that doesn't seem like an unreasonable position to you (though it does seem to be to others).

My automatic bias is for the states to stay as far away from immigration issues as possible. These are federal problems which the states have no power to control or fix. I am also biased towards the states dealing with their issues pragmatically. Whether this proposal fixes a problem or makes one worse, I don't pretend to know.

[IJ Reilly]

I certainly don't want anything to do with your bung? :) haha... i have no problem with the guy, i just don't like when people pull words out of your mouth. maybe it's what i get for not having ALL the facts...either way, all in good fun.

Please point out where I have "put words into your mouth." Pointing out where you've made statements without a factual basis don't count.