Skip to main content

Delaware just wants the Feds to leave a hundred dollar bill on the table afterward....

Delaware is obediently preparing to bend over and accept the civil rights reaming that is Real ID [as quoth the WNJ]:

Those getting a Delaware driver’s license will soon face increased security measures.

That could make life difficult for some – particularly immigrants who are not in this country legally and don’t have the necessary documents.

The federal REAL ID Act of 2005, which came in response to the 9/11
Commission’s findings that 18 of the 19 hijackers had obtained driver’s licenses, requires states to revamp their licenses and licensing procedures to meet federal standards.

The law was condemned by many states as a costly unfunded mandate – it would cost them an estimated $4 billion to implement it – and 24 states have refused to comply or passed laws limiting their participation.

Delaware, which didn’t resist the federal Real ID mandate, is expected to be ready to meet the requirements of Real ID.


If you want to read about the serious civil rights, personal privacy, and governmental intrusion implications of RealID, visit the Electronic Privacy Information Center and read the paper prepared by a panel of nationally recognized experts who say that the program is (a) unconstitutional; (b) rife with the potential for government and law enforcement abuse; (c) hideously costly; and (d) won't make us one damn bit safer from terrorists.

And while most of the liberal segments of the Delaware blogosphere are busily trashing Senator Tom Carper over his views on health care reform, let's take a moment to recall that he has consistently been against this program, and voted against it from the start.

Comments

Delaware Watch said…
"And while most of the liberal segments of the Delaware blogosphere are busily trashing Senator Tom Carper over his views on health care reform, let's take a moment to recall that he has consistently been against this program, and voted against it from the start."

Are you suggesting that because an elected official is good on one issue, he can't be criticized for being bad on another issue?
Dana,
Hardly. But I am suggesting that the stories being written about Carper these days in many places suggest he's never done anything right.
tom said…
"he has consistently been against this program, and voted against it from the start."

and yet the PASS Act, of which he is a sponsor and presumably does support is only marginally better than REAL ID.

Another disgusting fact about the Del. DMV implementing REAL ID is that they are spending money to prepare for it despite the fact that the bill authorizing its implementation, SB 74, has not yet been passed by the General Assembly.

Popular posts from this blog

A Libertarian Martin Luther King Jr. Day post

In which we travel into interesting waters . . . (for a fairly long trip, so be prepared) Dr. King's 1968 book, Where do we go from here:  chaos or community? , is profound in that it criticizes anti-poverty programs for their piecemeal approach, as John Schlosberg of the Center for a Stateless Society  [C4SS] observes: King noted that the antipoverty programs of the time “proceeded from a premise that poverty is a consequence of multiple evils,” with separate programs each dedicated to individual issues such as education and housing. Though in his view “none of these remedies in itself is unsound,” they “all have a fatal disadvantage” of being “piecemeal,” with their implementation having “fluctuated at the whims of legislative bodies” or been “entangled in bureaucratic stalling.”   The result is that “fragmentary and spasmodic reforms have failed to reach down to the profoundest needs of the poor.” Such single-issue approaches also have “another common failing — ...

More of This, Please

Or perhaps I should say, "Less of this one, please." Or how about just, "None of them. Ever again. Please....For the Love of God." Sunshine State Poll: Grayson In Trouble The latest Sunshine State/VSS poll shows controversial Democratic incumbent Alan Grayson trailing former state Senator Dan Webster by seven points, 43 percent to 36 percent. A majority of respondents -- 51 percent -- disapprove of the job that Grayson is doing. Independents have an unfavorable view of him as well, by a 36/47 margin. Grayson has ignored the conventional wisdom that a freshman should be a quiet member who carefully tends to the home fires. The latest controversy involves his " Taliban Dan " advertisement, where he explicitly compares his opponent to the Taliban, and shows a clip of Webster paraphrasing Ephesians 5:22 -- "wives, submit to your husbands." An unedited version of the clip shows that Webster was actually suggesting that husba...

A reply to Salon's R. J. Eskrow, and his 11 stupid questions about Libertarians

Posts here have been in short supply as I have been living life and trying to get a campaign off the ground. But "11 questions to see if Libertarians are hypocrites" by R. J. Eskrow, picked up at Salon , was just so freaking lame that I spent half an hour answering them. In the end (but I'll leave it to your judgment), it is not that Libertarians or Libertarian theory looks hypocritical, but that the best that can be said for Mr. Eskrow is that he doesn't have the faintest clue what he's talking about. That's ok, because even ill-informed attacks by people like this make an important point:  Libertarian ideas (as opposed to Conservative ideas, which are completely different) are making a comeback as the dynamic counterpoint to "politics as usual," and so every hack you can imagine must be dragged out to refute them. Ergo:  Mr. Eskrow's 11 questions, with answers: 1.       Are unions, political parties, elections, and ...