TOTAL INFORMATION ANALYSIS

Thursday, December 13, 2007

A release from Arizona state senator, Karen Johnson, Dec. 12, 2007:

"Sen. Karen Johnson statements on enhanced driver’s license

Last Thursday, Gov. Napolitano went to Washington, D.C. and signed an agreement with the U.S. Dept. of Homeland Security to implement an “enhanced driver’s license” in Arizona – that is, a driver’s license that will be a “3-in-one” card – a driver’s license, a passport, and a REAL ID. She made that agreement without knowing what the REAL ID card will consist of – the final regulations on the Real ID have not even been made public yet – and without knowing the cost to the state of Arizona.

Who is the governor to say what we are going to do? She is just one branch of our state government.

The following states have enacted legislation refusing to comply with the REAL ID Act:

Colorado, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Maine, Michigan, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Washington.

In the last legislative session, Arizona nearly passed such a bill. (SB 1152, which I sponsored, would have prohibited implementation of the Federal Real ID Act. It passed the Senate 23-5 and included bipartisan support.)

So what is it that so many state legislatures know that our governor doesn’t seem to understand?

Officials, especially on the national level, forget that they do not give orders, they take orders from constituents. The aforementioned states understand this intrusion and the nightmares likely to follow.

I oppose making our driver’s license into an identity card for a number of reasons:



First, the agreement the governor signed hands over to the federal government a great deal of state power and authority. This agreement gives to the Dept. of Homeland Security the power to (1) establish minimum “business standards” for the licenses (whatever that means) (2) establish how the Dept. of Motor vehicles will handle background checks (3) set standards for protecting personally identifiable information (4) determine the criteria for issuing the license and (5) establish the standards for the “facilitative technology” that will be embedded in the license. This is a huge transfer of power from the state to the federal government. I believe in state’s rights, and do not support abdicating our state sovereignty to a bunch of bureaucrats in Washington, D.C.


Second, creating an enhanced driver’s license turns our state Dept. of Motor Vehicles into a federal national security agency. That is a radical change in purpose that the legislature has neither studied nor contemplated.


Third, the technology required by the REAL ID Act could turn driver’s licenses into tracking devices, allowing computers to track people’s whereabouts. Today, with handheld technology available to read RFID chips at a distance, no rational person can assure Americans that their personal data will not be stolen and abused. This isn’t Nazi Germany, and I oppose requiring people to carry tracking devices in their pockets.


Fourth, there is no evidence that requiring people to carry identity cards will thwart terrorism. Terrorists are adept at getting around security and I have no doubt they will easily circumvent any card we can come up with.


Finally, an identity card does nothing to secure our borders. A fence across the border and well-armed guards would provide 90 percent of the protection needed. If the governor is willing to spend millions of dollars on a three-in-one card, then I’d prefer to see those millions spent on border protection.

Right now you could march an Army across our southern border, and no one would know it – and I can guarantee you that those soldiers wouldn’t be carrying an identity card so we could track them!!

These are just a few of the reasons I oppose the three-in-one card. I also have a number of questions for the governor. For example,



The Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative (WHTI) will not be fully implemented until the summer of 2008. Why would the governor agree to requirements that have not been fully developed, let alone implemented?


The memorandum of agreement (MOA) between the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the governor claim, “a driver’s license can be enhanced to securely denote identity and citizenship.” Just how secure will these new licenses be . . is that guaranteed?


By signing the MOA, the governor has committed Arizona to complying with standards established by DHS. What are those standards and what does the DHS business plan call for? Have the business plan and standards been developed and who gets to participate in their development?


What happens at the termination of the agreement on July 31, 2009? If the agreement ends but the enhanced license is valid for 5 years, will they still be valid if the MOA is not?


If the state opposes the implementation of the REAL ID Act due to a lack of funding, why has the governor agreed to this enhanced driver’s license in a MOA that specifically states “DHS is not intended to provide any funding or financial support for the State for this project”?
(NCSL study determined a cost of over $11 billion dollars for the 50 states to implement the Real ID.)


In the governor’s news release she states the 3-in-1 ID will require legislative approval. Why didn’t she wait to get that approval prior to signing the agreement? Is the agreement still valid if she does not get legislative approval?

Never in the history of our country have we ever required our citizens to carry an “internal passport” in order to move about and live their lives. Introducing identity cards into our culture and our laws is the very essence of tyranny. I will oppose that with every ounce of strength I have.
-----

Labels: homeland security, police state, real id

| Posted at 13:22 | PERMA-LINK |

Comments:

Post a Comment