Thread: No Fix for Real ID - oppose S.717 and H.R.1117

POTUS wrote:

If the REAL ID's real purpose is to make it harder for illegal aliens and terrorists to get driver's licenses, why is George W. Bush so keen on it, when he's done everthing in his power since taking office, to encourage the illegal invasion?

Bush didn't write the Real ID Act and he certainly wasn't going to veto the Iraq spending bill that it was a part of.

POTUS - I basically agree with you on the points you made. Boosh is worthless and has no interest in protecting the country. I think most everyone here is in agreement on that one. Border security is a must and should be highest priority.

But, I guess, I'd suggest that the overall issue has more nuances and constituencies behind the policies (pro and/or against) than may appear at first blush. What I am thinking of here, is that implementing border security deals with future entrants to the US, but doesn't do anything to address the problem with IAs (and terrorists, for all we know) that are here now.

Originally Posted by MW

POTUS wrote:

If the REAL ID's real purpose is to make it harder for illegal aliens and terrorists to get driver's licenses, why is George W. Bush so keen on it, when he's done everthing in his power since taking office, to encourage the illegal invasion?

Bush didn't write the Real ID Act and he certainly wasn't going to veto the Iraq spending bill that it was a part of.

Bush didn't write the REAL ID Act, and if it was going to have a negative impact on his amigos getting drivers' licenses, he would have twisted arms to get it removed from the Iraq appropriations bill, like he twisted arms to get CAFTA passed.

but doesn't do anything to address the problem with IAs (and terrorists, for all we know) that are here now.

No doubt about Bush. But this kind of touches on the difference between the reality and the dream about the REAL ID. The ID is a moot point without the borders secured. Someone can jump over the border, steal a truck, and park it outside with a bomb in the back without ever coming "on the grid".

In an ideal world, we want to be able to have something that identifies the good guys and identifies the bad guys. However, people like Timothy McVeigh, the DC sniper, and several of the 9/11 terrorists had no criminal records and no known links to terrorism before their attacks. The Palestinians have shown through the years that they have no problem recruiting suicide bombers who have no previous ties to terrorism and are able to subvert the expected profile. It should be noted that we were able to uncover several of the 9/11 terrorist before the fact (the Phoenix memo) without the REAL ID, but they slipped through the cracks due to government bureaucracy. Fixing government with more government seems like a solution that is destined to fail.

The sad fact is that you can't reliable identify people to this extent unless we do away with any semblance of privacy in this country. Government would need to be intimately familiar with our lives and routines. For example, the government learns that a guy has bought 100 pounds of fertilizer in Oklahoma. Is he a farmer or is he the next McVeigh? Should the government check up on the guy now? Or leave him alone based on criteria that may or may not apply? History has shown that terrorists will try to fool the profile. So we send out some guys to check up on him. It's the logical thing to do.

However, this really starts us down the road to a Big Brother type of society. With the borders still wide open, we've gained very little.

POTUS wrote:

Bush didn't write the REAL ID Act, and if it was going to have a negative impact on his amigos getting drivers' licenses, he would have twisted arms to get it removed from the Iraq appropriations bill, like he twisted arms to get CAFTA passed.

You give Bush more credit than is due. The man wouldn't have had the strength to twist too many arms. He couldn't do it to get his amnesty through and he couldn't have done it to stop the Real ID act. Furthermore, he wouldn't have dared go against the 9/11 Commission recommendation and his party who overwhelmingly supported Real ID (too many obstacles).

Originally Posted by MW

POTUS wrote:

Bush didn't write the REAL ID Act, and if it was going to have a negative impact on his amigos getting drivers' licenses, he would have twisted arms to get it removed from the Iraq appropriations bill, like he twisted arms to get CAFTA passed.

You give Bush more credit than is due. The man wouldn't have had the strength to twist too many arms. He couldn't do it to get his amnesty through and he couldn't have done it to stop the Real ID act. Furthermore, he wouldn't have dared go against the 9/11 Commission recommendation and his party who overwhelmingly supported Real ID (too many obstacles).

No, I don't give Bush more credit than he's due. He had the strength to twist enough arms to pass CAFTA: www.renewamerica.us/columns/baldwin/050804 Bush had considerably more political capital in '05, when he signed REAL ID into law, than in '07, when amnesty was stopped. He could have put pressure on the then Republican-controlled Congress to strip REAL ID out of the Iraq appropriations bill, without being in opposition to the 9/11 Commission. Where did the 9/11 Commission stipulate, that something like REAL ID, should be attached to a spending appropriations bill? If the real intent of REAL ID was to deny licenses to illegal aliens, (among other things), Bush would have played statesman, and said the law was too important to be stuck onto an appropriations bill, and should be debated in Congress. At any rate, Bush and his flunky at DHS have been intent on seeing REAL ID becoming the law of the land, all along: www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/a ... 01407.html

Originally Posted by POTUS

No, I don't give Bush more credit than he's due. He had the strength to twist enough arms to pass CAFTA: www.renewamerica.us/columns/baldwin/050804 Bush had considerably more political capital in '05, when he signed REAL ID into law, than in '07, when amnesty was stopped. He could have put pressure on the then Republican-controlled Congress to strip REAL ID out of the Iraq appropriations bill, without being in opposition to the 9/11 Commission. Where did the 9/11 Commission stipulate, that something like REAL ID, should be attached to a spending appropriations bill? If the real intent of REAL ID was to deny licenses to illegal aliens, (among other things), Bush would have played statesman, and said the law was too important to be stuck onto an appropriations bill, and should be debated in Congress. At any rate, Bush and his flunky at DHS have been intent on seeing REAL ID becoming the law of the land, all along: www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/a ... 01407.html

Well said.