100-0 Real ID wins....

(Lamar) Alexander (R-TN) and other lawmakers said the rules established in the REAL ID Act will have unintended consequences. Driver's license examiners trained to decide whether a person can parallel park will have to determine whether an applicant is an al-Qaida terrorist, he said.

"It's possible that some governor may look at this and say, 'Wait a minute. Who are these people in Washington telling us what to do with our driver's licenses and making us pay for them, too?'" Alexander said.

Some states have threatened to challenge the new driver's license orders in court and even disobey them.

Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, vice chairman of the National Governors Association, has said "if more than half of the governors agree we're not going down without a fight on this, Congress will have to consider changing" the rules. Huckabee also is a Republican.

Senator Slams New Driver's License Rules
By SUZANNE GAMBOA, Associated Press Writer
Tuesday, May 10, 2005
(05-10) 18:57 PDT WASHINGTON, (AP) --

States are threatening to challenge in court and even disobey new orders from Congress to start issuing more uniform driver's licenses and verify the citizenship or legal status of people getting them.

...

"Governors are looking at all their options. If more than half of the governors agree we're not going down without a fight on this, Congress will have to consider changing this unfunded federal mandate," said Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, vice chairman of the National Governors Association. A Huckabee aide said the options include court action.

...

States will have three years after the president signs the bill to obey the rules. If they don't, their residents won't be able to board planes or enter federally protected buildings.

States also question how they will verify birth certificates, whose appearance vary widely by state and county. Dunlap said his state has only a portion of birth certificates online.

more...
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2005/05/10/national/w155857D84.DTL

http://kennedy.senate.gov /

May 9, 2005

FLOOR STATEMENT BY SENATOR EDWARD M. KENNEDY ON IRAQ SUPPLEMENTAL
(As Prepared for Delivery)

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT: Laura Capps/Melissa Wagoner (202) 224-2633

<snip>

Included in the conference agreement are the so-called Real ID immigration provisions that are highly controversial, harmful, and unnecessary. The Intelligence Reform Act we approved overwhelmingly last year provides real border security solutions. The so-called Real ID bill added by the House to this spending bill, contains controversial provisions we rejected last year and likely would have rejected again if we had been given a chance to debate them on the floor of the Senate. They're a false solution on border security, and they serve no purpose except to push an anti-immigrant agenda. More than ever, we need to take the time to get border security reform right, as opposed to pushing through legislation to meet the demands of anti-immigrant extremists. The stakes are simply too great.

In addition to the numerous substantive problems with the Real ID, the process through which they have been forced into this conference report is flawed and unacceptable. The Republican leadership in the House and Senate shut Democrats out of the conference negotiations. Why? Because the House bill has controversial provisions that have questionable support in the Senate and with the American people. Strong-arm tactics are offensive and do a great deal of disservice to the important issues of our time. The White House too, once rejected these provisions, yet, they now support them. What important issues will the White House flip-flop on next?

Those who pushed through these Real ID provisions continue to say that loopholes exist in our immigration and asylum laws that are being exploited by terrorists. They claim these provisions will close them. In fact, they do nothing to improve national security, and leave other big issues unresolved.

They want us to believe that its changes will keep terrorists from being granted asylum. But current immigration laws already bar persons engaged in terrorist activity from asylum. Before they receive asylum, all applicants must also undergo extensive security checks, covering all terrorist and criminal databases at the Department of Homeland Security, the FBI, and the CIA.

Asylum seekers will find no refuge. Battered women and victims of stalking will be forced to divulge their addresses in order to get driver's licenses, potentially endangering their lives. Many Americans will have other problems with their driver's license. All legal requirements, including labor laws, can now be waived to build a wall. For the first time since the Civil War, habeas corpus will be prohibited. The Real ID provisions contain other broad and sweeping changes to laws that go to the core of our national identity.

Each year, countless refugees are forced to leave their countries, fleeing persecution. America has always been a haven for those desperate for such protection. At the very beginning of our history, the refugee Pilgrims seeking religious freedom landed on Plymouth Rock. Ever since, we've welcomed refugees, and it's made us a better nation. Refugees represent the best of American values. They have stood alone, at great personal cost, against hostile governments for fundamental principles like freedom of speech and religion. We have a responsibility to examine our asylum policies carefully, to see that they are fair and just.

But, the Real ID bill tramples this noble tradition and will be devastating for legitimate asylum-seekers fleeing persecution. It will make it more difficult for victims fleeing serious human rights abuses to obtain asylum and safety, and could easily lead to their return to their persecutors.

Another section of conference report contains a provision that would complete the US-Mexico border fence in San Diego. But it goes much farther than that. It gives the Department of Homeland security unprecedented and unchecked authority to waive all legal requirements necessary to build such fences, not only in San Diego, but anywhere else along our 2000 mile border with Mexico and our 4000 mile border with Canada. Building such fences will cost hundreds of millions of dollars, and they still won't stop illegal immigration. What we need are safe and legal avenues for immigrants to come here and work, not more walls.

A major additional problem in the Real ID provisions is that it could result in the deportation even of long-time legal permanent residents, for lawful speech or associations that occurred twenty years ago or more. It raises the burden of proof to nearly impossible levels in numerous cases.

A person who made a donation to a humanitarian organization involved in Tsunami relief could be deported if the organization or any of its affiliates was ever involved in violence. The burden would be on the donor to prove by clear and convincing evidence that he knew nothing about any of these activities. The spouse and children of a legal permanent resident could also be deported too based on such an accusation, because of their relationship to the donor.

The provision could be applied retroactively, so that a permanent resident who had once supported the lawful, nonviolent work of the African National Congress in South Africa, Sinn Fein in Northern Ireland, the Northern Alliance in Afghanistan, or the contras in Nicaragua would be deportable. It would be no defense to show that the only support was for lawful nonviolent activity. It would be no defense to show that the United States itself supported some of these groups.

The driver's license provisions don't make us safer either. Let me explain what these provisions really do. They repeal a section of the Intelligence Reform Act which sets up a process for states and the federal government to work together to establish federal standards for driver's licenses and identification cards. Progress is already being made to implement these important measures, but this bill replaces them with highly problematic and burdensome requirements. The National Conference of State Legislatures says that these provisions are "unworkable, unproven, costly mandates that compel States to enforce federal immigration policy rather than advance the paramount objective of making State-issued identity documents more secure and verifiable."

Indeed, it is a costly unfunded mandate on the states. The CBO estimate on the implementation of the driver's license provisions is $20 million over a 5-year period to reimburse states for complying with the legislation. But, that is not all; the provisions require states to participate in an interstate database that would share information at a cost of $80 million over 3 years.

The driver's license provisions do nothing to address the threat of terrorists or to address legitimate security concerns. It would not have prevented a single 9/11 hijacker from obtaining a driver's license, or a single terrorist from boarding a plane. All 13 hijackers could have obtained licenses or IDs under this proposal, and foreign terrorists can always use their passports to travel.

The result of these restrictive driver's license provisions will be raised insurance rates, higher numbers of fatalities on America's roadways, and an increased black market for false and fraudulent documents. The Real ID actually undercuts the original purpose of traffic safety. It is better to have licensed, insured, and trained drivers on our roads.

By preventing immigrants from obtaining driver's licenses undermines national security by pushing people into the shadows and fueling the black market for fraudulent identification documents.

The Real ID provisions do nothing to combat the threat of terrorists or to deal with legitimate security concerns. They have taken away precious time that could have been used to address genuine pressing issues.

Hundreds of organizations across the political spectrum continue to oppose this legislation. A broad coalition of religious, immigrant, human rights, civil liberties and state groups have expressed their own strong opposition.

In these difficult times for our country, we know that the threat of terrorism has not ended, and we must do all we can to enact genuine measures to stop terrorists before they act, and to see that law enforcement officials have the full support they need. The provisions of the Real ID bill in the conference report today will not improve these efforts. They will not make us safer or prevent terrorism. They are an invitation to gross abuses, and a false solution to national and border security.

The Real ID bill with its controversial provisions should have been considered by the Senate through debate and discussion, not attached to a critical piece of legislation needed by our troops.

I urge the Senate to get serious about immigration reform that will make genuine improvements where they are needed, and not in the piecemeal fashion that is contained in this report.

more.....

http://murray.senate.gov/news.cfm?id=237380

Murray Statement on Supplemental Aid for Iraq and Afghanistan

For Immediate Release: Tuesday, May 10, 2005

(WASHINGTON, D.C.) –

<snip>

I am also concerned about a controversial provision that was added to the Supplemental bill without any debate. The Real ID provision has ramifications for privacy, states’ rights and immigration policy. I am disappointed that it has been rammed through as an attachment to desperately needed funding for our troops.

I am already working with communities and officials across Washington state to help find a way to implement these new requirements. And I will continue to push the Administration to provide the funding necessary to make these changes without piling new burdens onto our already cash-strapped states.

It is unfortunate that at a time when we should be focusing on the needs of our troops and veterans, the majority party is using the Supplemental aid bill as a vehicle to legislate on subjects that have not received the debate and attention they deserve.

But at the end of the day, we cannot afford to fail in our missions abroad. With hundreds of thousands of troops sacrificing everyday in Iraq and Afghanistan, I support this Supplemental bill and I will continue my work to fight for their care as they return home.”

###

http://clinton.senate.gov/~clinton/news/2005/2005510B55.html

May 10, 2005
Statement of Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton
on the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations
Conference Report and Real ID Act

Washington, DC —

<snip>

I'm also deeply concerned that on an emergency supplemental to fund our troops and provide disaster relief for areas devastated by the tsunami we are being asked to vote on the so-called "Real ID" legislation. Its supporters say it is supposed to make our country safer, but how do we know that? We haven't had any committee hearings or any debate about it in the Senate. I had previously joined with my colleague, Senator Feinstein, on her amendment to prevent immigration proposals from being thrown needlessly into the emergency supplemental, and I am outraged that the Republican leadership in both the House and Senate decided to ignore this reasonable request and put this seriously flawed act into a bill to fund our troops. Emergency legislation designed to provide our troops with the resources they need to fight terrorism on the front lines is not the place for broad, sweeping immigration reform.

I am in total agreement with those who argue that we need to address our immigration challenges and we must also recognize that we are still not doing what we should to fulfill the demands of homeland security. And these issues do go hand-in-hand. If we can't secure our borders, we can't secure our homeland. We need a much tougher, much smarter look at these issues. Instead, we're faced with a piece of legislation, passed by the House, jammed into an emergency supplemental bill and my Republican colleagues are going to claim that we've made America safer. Well, that's a false claim.

We need to make our borders more secure. I've introduced legislation three years in a row to have a Northern Border Coordinator. I've met with both Secretary Ridge and Secretary Chertoff. We don't know who's in charge of the Northern Border. We're not even taking simple steps to rationalize our bureaucracy in Washington and figure out where the holes are and how to plug them.

We must continue our American tradition of welcoming immigrants who follow the rules and are trying to build a better life for their families. That's why I am so troubled by the changes in immigration, environmental and privacy laws included in this bill. I also worry about the consequences likely to occur because of changes in the asylum rules in the Real ID Act. I'm proud of the fact that our country has historically welcomed asylum seekers and refugees. Utica, New York is one of the most welcoming places for refugees in the entire country. But, under these new rules, we'll see whether America remains a welcoming place for those who seek refuge from persecution and violence.

We clearly have to make some tough decisions as a country. We need to ensure that people using fake ids don't cross our borders and jeopardize our homeland security. We must confirm that people who enter our country are who they purport to be. We need a system to apprehend criminals who are here illegally. And we need to develop a much better entry and exit system so that we know who is entering our country and overstaying their visas.

However, a piecemeal attempt to address immigration problems window-dressed as national security is not the solution. We need a thoughtful, reasonable process to address our immigration challenges and make our nation secure. This emergency bill does not provide that opportunity.