McGentrix wrote:Because there is no federal regulations covering how an official identification card is designed, applied for, or created.
This is a good thing, especially when it applies to private transactions.
Quote: We need a single ID that is the same from Hawaii to Massachusets. Then no matter where you go to buy your booze, the ID will be the same.
I don't think we need this. The necessary "federal regulations covering how an official identification... is applied for" is far too great an intrusion on my personal affairs to make it worthwhile.
Quote:Also, some states are toying with the idea of giving drivers licenses to illegal immigrants.
Of course, refusing drivers licenses to residents (legal or illegal) both makes us less secure and serves no purpose other than vindictive spite. But this has been covered in other threads.
But what about states rights. Doesn't this bill go against the 10th Amendment?
Quote:For the most part, your DL is an official doument. This woould guarantee two things. A uniform method of identification, and an allowance for a DL for immigrants and visa holders.
The problem with your "uniform method of identification" is that it would be controlled by the Federal government, would potentially have a big impact on my daily life, and it would be impossible for me to opt out.
If I want to open a bank account, for example, that is between me and the bank -- two private parties. There is no way you can tell me that forcing me to accept more government intrusion into this transaction is a good thing.
You damn liberals McGentrix. You think a Federal Program is the solution for every problem.