Mike Huckabee: An Interview

Mike Huckabe was interviewed about a variety of issues. Here is what he said about REAL ID:

There have been some things in this particular administration that have been troubling to me. I'm certainly a 10th Amendment guy. I'm a federalist at heart. I think Jefferson was right and Hamilton was wrong. And at times this administration seems to have become Hamiltonian and not Jeffersonian. For example, with REAL ID, that's a huge mistake. It's putting a burden on a state that should not be the state's function, which is to provide the frontline of national security defense at the hands of a DMV worker at a state office. That's absurd. And then not funding it. That's a real problem. If you're going to have federal program then the feds ought to pay for it.

Read more here.

I have to ask again: Is REAL ID a headache because it is inherently an affront to our heritage of freedom or because it is expensive?

The answer is both.

The disturbing fact is many see the problem of REAL ID in purely financial terms.

Governors pressure feds on Real ID funding

By Wade-Hahn Chan

Governors pressure feds on Real ID funding

Delaware Gov. Ruth Ann Minner and Nevada Gov. Jim Gibbons are calling on the federal government to issue the long-awaited regulations for the Real ID Act of 2005 and also to pump more money into the program.

In a Sept. 12 letter to the director of the Office of Management and Budget, the two governors asked federal officials to “provide the significant investment necessary to meet the requirements of the federal mandate.”

Read more here.

----------------------
Is REAL ID a headache because it is inherently an affront to our heritage of freedom or because it is expensive?

The answer is both.

The disturbing fact is that most state leaders see the problem of REAL ID in purely financial terms. - JR

Feds still love Real ID despite growing opposition

Anne Broache posted this article at CNet News:

WASHINGTON--A controversial plan for national identification cards known as Real ID drew another ringing endorsement from top Bush administration officials on Monday, even as senators continued to question the law's privacy implications and cost.

Cheerleading for the mandate was led by the retiring Sen. John Warner (R-Va.), who called a nationalized ID card a top priority. He asked the four Bush administration officials present to divulge whether they supported the idea, which was recommended by the 9/11 Commission but has sparked rebellion from numerous states and civil liberties advocates concerned about its cost and potential for abuse.

Read more here.

Looking Beyond Our Noses: "Judge Calls for a DNA Bank to Cover Everyone

The TimesOnline (UK) reports that

A senior judge has called for the entire population and anyone visiting Britain to have their DNA placed on a national database.

Lord Justice Sedley said that a nationwide bank of DNA profiles would help to tackle crime and correct an imbalance in profiles stored by police.

This is an important story because bad ideas have a way of spreading--and the justifications for destroying the individual to facilitate an ever-increasing "statism" are endless.

There are 4.1 million people whose DNA is recorded on the police computer, more than in any other country. The vast majority of the profiles were obtained by arresting officers who are allowed to take samples from anyone detained for a “recordable offence” – a crime that could lead to imprisonment. The samples are kept whether the person is convicted or acquitted.

Sir Stephen Sedley, one of England’s most experienced Appeal Court judges, claims that it would be fairer to obtain the DNA from the whole of the British population whether involved in crime or not.

I can hear a dam giving way.

I am continually amazed at the lemming-like folks who have "no problem" with such a massive power-grab by any government. The first two reader comments display an inability to stand against the tide of group-think. For example:

I don't see how people can complain when we already have a driving licence, passport and other such identity documents. (The "Its Already Bad So Let's Make it Worse Fallacy".)

And...

So with the proper protective measures in place I am ok handing my DNA profile to the authorities. (The "I Don't Have Any Sense of Personal Dignity" Fallacy combined with the "My DNA is not My Personal Property" conclusion and the "I Trust Everyone With Power and Cannot Think For Myself" inclination.)

The discouraging fact is that Americans increasingly think the same way.

An Idea Worthy Trying...

Robert Hawes at The Jeffersonian has an idea for undermining the REAL ID Act:

Contact your state representative and, if you can't persuade them to sink REAL ID, ask them to support a measure that will give people a choice as to whether they want it or not, pursuant to their understanding the consequences of not having it. Many state politicians seem like they're asking to be given a reason not to comply with REAL ID. This approach may give them a measure of satisfaction where that is concerned. It's also very difficult to argue against giving people a choice when the new requirements will present such a tangible expense and inconvenience for the average person. More importantly though, it will leave you with a bit more of your freedom than you might otherwise retain, and, over time, such allowances may prove to be the monkey wrench that wrecks the authoritarian machine.

Check out the rest of the article here.