Who put driver’s licenses on the national agenda?

November 16, 2007

When New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer (D-N.Y.) proposed that undocumented immigrants be eligible for driver’s licenses as a public-safety issue, New Yorkers were less than impressed with the idea. The issue went from a state to a national issue a couple of weeks ago when Hillary Clinton said she thought the Spitzer plan was a good idea, which she wasn’t prepared to endorse.

Given the attention to the issue in last night’s debate in Las Vegas, one might think this has become one of the most pressing issues in the nation. It’s really not. And as Noam Scheiber noted, it’s time to stop pretending that it is.

Man, I really hate that illegal immigrant driver’s license question. There’s a reason all three major candidates have struggled to answer it: It’s a dumb question that sheds almost no light on what they would do as president. No Democratic president is going to introduce federal legislation making immigrants eligible for driver’s licenses; and no Democratic president is going to introduce legislation preventing states from doing the same. So it’s moot. What a president does is influence federal immigration policy, which is what all three front-runners keep trying to say every time they get asked about this.

The audience laughed when Obama tried to say he voted for this legislation as a state senator but wouldn’t propose such legislation himself. But that’s a perfectly legitimate answer. No one would.

I’m sure everyone has specific issues they’d like to see emphasized in a debate, and there’s no way to get to everything, but last night’s event featured almost no discussion of Iraq policy, nothing about FISA or surveillance programs, nothing about torture policy, nothing about global warming, the list goes on (and on).

But Wolf Blitzer made sure that every single candidate on the stage responded to a hypothetical question about whether they would support drivers’ licenses for illegal immigrants in the absence of comprehensive immigration reform — a policy the next president will have almost no control over anyway.

Some candidates had the temerity to suggest that they discuss the broader immigration policy, but that was discouraged.

Consider this exchange:

MR. BLITZER: All right. I want to just press you on this point because it’s a logical follow-up, and then I want to go and ask everyone. On the issue that apparently tripped up Senator Clinton earlier, the issue of driver’s licenses for illegal immigrants, I take it, Senator Obama, you support giving driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants. Is that right?

SEN. OBAMA: When I was a state senator in Illinois, I voted to require that illegal aliens get trained, get a license, get insurance to protect public safety. (Scattered applause.) That was my intention. And — but I have to make sure that people understand the problem we have here is not drivers licenses. Undocumented workers don’t come here to drive. (Laughter.) They don’t go — they’re not coming here to go to the In-N-Out Burger. That’s not the reason they’re here. They’re here to work. And so instead of being distracted by what has now become a wedge issue, let’s focus on actually solving the problem that —

MR. BLITZER: All right.

SEN. OBAMA: — this administration, the Bush administration, has done nothing about.

MR. BLITZER: Well, let’s go through everybody because I want to be precise. I want to make sure the viewers and those of us who are here fully understand all of your positions on this.

Barring, avoiding, assuming there isn’t going to be comprehensive immigration reform, do you support or oppose drivers licenses for illegal immigrants?

SEN. OBAMA: I am not proposing that that’s what we do. What I’m saying is that we can’t — (interrupted by laughter). No, no, no, no, look, I have already said I support the notion that we have to deal with public safety and that drivers licenses at the state level can make that happen. But what I also —

MR. BLITZER: All right.

SEN. OBAMA: But what I also know, Wolf, is that if we keep on getting distracted by this problem, then we are not solving it.

MR. BLITZER: But — because this is the kind of question that is sort of available for a yes or no answer. (Laughter, cheers, applause.) Either you support it or you oppose it. Let’s go down and get a yes or no from everyone….

Who cares? If this were a gubernatorial debate in a state with a large immigrant population, then sure, but this isn’t a presidential issue.

Is there some great public yearning for a never-ending discussion about driver’s licenses that I’m not aware of? Can the political world move on now?

This is exactly the world George Orwell saw coming.

The myopic media and the not-so-savvy audience were LAUGHING at the suggestion that there could be a better way of life in America.

Un-phucking-believable.

  • Biden made the most salient point of the night when he indicated that the average American sitting at home didn’t care about all the scatological discussion about drivers’ licenses and government procedures, etc. They want to know what the next President is going to do about making their life better – whether that’s improving the jobs outlook, protecting home owners, keeping their kids safe or bringing home sons and daughters from Iraq.

    It sure does seem like the networks that host these debates care more about scoring some points with their fellow journalists than getting any type of understanding about the issues that Americans care about.

  • I think that the issue is pertinent in the sense that a microchipped national ID (REAL ID) has already been enacted into law and the Executive Branch has the authority to not enforce it on the grounds that it is unconstitutional (I believe it is a violation of the Fourth Amendment).

    Again, this is where there is little difference among the Democratic Candidates (with the notable exception of Dennis Kucinich), of those who were members of Congress at the time of the passage of the REAL ID Act, Kucinich was the lone ‘Nay’ vote.

    Passports are already being microchipped and the program for state driver’s licenses will begin in 2009.

    So, how do you like 1984 everyone?

  • Wolf Blitzer is the worst debate moderator – ever.

    I participated in an email campaign yesterday trying to get Wolf to ask the candidates about the place of coal in our energy future. (The telecast was sponsored in part by “clean coal,” whatever that is, and there is a lot of coal mining in Nevada.) I was disappointed, but not surprised, that he ignored the issue.

    I enjoyed the moment when Hillary put Campbell Brown in her place. I don’t remember the question, but Hillary’s response was a dismissive “Campbell!” It was effective, and from the same bag of tricks as her “cackle.”

    Did CNN mention that Campbell Brown’s husband is a Republican consultant and frequent contributor on Fox “News?” Surely they did. I must have missed it while I was crunching my popcorn.

  • Why shouldn’t immigration, crime, border enforcement, changing demographcic, criminal gangs, highway safety, and scofflaws be important issues.

    Do you really think that the average middle class American sitting at home cares more about torture than about the illegal aliens in his neighborhood, in his kid’s school, or driving in the lane next to him?

    If the candidate did not want to answer specifically about drivers licenses, then they should have linked to their ideas about immigration, border security, etc.

    Maybe the real answer that so many of the Democratic candidates want to avoid immigration is that their beliefs and proposals are so far from what most Americans want.

  • “Again, this is where there is little difference among the Democratic Candidates (with the notable exception of Dennis Kucinich), of those who were members of Congress at the time of the passage of the REAL ID Act, Kucinich was the lone ‘Nay’ vote.”

    Actually, that is not a correct statement. Has the REAL ID Act actually passed all of Congress? I may be wrong, but the bill did pass in the House, with 160 or so Representatives (primarily Dem) voting against it. But has it passed the Senate? I thought it was placed into a different bill in the Senate, the Comprehensive Immigration bill, and that that bill has not passed yet. And there were votes on amendments (Baccus-Tester) to table the REAL ID portion of the Comprehensive Immigration bill, and on which Clinton and Dodd were on the correct side of the vote, but Obama was on the wrong side of the vote on the amendment. Biden was a no vote.

  • “Do you really think that the average middle class American sitting at home cares more about torture than about the illegal aliens in his neighborhood, in his kid’s school, or driving in the lane next to him?”

    No. I would bet dollars to doughnuts, though, that the average middle class American does not place “illegal aliens in his neighborhood, in his kid’s schools, or driving in the lane next to him” that high on the list of issues most important to them. Practically every poll reflects this. But you do a good job of projection, I will say. And I would even go as far as saying that the average middle American really does not have a huge problem with illegals in their neighborhoods, or in the driving lanes next to them, as most probably do work for those average middle class Americans on a regular basis, providing domestic services, landscape services, home repair services, etc. at a lower price.

  • Then again, maybe I am wrong on Real ID. Did it pass and then is not going into effect for a few years, with the Dems now trying to strip it out/reverse something from the past? I forget.

  • Re: bubba @ #6

    From wikipedia:

    The Real ID Act started off as H.R. 418, which passed the House[1] and went stagnant. Representative James Sensenbrenner (R) of Wisconsin, the author of the original Real ID Act, then attached it as a rider on a military spending bill (H.R. 1268). The House of Representatives passed that spending bill with the Real ID rider 368-58[2], and the Senate passed the joint House-Senate conference report on that bill 100-0.[3]. President Bush signed it into law on May 11, 2005[4].

    Bush signs H.R. 1268:

    Statement on H.R. 1268, the “Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for Defense, the Global War on Terror, and Tsunami Relief, 2005”

    I love this back door shit.

  • It’s not hard to understand. Immigration is the big Republican issue next year, Republican activists see an opportunity to punish Dems on this issue so they have been putting pressure on the media including Wolf to focus on immigrant driver’s licenses, Wolf in all his gullibility does their bidding and turns it into a big story, as do idiots like Matthews and Russert. Luckily for Wolf Blitzer that Republican operatives never tried to convince him to do a gay porn video or he would be resigning in disgrace right about now.

  • “Who cares?”

    My feeling on this issue exactly. It is largely a state issue, but I don”t entirely mind some discussion of a candidate’s views on matters which are more state issues as such issues might provide some insight into their principles. A limited discussion of this issue might have been ok, but it has received far more attention that it deserves.

    Ultimately there are major issues and there are other things which have little bearing on whether I’d choose one candidate over another. A candidate’s position on this is not going to affect whether I support them.

  • Wolf Blitzer was terrible. He insisted on asking ridiculous questions that do not have simple yes or no answers; he wouldn’t allow candidates to speak without quickly jumping in to cut them off; he clearly created unnecessary, distracting chaos that serves no one well (except maybe the Republicans). Bring back the bells!

  • Yeah, it is a ridiculous question, but it would be nice of the Obama fams and Hillary haters here would acknowledge that Obama’s answer last night was almost identical to the answer he spent a week bashing Hillary for. Obama was all over the map, and his salvaging bottom line was “we need to address the bigger issue, which Bush has not done” — exactly like HRC last debate. Apparently hypocrisy in campaigning is not limited to Clintons and Rethugs.

  • I’m missing something in this debate. When I went to Europe I was allowed to drive with a US license, even though I didn’t speak much Swedish. I was told that if I stayed more than 6 (I think) months I would have to apply for a permanent Swedish license. It had nothing to do with citizenship. When my Swedish friend came here, he rented a car without any problem, though he needed his son to translate at the rent-a-car office. I would think that states would want people to get US licenses regardless of status if they are here for any extended length of time. And I can’t believe they use the process to screen out INS violations.

  • It has nothing to do with driving. It has to with legitimizing illegal aliens. A Mexican citizen may drive here with a Mexican driver’s license too. He or she just cannot BE here unless they have a visa or green card.

  • Bubba says: …the average middle American really does not have a huge problem with illegals in their neighborhoods…

    I guess we’re supposed to wait until the average American has a “huge problem” before we do something? What state do you live in? Here in Texas we’ve got a pretty big problem, and it’s only getting worse because the 2.7 million illegal aliens who were legalized under Reagan in 1986 and all their friends see that as a precedent to be expanded on. To them what we call illegal immigration isn’t really illegal, it’s someday-they’ll-be-retroactively-legal immigration.

    There are tons of legal latinos here who have friends who are illegal. And these latino Americans are simply incensed that the rest of us want to enforce the law and have normal immigration the way it’s supposed to be, where people from every country get to come here if they wait in line. They want their friends legalized, and to hell with the “racists” like me who say screw that.

    I’m sick of seeing American wages and property values forced down by hard-working people who should be in Mexico helping force their wages and property values UP. I know they’re only here to work. But illegal aliens can’t complain about labor conditions, and their bosses know that. You think that doesn’t force wages down?

  • “I guess we’re supposed to wait until the average American has a “huge problem” before we do something?”

    Don’t know how you read that into my comment, as my post says nothing of the sort. Seems you have a bit of bitterness on the issue, which is fine, and maybe even valid. But I was merely specifically replying specifically to a comment above, one that attempted to try and speak for most americans in a manner that does not appear to reflect reality. My comment does not stand for the proposition that nothing should be done, nor can I see how it can be.

  • Bubba,

    I would assme that most Americans put immigration higher on their list of concerns than torture or FISA. Torture and FISA are inside the beltway issues that only activist are concerned about. A large group of voters did not flood Capital Hill with calls about FISA. However, Congress’s phone system could not take the traffic generated by the Bush Amnesty and Open Borders proposals.

    When most people talk about that they believe America is on the wrong track, they probably believe that having to push “2” for English is part of being on the wrong track. Every poll shows that Americans do not support open borders, unlimited immigration, chain migration, or anchor babies. Yet, the leadership of progressives and the Democratic Party are overwhelmingly in their support of open borders.

    Maybe someone should have asked Edwards or Obama how they plan to have nationalized healthcare, free college for all, and lower greenhouse emissions while maintain unlimited immigration and open borders.

  • superdestroyer,

    Undertand what you are saying, but I am not buying. Especially: “However, Congress’s phone system could not take the traffic generated by the Bush Amnesty and Open Borders proposals.” That means nothing, as we have all too often seen with a certain loud, vocal, active but very minority group of folks in this country on way too many issues. Not saying that the issues presented by illegal immigration do not need attention or leadership, or that certain suggested ideas/solutions or things you note like open borders and unlimited immigration are not supported by people. But just because people do not support certain black/white presented things, strawmanlike if you will, like ‘open borders’ and ‘unlimited immigration’ does not mean that immigration issues are the higher ranked issues on the lists of ‘average Americans’. Practically every poll shows they are not. Although, to be fair,aA part of the problem is that ‘average Americans’ does not really take into account those Americans who are faced with serious immigration issues every day.

  • If I had to guess, I would guess that the top issues the average American is concerned with, without much fluctuation and pretty consistently, would be economy, Iraq, health care and Terra. Other issues, including immigration, may occassionally crack the top 4 or 5, but most likely waxing and waning in importance as the debate goes in Congress–so when Congress is actually debating immigration issues, it might kick up to a top 4 or 5 issue, but once the debate is done, and media coverage drops off, it drops back a few steps.

  • Bubba,

    But immigration is involved in such issues as the economy, health care, the environment, education, traffic, and crime. As long as the progressives and Democrats support defacto unlimited immigration (never deport anyone who gets to the U.S) and open borders (no fence, limits on ICE, no tracking of visitors), they have less credbility of the other issues. How does a single payer healthcere plan work with 20 million or more illegal aliens? How does the U.S. lower its carbon emissions with millions of both legal and illegal aliens coming in every year? How does the economy improve with millions of low skilled, low wage legal and illegal aliens in the U.S.? How does American get back on the right track when the public schools have MS-13 members as students and people are afriad to top at 7-11 because of the day laborers hanging around?

  • Driving licenses for illegals isn’t a federal issue; *comprehensive* immigration reform *is*. If you want to talk about illegals and immigration, then pose questions about *reform*, not about drivers licenses, which is a stop-gap and very limited in scope measure, best left to the individual states to decide. Sheesh.

  • Oh for fuck’s sake!

    “Illegals” are the new gays, who were the new blacks.

    Pass it on.

    I’m so tired of all this useless, right-wing fear-mongering, an “issue” that is nothing more than hate and bigotry and demagoguery.

    Is the economy in the tank because the rich elite and global corporations are gorging themselves on tax cuts and corporate welfare while you get fucked? Blame it on the “welfare mothers” and black folks! No wait, we can’t do that anymore… OK blame it on gays getting married! Uh, well, that worked in 2000, 2002, and 2004, but white middle class voters don’t seem too afraid of gays anymore. OK BLAME IT ON THE MESSICANS! Yeah, yeah, that’s the ticket!

    When will this stupidity stop?

  • I too whish they would ask better questions

    We need to know if a paticular candidate is for deportation by attrition or amnesty. If it amnesty, we need to know how they intend to avoid putting the USA into bankrutcy, as the ecomists are warning that we must bring in legal best and brightest immgrants who put more into the economy than they take out. Then we can have some low skilled workers who need to be carried for a generation.

    We need to know if the candidate is for North American Union and what their plans are if they are. Hilliary’s website about 6 months ago when I check it said she was for open borders. She has backed off that now.

    We need to know why none of the Dem candidates who are in the Senate have sponsored a bill to fix the immigration problem.

    This election could well determine the fate of our country. According to a Bush gov. document obtained by Judicial Watch,Bush has been secretly making policies for a North American Union, as Americans would resist North American integration and he is implementing them “by evolutionary stealth”. He supposed has agreed to completely open borders by 2010. Look at the facts:

    1. Bush open the border and stopped enforcing our immigration laws.
    2. Bush is denies he is creating a North American Highway, and his aide confirmed that to Congress, one minute before outlining exactly where the highway was to be.
    3. Bush was frantic to get Mexican truckers to have open access to American markets. Luckly some membes of Congress were on the ball and put a temporary stop to it.
    4. Bush pushes really stupid amnesty plan that only benefitted employers.
    5. Bush stopped building the fence, When pushed he started again… very slowly.
    6. Bush declared tough enforcement in August, then pulls the national guard and 1/2 the border patrol off the border.
    7. Bush declared tough enforcement in August but the bill for employer verification was not properly authroized. Bush does nothing to correct that.
    8. Mexican President Caldreson says that there is no border, that Mexicans have a right to live and work anywhere in the USA. No USA politcan says anything. No American media up roar. Strange.

    See www. stopnorthamericanunion.com

    Unless we elect a President and representatiaves that are pro deportation, pro rule of law and anti North American Union, American will not be around much longer.

    Will the last person in the country we used to call America please lower the flag.

    • Comments are closed.