[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 151 (2005), Part 4]
[Senate]
[Page 5514]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                           DRIVER'S LICENSES

  Mr. ALEXANDER. Mr. President, I would now like to speak for 4 or 5 
minutes on another subject. I again thank the Senator from Texas. This 
is a subject that I recently wrote an op-ed about, which was published 
last week in the Washington Post. Fearing that many of my colleagues 
might have been in places such as Texas or Tennessee or Iraq and might 
have missed it, I will make virtually the same remarks here.
  Specifically, I am concerned about the so-called ``Real ID Act,'' a 
bill recently passed by the House of Representatives that would require 
States to turn 190 million driver's licenses into national 
identification cards, with State taxpayers, I am afraid, paying most of 
the costs.
  The first thing wrong here is that some House Members want to stick 
that identification card proposal on the appropriations bill that 
supports troops in Iraq. We should not slow down money for our troops 
while we debate identification cards.
  The second problem is that States not only get to create these 
identification cards, States will likely end up paying the bill. This 
is one more of the unfunded Federal mandates that we Republicans 
especially promised to stop.
  Supporters argue this is no mandate because States have a choice. 
Well, true. States may refuse to conform to the proposed Federal 
standards and issue licenses to whomever they choose, including illegal 
immigrants. But, if they do, States' licenses will not be accepted for 
``Federal purposes,'' such as boarding an airplane. That is some 
choice. What Governor will deny his or her citizens the identification 
they need to travel by air or to cash Social Security checks or for 
``other Federal purposes?''
  Of course, this identification card idea might backfire on us, the 
Members of Congress. Some feisty Governor might ask: Who are these 
people in Washington telling us what to do with our driver's licenses 
and making us pay for them, too?
  A Governor, let us say from California, might say: California will 
use its licenses for certifying drivers, and Congress can create its 
own identification cards for people who want to fly and do other 
federally regulated things. And, if they do not, I will put on the 
Internet the home telephone numbers of all the Congressmen.
  That is what some feisty Governor might say.
  If just one State refuses to do the Federal Government identification 
work, Congress would be forced to create what it claims to oppose, a 
Federal identification card for citizens of that State.
  Finally, if we must have a better identification card for some 
Federal purposes, there may be better ideas than turning State driver's 
license examiners into CIA agents. For example, Congress might create 
an airline traveler's card, or there could be an expanded-use U.S. 
passport. Since a motive here is to discourage illegal immigration, 
probably the most logical idea is to upgrade the Social Security card, 
which directly relates to the reason most immigrants come to the United 
States, to work.
  I have fought government identification cards as long and as hard as 
anyone in this Chamber. In 1983, when I was Governor of Tennessee, our 
Tennessee Legislature voted to put photographs on driver's licenses. 
Merchants and policemen wanted a State identification card to 
discourage check fraud and teenage drinking. I vetoed this photo 
driver's license bill twice because I believed driver's licenses should 
be about driving and that State identification cards infringed on civil 
liberties.
  That same year, 1983, I visited the White House on the annual visit 
that Governors have with the President of the United States. As I got 
to the gate, a White House guard asked for my photo identification.
  I said to the guard: We don't have photo driver's licenses in 
Tennessee. I vetoed them.
  The guard said: Well, you can't get in without one.
  Fortunately, the Governor of Georgia, the late George Busbee, was 
standing there next to me. He had his Georgia photo driver's license. 
He vouched for me. I was admitted to the White House.
  The legislature at home overrode my veto, and I gave up my fight 
against the State identification card. For years, the State driver's 
licenses have served as a de facto national identification card. But 
they have been unreliable. All but one of the 9/11 terrorists had valid 
driver's licenses.
  Even today, when I board an airplane, as I did this morning, security 
officials look at the front of my driver's license, which expired in 
2000, and rarely turn it over to verify that it has been extended until 
2005.
  My point is, we already have a national identification card. They are 
called driver's licenses. They are just ineffective.
  I still detest the idea of a government identification card. South 
Africa's experience is a grim reminder of how such documents can be 
abused.
  But I am afraid this is one of the ways 9/11 has changed our lives. 
Instead of pretending that we are not creating national identification 
cards, when we obviously are, I believe Congress should carefully 
create an effective Federal document that helps prevent terrorism with 
as much respect for privacy as possible.
  I thank the Senator from Texas for his courtesy. I yield the floor.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Texas.

                          ____________________