February 17, 2011
By Staff Reporter
The bill, drawn up by Rep. James Sensenbrenner, proposes to establish uniform rules for the issuing of temporary driver’s licenses in all states. It would limit such licenses to the period of a visa issued to a particular individual.
The bill is prompting negative reaction from several organizations, including the Irish American Unity Conference, because it pulls together a wide range of issues — such as political asylum, national security and licenses — in one potentially far-reaching legislative proposal.
The bill, H.R. 418, was initially referred to the House Judiciary Committee, its immigration subcommittee, the Homeland Security Committee and the Government Reform Committee.
As of presstime it was back before the full 435-member House.
A spokesman for the Judiciary Committee said Tuesday said that the bill was heading for the floor with 132 co-sponsors, all but two of them Republicans. One of the GOP co-sponsors is Rep. John Sweeney from upstate New York. Sweeney is a co-chair of the Congressional Ad Hoc Committee for Irish Affairs.
The judiciary spokesman said that a vote on the bill was expected on Thursday.
Sensenbrenner, a Republican from Wisconsin, is the chairman of the judiciary panel, so a rapid passage through the committee phase was not surprising.
In a statement on his Web site, Sensenbrenner said his legislation was not trying to set state policy for who may or may not drive a car.
“But it does address the use of a driver’s license as a form of identification to a federal official.”
Sensenbrenner said that the act would establish a uniform rule for all states as a result of which temporary driver’s licenses for foreign visitors would expire when their visa terms expire.
“And it will establish tough rules for confirming identity before temporary driver’s licenses are issued,” Sensenbrenner said.
However, a spokeswoman for the New York Immigration Coalition said that while the Sensenbrenner bill was not explicitly telling the states what do with regard to licenses for undocumented immigrants, it would “de facto” force the states to change their current requirements.
“The states won’t have much of a choice so it’s a little disingenuous on his [Sensenbrenner’s] part,” the coalition’s Jackie Zimo said.
The IAUC, meanwhile, vowed to battle the bill as it proceeds through the legislative process.
The Washington D.C.-based group said this week that it was committed to defeating Sensenbrenner’s bill on the grounds that it was anti-immigrant.
IAUC national president Andrew Somers said that, far from enhancing the nation’s security, the Real ID Act would increase the numbers of uninsured drivers, thereby making the nation’s roadways more dangerous.
The IAUC, he said, was also concerned about the act’s view of what constitutes terrorist activity.
“Once again, Congress has an opportunity to clarify what is meant by terrorist activity and once again it has singularly failed to do so,” Somers, a retired judge, said. “We have seen that even the current definition of terrorism contained in
the Immigration and Nationality Act is so overbroad that it has targeted
Irish nationals and their families who pose no danger to the safety and
security of the United States.
“Now it is proposed that any non-citizen who ever supported Irish political prisoners or their families are to be ousted from the United States on the say-so of some low-level bureaucrat. This legislation is most un-American, and the IAUC will not stand for it.”
Should the Real ID Act be approved by the House of Representatives, it will then move the U.S. Senate for a vote in that 100-member body.