Canadian consul Dale Eisler, during his visit to Montana last week, praised Canada's relationship with the United States and reiterated the importance of a secure - yet efficient - border.
Eisler's comments turned out to be a timely reminder. Just a few days after his visit came the announcement that the federal REAL ID Act, which was supposed to go into effect this May, is being delayed yet again. Now we have until 2014 to adopt federal standards for driver's licenses and start feeding residents' personal information into a national database.
Fortunately, we're in good company. A number of lawmakers on both sides of the aisle have repeatedly stated their opposition to the REAL ID Act. These include Montana's Rep. Denny Rehberg, Sens. Max Baucus and Jon Tester and Gov. Brian Schweitzer. In fact, Baucus and Tester have co-sponsored a U.S. Senate effort to repeal the act.
What's more, Montana is already one of 17 states to have rejected this legislative mistake, thanks to a unanimous vote by state legislators last year.
But we're not out of the woods yet. Because we opted not to heed the act, Montana is one of several states that might have given up its ability to file for an extension to avoid additional security screenings when boarding an airplane or entering a federal building. We could be required to submit to extra security measures as early as this year.
Nevertheless, Montana's lawmakers deserve our continued support for their opposition. They will certainly need it in the coming years, because the REAL ID Act isn't the easiest measure to fight. After all, who doesn't want better border security?
The REAL ID Act follows a 9/11 Commission report that outlined a proposal to have every state contribute to a national database of individual identification information. The REAL ID Act would require states to meet new federal standards for driver's licenses, and it would require them collect an extensive amount of private information to do so.
But as a number of identity-theft experts have pointed out, this poses a massive security risk to the millions of Americans whose personal information would be contained in the centralized system. Some politicians have pointed out that the act also represents a substantial transfer of state authority to the federal government.
The act is of particular interest to border states like Montana, where many residents also oppose the ID requirements out of concern for healthy trans-border relations.
As Eisler pointed out, Montana shares strong economic and environmental interests with our neighbors to the north. Canada is our largest foreign export market, and more than 24,000 jobs in Montana are believed to be supported by trade between the two countries. Additionally, Montana sometimes shares fire and emergency services with local governments in Canada.
Those are among the many reasons why it's so important to maintain effective rules for border security. Unfortunately, the REAL ID Act doesn't fit this bill. It is meant to thwart terrorists, but it isn't clear just how a national ID card - which is what REAL ID would essentially create - would accomplish this.
It is clear, however, that it would put a number of needless and inefficient restrictions on law-abiding citizens.
|
 |
 |
Add your comment now! Write your comment in the form below.
(Email address is for verification only. If you'd like to email a story, look for the link above)