Someone Please Buy Matt Yglesias A Starbucks Coffee

The normally insightful Matt Yglesias tackles the apparently vexing question of whether illegal immigrants should be allowed to get driver's licenses and ends up demonstrating that he is in dire need of a trip to Starbucks, where we hope he will wake up and smell the latte:

Since this question (Should illegal immigrants get driver's licenses?) seems very hard for Democratic politicians to give a straightforward answer to [see Hillary at the debate], I thought I'd try to think about it myself. The problem with saying "yes" isn't just that it's unpopular, it's that it's unpopular because it sounds ridiculous. On some level, illegal immigrants shouldn't be allowed to get coffee at Starbucks. There's nothing that a person who's in the United States illegally can do inside the United States that is legal. If it's illegal for you to live in the United States, and it's illegal for you to work in the United States, then obviously it's illegal for you to drive to work in the United States which makes handing out driver's licenses to illegals seem preposterous.

On the other hand, back to the Starbucks. While it's not legal, as such, for illegal immigrants to be buying a latte at Starbucks, they also don't, in practice, need to pass a citizenship check or show a valid visa in order to do so. And, I think, rightly so. It would be incredibly inconvenient for everyone to need to present documentation before buying coffee. Coffee shops simply aren't a good locus for enforcement of immigration laws -- laws which ought to be enforced at the border, at airports, and at the workplace. The DMV seems to me to be closer to the Starbucks than to the airport in this regard.  What, after all, does the policy of requiring verified legal residency before issuing a driver's license accomplish? It doesn't stop people from crossing the border or overstaying their visa. It doesn't stop illegal immigrants from driving.

Huh?  Republican have two squawking points on the topic of illegal immigrants and driver's licenses - national security and voter fraud - and both hold up well in the face of this Starbucks logic:

National Security:  Gov. Spitzer recently backed down from his plan to offer driver's licenses to illegals when faced with pressure from the department of Homeland Security.  Even the Times seemed to grasp the issue:

Under the revised plan, New York will offer a new, highly secure state driver’s license, known as Real ID. It would be available only to citizens and legal immigrants and comply with new federal rules, and it could be used to board domestic flights and enter federal buildings. Two other types of licenses would be offered: an enhanced driver’s license that New Yorkers who are citizens could use to cross the Canadian border without a passport, and a less expensive, limited license available to illegal immigrants and others that would not be a valid federal identification.

The goal, said Christine Anderson, a spokeswoman for Mr. Spitzer, was to defuse concerns about security that had been raised in recent weeks while providing a way for illegal immigrants to obtain licenses.

So let's see - driver's licenses are valid for crossing the Canadian and Mexican borders into the US, and good for boarding domestic flights.  Can Matt, or any Democratic politician, see why maybe it is not such a grand idea to make such activities that much easier for Osama's henchmen?  If an Al Qaeda terrorist wants to attempt to board a flight brandishing a Yemeni or Saudi passport with an expired immigration sticker, or even while brandishing a double half-caf mocha latte, more power to him.  Or, if the would-be Party of Civil Rights for Terrorists wants to advocate for this, again, more power.

Voter Fraud: The second Rep squawking point concerns voter fraud; let's cut to John Fund in the WSJ:

The background here is the National Voter Registration Act, commonly known as "Motor Voter," that President Bill Clinton signed into law in 1993. It required all states to offer voter registration to anyone getting a driver's license. One simply fills out a form and checks a box stating he is a citizen; he is then registered and in most states does not have to show any ID to vote.

But no one checks if the person registering to vote is indeed a citizen. That greatly concerns New York election officials, who processed 245,000 voter registrations at DMV offices last year. "It would be [tough to catch] if someone wanted to . . . get a number of people registered who aren't citizens and went ahead and got them drivers' licenses," says Lee Daghlian, spokesman for New York's Board of Elections. Assemblywoman Ginny Fields, a Long Island Democrat, warns that the state's "Board of Elections has no voter police" and that the state probably has upwards of 500,000 illegal immigrants old enough to drive.

The potential for fraud is not trivial, as federal privacy laws prevent cross-checking voter registration rolls with immigration records. Nevertheless, a 1997 Congressional investigation found that "4,023 illegal voters possibly cast ballots in [a] disputed House election" in California. After 9/11, the Justice Department found that eight of the 19 hijackers were registered to vote.

Under pressure from liberal groups, some states have even abandoned the requirement that people check a citizenship box to be put on the voter rolls. Iowa has told local registrars they should register people even if they leave the citizenship box blank. Maryland officials wave illegal immigrants through the registration process, prompting a Justice Department letter warning they may be helping people violate federal law.

And how about in New York State?

It used to be that county clerks who process driver's licenses were banned from giving out voter registration forms to anyone without a Social Security number. No longer. Lou Dobbs of CNN reported that an Oct. 19 memo from the state DMV informed the clerks they don't "have any statutory discretion to withhold a motor voter form." What's more, the computer block preventing a DMV clerk from transmitting a motor voter registration without a Social Security number was removed.

Gov. Spitzer's office told me the courts have upheld their position on Social Security numbers. Sandy DePerno, the Democratic clerk of Oneida County, says that makes no sense. "This makes voter fraud easier," she told me.

Now, just because Gov. Spitzer is making fraud easier does not mean that more fraud will actually occur.  And truly earnest Dems consider voter fraud to be a mere Republican myth in any case - here is an old Rick Hasen piece on the partisan mess.

Still, however easy or opaque voter registration may be in this country, few folks are successfully registering simply by holding up a Starbucks grande.  So I think Mr. Yglesias may be mis-overestimating the commonalities between Starbucks (a private entity) and the Department of Motor Vehicles (an arm of the state and a frequent contact point for many citizens.)

Atrios has a characteristically measured reaction to Matt's piece:

The basic issue is that it is stupid to set DMV's up as immigration enforcement centers, and if you're not going to do that then it makes complete sense to give illegal immigrants drivers licenses.

Ohh, it's stupid.  That answers that.

Well, if we want to require some other government sponsored ID for things like crossing borders and boarding planes and insist that folks use their driver's license only to drive, then fine.  But as a practical matter, I don't think the Dems will be pushing for a repeal of the motor-voter laws, which means they are committed to having the DMV perform some extra-curricular duties.

MORE: John Edwards was for giving illegals driver's licenses before he was against it:

WASHINGTON —  John Edwards on Sunday said he opposes a new program in New York to give driver's licenses to illegal immigrants, but the Democratic presidential candidate offered much the same plan for establishing a licensing system as his chief rival and party primary frontrunner, Hillary Clinton.

The former North Carolina senator, who unequivocally supported issuing driver's licenses to illegals when he was running for vice president in 2004, said that it should be up to the states to decide whether to issue licenses to illegals. However, once a national comprehensive immigration reform plan is passed into law, any illegal who gets on the path to citizenship should be permitted to obtain a license, he said.

"I believe that, first of all we have to have comprehensive immigration reform and for anybody in this country who is making an effort and on the path to obtaining American citizenship, yes, they should have a driver's license. If they're not making any effort to become an American citizen, and we have a system for doing that, my own personal view is, no, I would not give them a driver's license," Edwards said on ABC's "This Week."

That strikes me as a reasonable position, but since we don't have a comprehensive reform in place and most illegals are not on some path to citizenship, the de facto implication is that illegals should be denied driver's licenses.

BONUS OBVIOUS QUESTION:  I take for granted that the entire Democratic goal here is to pander to immigrants, and the Starbucks argument does not exactly reassure me that there are weighty policy arguments shoring up the Dem position of offering licenses to anyone that might have a friend or relative who could vote for them.  So my question - are there any sensible or even colorable arguments to justify this pander, or is it really about as pure a pander as a pander could be?

DUH, OR, MAYBE SOMEONE COULD BUY ME SOME COFFEE TOO:  OK, the policy argument in favor of granting licenses to illegals is the road safety - issuing licenses will encourage them to learn the rules of the road and follow them, just like it says in the article about Edwards to which I linked, or as Hillary said in the debate.  I find the argument pretty improbable, but I should not dismiss it so thoroughly that I also forget it (and weirdly, the safety issue was part of my cocktail party diatribe monologue this weekend; bet you're sorry to have missed that.)

Comments

[Clarice]

Button up your lips,TM..Despite the easrly punditwisdom that failure to pass "comprehensive immigration reform" would hurt the Reps, Barone and Kaus argue convincingly that this like the Civil Rights for Terrorists gambit, is a big ,divisive, problem for the Dems.
Go for it Matt and Atrios! Here's hoping you get your party's standard bearer to buy your very shrewd argument.

[TRD]

In some states you can get the voting, SSN and other federal documents right on the license(helps if it says dem).

[Rick Ballard]

One year from tomorrow we'll be able to gauge the "wisdom" of the progressive's efforts. Fighting for wholly fictional "rights" for terrorists while extending privileges to illegals may seem rather odd but I'm sure that the truly insane progressive mind is capable of coming up with a rationale for anything.

[Sue]

The DMV seems to me to be closer to the Starbucks than to the airport in this regard. What, after all, does the policy of requiring verified legal residency before issuing a driver's license accomplish? It doesn't stop people from crossing the border or overstaying their visa. It doesn't stop illegal immigrants from driving.

Is this a joke? Tongue in cheek? The DMV issues a government document that allows you to do all sorts of things besides drive a car. Buying a coffee at Starbucks just sets you back about $4.50.

[capitano]

I take for granted that the entire Democratic goal here is to pander to immigrants,....

Don't discount illegal voting in select areas where the fix is in -- you can't expect the unions to carry the entire vote fraud burden.

[MayBee]

The basic issue is that it is stupid to set DMV's up as immigration enforcement centers,

Aren't DMVs set up specifically to only license people that are legal to be licensed in that state? There are various requirements, including age, driving ability, prior driving record, and residence. It isn't that the DMV is supposed to just hand a license to all comers. If there's a requirement to check for age, there can be a requirement to check for legal residence.

If it is stupid to enforce one requirement, why isn't it stupid to enforce them all?
The flipside of Iglesias's argument would be that anyone that could get a coffee at Starbucks should be able to get a license at the DMV. Now that would be stupid.

[gmax]

How about something not stupid? Like voting for JMax?

Night time link:

http://soccer.seniorclassaward.com/public/women/vote.aspx>Vote like there is only two weeks left!

[Sue]

I don't know about other states, but in Texas you have to present proof of liability insurance to get your license. If you have to prove you have insurance, why is it asking too much to prove you are a citizen?

[Ann]

Gmax,

I haven't been around much the last two weeks, but I have voted everyday for your daughter! Go Jessica!

[km]

Psst. Hey, senor. You want a driver's license, man? How bout some coffee? Real Colombian.

[abw]

It would be incredibly inconvenient for everyone to need to present documentation before buying coffee.

We require ID checks for buying alcohol, cigarettes, some forms of medication, guns and a number of other items. I certainly don't want ID checks for buying coffee but I think it's worth noting that the practice of ID check isn't as inconvenient as implied.

[bgates]

The normally insightful Matt Yglesias
It must be tough for that one to labor in the shadow of the much better-known, predictable hack Democrat Matt Yglesias.

I take for granted that the entire Democratic goal here is to pander to immigrants
They could also be pandering to the guilty white people who don't think America deserves control over its borders. Or it could be brain-stem-level reflexive opposition to something Republicans want to do.

[bgates]

What, after all, does the policy of requiring fewer than 10 DWI convictions before issuing a driver's license accomplish? It doesn't stop drunks from driving.

What, after all, does the policy of requiring no murder convictions before issuing a firearm license accomplish? It doesn't stop felons from shooting.

[donaldforbes]

just as a matter of interest, does any of the requirements for the issue of a u.s. driving list include a tested ability to drive? in europe driving without a licence automatically invalidates your auto insurance.

[David Walser]

So my question - are there any sensible or even colorable arguments to justify this pander, or is it really about as pure a pander as a pander could be?

Yes, there are colorable arguments justifying the position. One of them goes something like this: Undocumented workers drive and engage in otherwise lawful commerce in our state. Denying these workers drivers licenses drives them underground. This causes them to flee the scene of accidents (even when they are not at fault) or to run from police when caught in even minor traffic law violations. Granting undocumented workers valid drivers licenses would avoid these issues and would, thereby, increase public safety. In addition, it would bring undocumented workers out of the shadows, making it easier for them to contribute to our great society.

I don't buy that argument, but it is one that can be cogently made.

[Jane]

I don't buy that argument either. What good is a driver's license in an accident if you don't have insurance? It's little solace to be able to identify the guy that hit you only to have him thumb his nose at your loss. And why would illegals want a license which makes them easier to identify. It seems to me they want to be below the radar?

I guess getting out there to cast your vote for Hillary might be worth the exposure, but sheesh doesn't that feed into the stereotype that all illegals are stupid?

[Sue]

I'll tell you a little story about illegals and insurance. A few years ago, my youngest daughter was hit by a Hispanic woman who ran a red light. She presented driver's license, proof of insurance and was ticketed for failure to yield, or something. She spoke no English, or at least pretended to not speak English. We were provided a copy of her insurance card. Guess what? Fake. The phone number was fake. The insurance company was fake. I called the police department and spoke with the officer who investigated the accident. Explained the situation. I had tracked down the owner of the vehicle through the license plate. Told him I had spoken to someone at the address who spoke little English. The young lady had disappeared. What did I want them to do, asked? And this was in Farmers Branch Texas where they have tried to crack down on illegals. Having a driver's license, having proof of insurance is not good enough. No one cares if they present fake documents. My daughter's car was totaled. We wound up negotiating with our own insurance company and you don't have much leverage to get an amount above the book value of the car. Made a nice down payment for a new car but certainly not enough to replace the one she was driving that was paid for.

Do not allow them to have a driver's license. It provides no protection.

Her driver's license was not fake, btw. It had been issued by the State of Texas.

[MayBee]

jane- part of the theory is that a drivers license will allow illegals to buy insurance.
But Sue raises a good point- why go through the bureaucracy if fake is available?
The other argument I've seen is that getting a license will encourage illegals to take lessons and study for the test, thus they will be better drivers.
Of course, there is nothing stopping them from doing that now.
If you're being paid low wages, sending some of that back home, and trying to afford to live in the us, actually buying insurance is expensive. What is the penalty for getting caught driving without a license or without insurance? If it is less than the penalty for getting caught being an illegal alien, don't you think that's the option people will take?

Regardless of any of the practical effects, I just don't believe you can have the State documenting people it knows to be here illegally. The Feds have managed to control the State's drinking age and speed limit by threatening highway funds. I would support the same thing in this case.

[glasater]

Has anyone posting here tried driving their US licensed car in Mexico? You have to have Mexican insurance when crossing the border. Heaven help you if you hit a Mexican car without this insurance. It is directly to jail until things are sorted out.
I was hit in a parking lot by an illegal mexican without insurance in Washington state years ago and the cop who came onto the scene said he couldn't do anything because it wasn't on public property. And it played havoc with my insurance.

[battery]

I was hit in a parking lot by an illegal mexican without insurance in Washington state years ago and the cop who came onto the scene said he couldn't do anything because it wasn't on public property. And it played havoc with my insurance.