Advocates claim that since the individuals are already in the country, there is no reason to make it more difficult for the same to obtain proper identification in order to drive and receive insurance. Other proponents claim that the policy will enforce safer driving and prevent accidents, while also ensuring that if an illegal immigrants gets into a car accident, the individual will more likely have insurance so that aggrieved partied will receive a remedy.
Are these arguments valid? Should they be valued?
For the record,
six states have repealed legislation which had permitted illegal immigrants to obtain drivers' licenses, including California, when large voted discontent forced its repeal before its passage in 2002. Among the reasons for repeal included compliance with federal immigration laws, concerns of fraud and identity theft, and of course political pressure.The current governor of New Mexico, Hispanic, female conservative Republican Susana Martinez,
opposed issuing drivers licenses to illegal immigrants, and she was elected by a wide margin on this pledge in 2010. In another interview, she cited the following reasons for pushing for repeal:"72% of New Mexicans support repealing the law" based on a poll published by the Albuquerque Journal. Political pressure.
She then contended that tt's a public safety issue. New Mexico has people coming from all over the world to get a valid US ID, and then they leave the state. She further remarked that those licenses can be exchanged in other states, where that individual can cause great harm, and no one can track them
Martinez also talked about the rise of human trafficking and fraud related to obtaining drivers licenses.
Besides Governor Martinez' take on this issue, do licenses for illegal immigrants make our roads safer?
The
Modesto Bee contended that the measure would make California roads safer. The editorial justified the argument based on assumption without proof:Without a license, they are not being tested for knowledge of traffic laws. Studies suggest they are more likely to be involved in fatal crashes. And as several top law enforcement officials point out, unlicensed immigrants cannot get auto insurance, leading to more hit-and-run wrecks.
A
recent study confirmed that granting illegal immigrants a license did not ensure that more drivers would be insured, contrary to the contentions of DLIM supporters.Because the law encourages more illegal immigration, studies reflecting on the impact of growing illegal migration point out the increased illegal immigration population costs the state of California
$10 billion a year. Another federal study confirmed the negative fiscal impact of increased illegal immigration.The Federation for American Immigration Reform
submitted that granting licenses to illegal immigrants would encourage more illegal immigration and incentivize breaking the law. Should taxpaying Americans be forced to subsidize licensing individuals who have entered this country illegally? There is no moral basis for the state legislature to reward illegal conduct.Putting aside the opinions of interest groups and politicians, what conclusions can we reach from empirical studies about the effects of allowing illegal immigrants to obtain drivers licenses?
The research is scant, but the moral obligation to recognize lawful residents and discourage illegal immigration should not be ignored.
With a state in fiscal freefall, in spite of tax increases, the Sacramento legislature should have spent more time discussing and implementing comprehensive pension reform. How many public servants will retire knowing that they paid into a solvent reserve which will benefit them into their declining years?
California's tax structure is still unjust, volatile, and dysfunctional. Taxing the top earners while hoping for a growing economy has proved false and futile in years past. Despite Governor Brown's pleas and promises for a balanced budget, the wall of debt remains, and the cost of living has only increased in this state. A rise in the minimum wage is hurting already hurting small businesses (
who massively opposed the rise) Instead of issuing more licenses to illegal immigrants, when will the state legislature focus on easing the tax and regulatory burden on the legal residents, including the small businesses and corporate interests struggling to survive in spite of the anemic recovery? A majority of California residents opposed Governor Brown's DREAM Act legislation, and yet the legislature approved licenses for illegal immigrants. Will California become a magnet for more illegal immigration? How can any state maintain the rule of law and adequately fund public services with a growing influx of users who do not pay?