Congressional Democrats Grow Wary of Spitzer Driver's License Plan: Call for him to shelve idea

Source: New York Times

By RAYMOND HERNANDEZ
Published: November 8, 2007

Democratic members of Congress, having watched Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton stumble on the question of whether states should give driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants, are growing increasingly agitated over Gov. Eliot Spitzer’s plan to do so and are calling for him to shelve the idea.

The opposition is especially strong among Democrats bracing for the prospect of tough re-election battles next year in politically moderate and conservative regions of New York; they have begun to speak out on the issue and, in many cases, have disavowed the plan. “It’s hugely unpopular,” said Representative Michael Arcuri, a first-term Democrat from central New York whom Republicans hope to defeat next year. “I don’t think it would be wise to move forward with it at this point.”

The governor’s aides have been quietly working to mollify lawmakers, and Mr. Spitzer will meet behind closed doors with members of New York’s Congressional delegation next week, according to staff workers on Capitol Hill and in Albany. The reaction among some Democrats underscores how Mr. Spitzer, who just a year ago was viewed as a rising star nationally, has become isolated within his own party.

The Democrats’ concerns are not limited to members whom Republicans consider potentially vulnerable next year. Nita M. Lowey, a longtime incumbent from Westchester who is among the most influential members of New York’s delegation, warned that now was not the time to take up the issue. Ms. Lowey said Mr. Spitzer’s “proposal raises serious questions that must first be addressed through comprehensive immigration reform at a national level,” according to a statement released by her aides....

Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/08/nyregion/08spitzer.html?_r=1&oref=login

on the investigations against him.

I favor licensed drivers on the road. Do you favor unlicensed drivers on the road?

First published: Thursday, November 8, 2007 http://timesunion.com/AspStories/story.asp?storyID=637151&category=FRONTPG&BCCode=HOME&newsdate=11/8/2007

ALBANY -- Gov. Eliot Spitzer's former top press aide may be asked to return to the state's Public Integrity Commission to testify once again on his role in the scandal over Senate Majority Leader Joseph L. Bruno's travel records.

The Public Integrity Commission's predecessor, the state Ethics Commission, earlier queried Darren Dopp and other key Spitzer staffers after Bruno, a Brunswick Republican, complained the governor's people had spied on him.


Dopp also submitted a written statement to Attorney General Andrew Cuomo, who issued a July 23 report on the affair. Dopp spoke with Albany County District Attorney David Soares, who put out his own report on Sept. 21.

Neither Soares nor members of the Integrity Commission could be reached late Wednesday. But sources with knowledge of the investigations said Public Integrity Commission members recently went to the district attorney with concerns about what they viewed as inconsistencies between what Dopp, and possibly others, told the commission and Soares.

The Public Integrity Commission has yet to issue its report on the affair.

Both Cuomo and Soares found no illegality in the matter, but Cuomo suggested that Dopp and former state Homeland Security chief William Howard had improperly gotten acting State Police Superintendent Preston Felton to produce the travel records. That, Cuomo concluded, amounted to using police for a political purpose. Moreover, in some cases the troopers who drove Bruno around New York City re-created his itineraries from memory, which Cuomo said was outside normal procedure and left open the possibility of error.

have kept the Spitzer plan in the limelight.

Wanting everyone behind the wheel to be a licensed driver? I get that the plan sucks, but give me a better one to accomplish that goal.

When were illegal immigrants added to the plan?

Will not drive because they flunked a test?:shrug:

Are you saying since we can't do it perfectly we shouldn't do it at all?

That will have no effect on anything. It gives an illusion of addressing a problem, but does nothing to correct it. It's the same with drunk drivers. Even after license suspension, people still drive.

Not ALL drunk drivers drive after having their license suspended. Just because you can't prevent them all is no reason to try to prevent some, or even one.

I do. So I don't care what you want in NY. 70%+ of NYers don't want this.

:shrug:

And if you want to kill yourself politically, you suggest or vote for it. The very idea is just all around dumb.

I've seen the hyperventilating by the repressive right and the loonies who would just as soon exterminate "illegal" aliens on sight, but perhaps there is a reason this is ridiculous that I haven't seen.

Should state motor vehicle departments become adjuncts to the INS? And why stop there? If one government agency should be compelled to become a subservient to the INS, why not all of them? And if we're really serious about cracking down on "illegal" immigrants, maybe we should have everyone on his or her toes: Supermarket checkout lines should require proof of citizenship, no? I mean, if those dirty "illegals" couldn't buy food, they'd skedaddle, wouldn't they?

I submit that state bureaus created to license and regulate drivers should (and this is going to be a shocker, I know) license and regulate drivers. It's not part of their governmental mandate to do the INS's job.

But maybe there's a compelling reason that I'm missing.

not comfortable with. Anything that stops the inevitable, that being that the causation race will be a minority some day, is ok with a xenophobe.

I can not see the harm myself but people get so worked up and irrational over such issues

> Nita M. Lowey, a longtime incumbent from Westchester who is
> among the most influential members of New York’s delegation,
> warned that now was not the time to take up the issue.

Did'ja ever notice how it's *NEVER* the right time to do the
right thing? Gay rights, women's rights, restoring the Consti-
turtion, ending wars, impeaching criminal presidents, resolving
how we'll deal with immigration, bith legal and illegal...

Now just isn't the right time, ya know? Maybe next millenium...

Tesha

It's bad policy.

The House just passed a bill yesterday to protect employees from sexual discrimination.

70% of NYers do not believe this is the "right thing." So wouldn't opposition be the "right thing?"