There is a new bill in the Wisconsin Legislature that would prevent illegal immigrants from getting Wisconsin driver's licenses:

Immigrants would have to provide proof they are in the United States legally to get a Wisconsin driver's license under legislation proposed Monday.

The bill, authored by Rep. Mark Gundrum, R-New Berlin, also would tie the expiration date of the state-issued ID to that of the foreign citizen's visa.

The legislation aims at preventing terrorist attacks and making Wisconsin and the country "a little more secure," Gundrum said Monday at a news conference at Milwaukee's Mitchell International Airport.

First of all... I think it's a great idea. However... tying this bill to terrorism is a terrible idea. It's not about "making us more secure"... cause this won't do that. This should be about enforcing immigration laws, and not rewarding people who break those laws, pure and simple. However, it gets worse because Gov. Doyle has vowed to veto the bill (as he does with all identification reform)... and now this in the same article:

Last week, the U.S House approved legislation authored by Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner, R-Wis., to make states verify they are not giving driver's licenses to illegal immigrants. Federal agencies would not accept driver's licenses issued by states that do not meet the proposed requirement.

The federal bill still needs approval from the U.S. Senate and President Bush's signature to become law.

This means that if the federal law passes and the Wisconsin law does not... not only would we lose federal funding (which is being tied to the federal law), but a Wisconsin driver's license could not be used as valid ID to get on an airplane! However... there is more to this law then just making requirements for getting licenses more secure:

The bill in Congress also requires states to share driver's license data so someone cannot get multiple licenses from different states.

Is that the only reason to share among the states? Remember the Social Security card reform?

Both Dreier and Sensenbrenner insist their respective proposals will not produce anything that could be considered a national identification card. The proposed Social Security card would even be inscribed with the words, "This is not a national ID card."

Of course so many people were pissed off about that idea... that now he's proposing a distributed national ID card. Instead of the federal government doing it, all the states will have to, and share the information between them and with the federal government. Guess what... that's not any better.