Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 exptools 1/6/84; site iwu1c.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!we13!ihnp4!iwu1c!jgpo From: jgpo@iwu1c.UUCP (John, KA9MNK) Newsgroups: net.misc Subject: Re: National driver's license Message-ID: <238@iwu1c.UUCP> Date: Tue, 8-May-84 14:20:34 EDT Article-I.D.: iwu1c.238 Posted: Tue May 8 14:20:34 1984 Date-Received: Wed, 9-May-84 02:35:14 EDT Organization: AT&T Bell Labs, Naperville, IL Lines: 34 > After all, the Constitution states that any powers that > it does not explicitly give to Congress belong to the states. > > Thus, if the Constutition does not mention motor vehicles, it > seems to me that establishment of a national driver's license > would require a Constitutional amendment. I don't know about that. There must be a mechanism whereby the Feds can get control of things not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution; things that the drafters of the document could never have anticipated, such as airplanes and amateur radio. Both my pilot's and ham licenses were issued by Federal agencies. When you stop to think about it, that's the only way these particular activities can reasonably be regulated. Maybe it's allowed because the regulations are promulgated and enforced by various agencies, commissions, and administrations, rather than Congress per se. Also, the various rules and regulations, at least as far as aviation and ham radio are concerned, are just that: rules and regulations; they are NOT laws. Granted, we are bound to adhere to those rules and can be punished if we don't, but a violation of a rule results in an administrative hearing, NOT a trial in a court of law. Perhaps, if we do end up with a Federal driver's license, the various laws would have to be replaced by rules and regulations. Then, since the LAW is no longer involved, it would automagically become constitutional. "The change should be transparent to the user." (Famous Last Words #3) Anybody out there well-versed in Constitutional law? John Opalko