No time to celebrate yet

District tourist camp owners, along with local politicians from both sides of the border, deserve praise for their role in helping convince the U.S. Congress to delay implementation of Washington’s passport requirement for those entering the country via land crossings until June 1, 2009.
But while getting the reprieve is important, it certainly isn’t the end of the battle.
The key word here is “delay,” not “amend” or “quash.” In fact, the new June 1, 2009 deadline, instead of the initial Jan. 1, 2008 one, is seen by many in Congress as the latest possible implementation date. They’re still calling for the “earliest possible deployment” of the new rule.
Which doesn’t leave much time for lobbying efforts to get the Bush administration to accept some other type of “secure” document at the border rather than a passport.
Ontario, for one, is pushing for a driver’s licence with an enhanced security component, which will create less hassle for people since a driver’s licence is something most have already. It also is more convenient to carry than a passport (i.e., it fits in your wallet).
And besides, there’s nothing to stop terrorists from getting a passport, as the Sept. 11 attackers all did.
Needing a passport to cross the river to visit family or friends, go out to dinner, or catch a movie certainly sounds like a big joke. It’s no laughing matter, though, when one considers the very real economic impact such a move will have in both countries, particularly for communities that sit on the border.
For area tourist camp owners especially, it’s one more reason for Americans to stay home.
Surely Washington will realize that passports aren’t the best way to balance security with cross-border trade and tourism. Unfortunately, until that happens, this is no time to break out the champagne just yet.
The window of opportunity to change minds has opened wider—but only by a little bit.