The Lone Ranger rides again.
State Rep. Bobby Franklin, R-Marietta, has discovered a way to end the fractious debate over whether illegal immigrants should be able to have driver’s licenses.
Or 12-year-olds, for that matter. Just do away with the troublesome documents.

State Rep. Bobby Franklin, R-Marietta, in a 2008 photo mocking his colleagues’ observation that he’s often the “Lone Ranger” on issues championed by his bills. Elissa Eubanks, eeubanks@ajc.com
Sandra Parrish with AM750 and now 95.5FM News/Talk WSB talked to Franklin about his bill this morning. Listen to the conversation here.
Likewise, CBS Atlanta today gave some noon air time to the – let’s admit – unusual legislation. Video is now online, but here’s what’s posted about Franklin’s “Right to Travel Act:”
CBS Atlanta’s Rebekka Schramm asked Franklin, “How are we going to keep up with who’s who and who’s on the roads and who’s not supposed to be on the roads?”
“That’s a great question,” Franklin said. “And I would have to answer that with a question, ‘Why do you need to know who’s who?’”
“What about 12-14-year-olds who want to drive? What would stop them?” Schramm asked.
“Well, what’s stopping them now anyway?” Franklin answered.
Let us answer Franklin’s question right away: Millions of parents are stopping them, in the name of a law that’s unlikely to change anytime soon. Another roadblock: The constant fatalities, including this morning’s death of a “HERO” unit operator, that remind us that driving is serious business.
So it’s likely that we’ll continue to be burdened with driver’s licenses, despite the lawmaker’s contention that the right to burn unleaded dates back to King John. From Franklin’s HB 7:
In England in 1215, the right to travel was enshrined in Article 42 of Magna Carta: It shall be lawful to any person, for the future, to go out of our kingdom, and to return, safely and securely, by land or by water, saving his allegiance to us, unless it be in time of war, for some short space, for the common good of the kingdom: excepting prisoners and outlaws, according to the laws of the land, and of the people of the nation at war against us, and Merchants who shall be treated as it is said above.
Franklin has a concept of limited government that may sound strange to some. He has already introduced legislation demanding that state transactions be conducted in gold or silver. Franklin regularly attempts to define abortion as murder through legislation filed each year.
His answer to the debate over gay marriage? What business does the government have saying who should wed who? But that hasn’t made it into a bill. Not yet.
Addendum: Before the House adjourned today, the chamber took up the matter of the Senate’s override of Gov. Sonny Perdue’s veto of last year’s zero-based budgeting bill. House Speaker David Ralston sent the Senate’s veto message to a committee, where it will most certainly perish.
But state Rep. Bobby Franklin challenged the speaker’s ruling. The state constitution required that the House tackle the question of the veto immediately – on the floor. The vote upholding the speaker’s ruling was 164 to 1.
The Lone Ranger had struck yet again.
- By Jim Galloway, Political Insider
For instant updates, follow me on Twitter, or connect with me on Facebook.
251 comments Add your comment
wtaggin
February 2nd, 2011
5:51 pm
He does have a point. Why does a license make it any easier/harder for a 14 yr old, illegal alien, or anybody else to drive? Say you get pulled over for a busted tail light. If you do not have a license, you go to jail for Driving without a License….even if you upheld EVERY traffic law. Then, we have somebody, licensed, who is speeding in a school zone. They get a ticket. Which is more dangerous…Not having a plastic card or hauling ass while kids are getting out of school?
I do NOT agree to abolish licenses completely. I actually believe people should be required to retake the drivers test every X amount of years. Just because I passed the test at 16, does not make me fit for the road 50 years later. I have had to swerve, slam brakes, etc numerous times because of others inability to drive. We stress so much about the age at which one can drive, when we should really be questioning their ability to drive.
A lot of posts on here talk about “driving is a privilege.” So this “privilege,” which cannot be spelled right by ANYBODY here and only makes them less unreliable as having a valid opinion, is gained by simply living 16 years and proving to a minimum wage government worker that you can operate a motor vehicle, ONE TIME? That is not right. Take the driving test when you feel comfortable and able to drive a vehicle. Prove to me again in X years that you can still drive. People change, as well as their abilities. 16 year old Johnny may have not fried his brain cells to drugs and alcohol just yet, so let’s retest him in X years to make sure HE CAN ACTUALLY DRIVE CORRECTLY.