Immigration laws will be a major issue in next year’s presidential election. The question remains: does licensing illegal immigrants help or hurt American citizens?

Recently, New York State governor Eliot Spitzer proposed issuing driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants. An immense backlash forced Spitzer to abandon the plan. Is this the first time anyone has suggested offering licenses to undocumented immigrants?

Driver’s license are currently offered to illegal immigrants in:
— Hawaii,
— Maine,
— Maryland,
— Michigan,
— New Mexico,
— Oregon,
— Utah and the state of
— Washington

Why then was the plan from New York’s governor so controversial?
— It was probably due to the timing, during the height of the primary season for the upcoming presidential election. — Clearly this is a topic that strikes a nerve with the American people. — The purpose of the proposal was to promote safety by requiring a drivers test for illegal immigrants.

What are some of the potential problems with giving immigrants licenses?
— It’s uncertain how many illegal immigrants would step forward and get a license out of fear of deportation.
— It’s also seen as a way to legitimize people who are breaking the law.

How has the federal government responded?
Some lawmakers are working on a bill that would deny federal highway funds to states that give licenses to immigrants.

As our country searches for a comprehensive approach to illegal immigrants, this will continue to be an issue for some time to come.

As we gear up for the start of school and summer starts coming to an end, a lot of people are hitting the lake one last time. Tell us about Missouri’s new boating law.
In 2001, Missouri lowered the legal blood alcohol limit to .08, but this change only applied to drivers on our roads and highways. The legal limit on lakes remained at .10. Missouri’s new boating law lowers the legal blood alcohol limit to .08.

Is drinking an boating a real problem on our lakes?
In 2006, 10 deaths occurred out of the 50 alcohol related boating accidents. 75% of those accidents were on the Lake of the Ozarks.

The new law also says that anyone who causes a death while boating under the influence can be found guilty of involuntary manslaughter.

Does the new law contain any other changes or requirements for boaters?
Boats will be required to travel at no wake speeds within 100 feet of the Water Patrol or other emergency vessels with red or blue lights on.

When does the new boating law take affect?
On Monday, Aug 28th, the new boating law goes into affect.

Where would someone find the rules that apply to safe boating?
Boats and boating practices are regulated by state law.

The Missouri State Water Patrol offers a handbook that explains the laws and responsibilities for all boaters whether you are on the river or a lake.

We have all seen the large cigarette, speed boats that are very loud. Is noise from boats regulated , if so, what is the legal limit on the noise level from a boat in Missouri?
If you are on a body of water that has more than 160 miles of shoreline, then:
· The boat’s motor, at idle speed, can not exceed a noise level of 90 decibels when measured at a distance of 3 feet.
· This only applies to boats manufactured after January 1, 1996.

What happens if a boat fails the noise test?
Let’s say that the Water Patrol determines that a boat is too loud,
· The owner will have 60 days to bring it within the legal noise limit.
· It is up the owner to arrange for another test.
· If the boat fails this test, it is to be docked until it does finally pass.

What are other areas that the Water Patrol will be looking out for this year?
· Wave runner and jet ski accidents continue to increase.
· If you are operating a wave runner, remember to exercise a lot of caution and don’t let young or inexperienced drivers out on the lake by themselves.

When someone suffers from a serious or catastrophic injury, you need a lot of money just to cover the medical bills, treatment and retro fitting the house for wheelchair ramps for a wheelchair or lifts.

The level of insurance required by a driver is only 25/50.

That is 25K per person/ 50K accident.

Unfortunately, there are times when the at fault driver does not have sufficient coverage for your actual losses.

How can a consumer protect themselves in this situation?
Everyone needs to purchase underinsured coverage or UIM.
It doesn’t cost very much.

UIM kicks in after all liability policies are exhausted or tendered.

Q: How is underinsured different from uninsured motorist coverage?
“Uninsured” motorist coverage is where you are injured by a driver who has no insurance.

“Underinsured” coverage is where you’re injured by a driver who does have insurance, but the claim is worth more than their policy.

In that situation, the “underinsured” coverage kicks in after all liability policies are exhausted or tendered.

Q: How can someone find out if they have UIM, is it automatic when you buy a policy of insurance?
In Missouri, underinsured coverage is not mandatory and it is NOT automatic.
In other words, you have to request it. To find out if you have UIM, start by reviewing you insurance dec sheet and also call your insurance agent. A lot of people with “full coverage” don’t have underinsured coverage.

So call your insurance agent and ask about underinsured motorist coverage.
Because if you are ever in a serious accident, it may be the best thing you ever did.

Practical Suggestions

• Review insurance policies
  • UIM on Dec sheet
  • W on ins card
  • If you have it, review amount of coverage

• “UIM” is relatively inexpensive.
  • 100/300 UIM - $ 2.50 per month

• Right of Subrogation.
  • Basically means ‘right of reimbursement’
  • Your insurance company has the right to collect back what it has paid out from the driver who caused your injuries.

This week’s topic is the freedom to practice religion. Is the right to practice whatever religion we choose Constitutionally guaranteed?
The First Amendment starts with the phrase, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” That seems perfectly clear – whatever religion you want to believe in, the government is not allowed to stop you. The problem arises when specific practices within a religion are otherwise illegal.

How was this issue resolved with regard to Native Americans’ use of peyote in their religious rites?
Peyote is a hallucinogenic material that has been used by many Native American tribes for religious purposes, but it is also a banned substance in the U.S. Under the old standard, to ban a specific religious practice, the government had to prove that they had a compelling interest in doing so. The ban had to protect the general public interest. For decades, Native American could use peyote in their rituals because there was no compelling reason for the government to stop them.

When did that change?
A 1990 Supreme Court ruling, which has been heavily criticized, ruled that religious practices are not inherently protected by the First Amendment, but they can be protected by specific legislation. This turned decades of legal precedent upside down, and was partly reversed by a federal law, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993.

In the case of the Fundamentalist Church of Latter-Day Saints, what was the reasoning behind the removal of their children?
They are a small splinter group of Mormonism that still openly practices polygamy, which is illegal. They are known to force girls into arranged marriages with older men when the girls are very young. The sect’s leader, Warren Jeffs, was convicted last year on charges related to arranging marriages for young girls. A phone call for help from a girl within the FLDS ranch lead officials to believe all the children present were in danger of abuse and rape.

If true, could those practices be protected by the First Amendment?
No. Although the standards for protected religious practices has shifted, there are two basic factors to consider:
— Is everyone participating in the religious practice doing it voluntarily?
— Does the practice cause harm to someone who is either not involved or involved involuntarily?
If the answer to those questions is no, the practice will not be protected.

Is that why adults can refuse medical treatment for religious reasons, but they can’t prevent their children from receiving treatment?
That is exactly why. A person who is a legal minor is legally unable to give consent for anything. Without consent, the actions are not Constitutionally protected. It’s the same reason Native Americans can use peyote in a ritual, but they can’t go out and drive on public roads while under the influence of peyote. That puts other people in harm’s way.

How easy is it to legally change your name? There are many reasons someone might want to legally change his or her name - marriage, divorce, business reasons, or to leave behind an abusive past. It’s actually a relatively straightforward process.

Recently Billy Ray Cyrus’ daughter changed her name from Destiny Hope Cyrus to Miley Ray Cyrus. How hard is it to legally change you name?
—A name change is a relatively simple process.
— It starts with a petition being filed in the county where you live
— The petition is basically a sworn affidavit that explains your current name, new name and reason for the change.
— The judge then has discretion to determine if the new name would cause harm or confusion to another person.

Are there any additional steps?
— After a hearing before the Judge, the new name is then published, typically in a local newspaper on three different occasions within 20 days of the court order.
— If someone is changing their identity because they were a victim of abuse or the victim of a crime, the publication requirement is waived.

Is the court order all that’s needed to accomplish the change?
— The court order is the easy part.
— It’s up to you to notify your bank, creditors, and others as to the name change

Can parents change the names of their children?
— Both parents must consent, but yes, it is legal.
— Experts suggest that if the child is old enough, he or she should be involved in the process.

Legally changing your name is a relatively quick and inexpensive process.

A massive ice storm hit the Midwest in January of 2007, and we experienced another one in December. Insurance companies are flooded with phone calls in the aftermath, most of them from homeowners wondering if the damage will be covered under their insurance.

Is ice storm damage typically covered?
— In general, a typical homeowner’s policy includes coverage for damage due to weight of ice and snow, including trees that fall and cause damage to your house. — It’s different from flood damage, which usually requires a separate, special policy.

Is it possible to get reimbursed for spoiled food in your fridge?
It is best to talk with you insurance agent, but it depends on where the interruption in electric service came. If the line on your property failed, you’ll probably be covered.
If the failure occurred away from your property, at a transformer down the street for instance, you may not have coverage.

If the storm caused damage to a garage so severe that the car inside it is damaged, is the car covered?
It would be covered under comprehensive auto insurance. Cars are never covered under homeowner’s insurance.

What steps should a homeowner take in the aftermath of an ice storm?
Take photos of all the damage before you touch anything.
If you need to make repairs to prevent further damage, get them done and keep the receipts.
Remember that safety is more important than property - be cautious around downed power lines or low hanging tree branches.

Take a deep breath - it’s probably covered.

Could a Supreme Court decision on the ban on handguns in Washington D.C. affect gun rights nationwide?

Washington D.C. enacted on ban on the personal ownership of handguns in 1976 to try and curb skyrocketing violent crime rates. A recent lawsuit put the law under the scrutiny of a federal appeals court.

What are the details of Washington D.C. law banning private handgun ownership?
As a result of crime in our nation’s capital, a law was passed in 1976 that prevents anyone from owning a handgun that doesn’t have a special permit.

Generally, only police officers and security guards can obtain permits for handguns

Rifles and shotguns are not covered by the ban.

How did the Court of Appeals rule in response to the lawsuit against this law that has been on the books for 30 years?
Based on the 2nd Amendment, the federal Court of Appeals overturned the ban on handguns.

Isn’t this law an unconstitutional violation of the 2nd Amendment?
That’s the point of view of the plaintiffs suing the city, and it was also the opinion of the federal appeals court, which overturned the law.

As you know, the 2nd Amendment reads: “A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”

In contrast, the city interprets that to mean that only those who are part of an organized militia have unlimited rights to own guns.

What is the current status of the law?
The city appealed the federal ruling, which means that the law remains in effect until the appeal is decided.

The case made it to the U.S. Supreme Court

A Decision in February or March of 2008.

What kind of impact will their ruling have?
A ruling against the ban could put gun control laws across the U.S. in jeopardy.

The Supreme Court hasn’t made a decision related to gun ownership in about 70 years.

This case is very interesting since it will give us a glimpse of how this Supreme Court could rule on other gun control laws in the future.