Stop the Steal

[98cwitr]

OK. How is limiting SSN info to the last 4 a violation of the 10th amendment?

Should a state not have the liberty to ask for a full SSN if they so choose?

Your opinion is noted.

Thank you.

Can you expand upon how you see this as being an issue?

Having an ID requirement for voting ensures that the person voting is who they say they are. This is conducive to free and fair election processes and helps mitigate fraud.

 

[Belk]

Should a state not have the liberty to ask for a full SSN if they so choose?

Maybe, maybe not. I fail to see how that is an argument for why this is a 10th amendment matter.

Thank you.



Having an ID requirement for voting ensures that the person voting is who they say they are. This is conducive to free and fair election processes and helps mitigate fraud.

OK. This is not blocking an ID requirement for voting. It blocks an ID requirement to receive an absentee ballot. Are you conflating these two items?

 

[98cwitr]

Maybe, maybe not. I fail to see how that is an argument for why this is a 10th amendment matter.

Because it's federal overreach. States get to determine their own voting laws.

OK. This is not blocking an ID requirement for voting. It blocks an ID requirement to receive an absentee ballot. Are you conflating these two items?

So anyone without an ID, or here illegally, or being a felon can just file an absentee ballot under a false name? Yeah...no thanks!

(B) Congress finds that electoral practices including voting rights restoration conditions for people with convictions, voter identification requirements, and other restrictions to the franchise burden voters on account of their ability to pay.

Non-sequitur since voter IDs are provided via taxpayer funding and are at no cost to the voter directly at the time of acquisition.

 

[rambot]

Consider the substance rather than what someone else thinks of a particular media outlet. Make the effort. There have been some serious charges regarding election integrity.

But the problem is: What if we can't completely TRUST the substance?

Other folks have already called into question certain bases within the article.

 

[Belk]

Because it's federal overreach. States get to determine their own voting laws.

True, but the Federal government gets to dictate how federal identification is used.

So anyone without an ID, or here illegally, or being a felon can just file an absentee ballot under a false name? Yeah...no thanks!

No, that would be illegal.

Non-sequitur since voter IDs are provided via taxpayer funding and are at no cost to the voter directly at the time of acquisition.

Not something I said, but I am unaware of any voter ID provided at no cost. Could you link to the program you are talking about?

 

[98cwitr]

True, but the Federal government gets to dictate how federal identification is used.

IDs are state issued though.

No, that would be illegal.

Lots of things that are illegal still happen. How would or could an audit even catch such a thing?

Not something I said, but I am unaware of any voter ID provided at no cost. Could you link to the program you are talking about?

NC voter photo ID cards offered free

It's hypocritical that opponents will decry that voter IDs must be provided at no cost, and then decry how much it's going to cost the state (ie: taxpayers) to implement the program (~$12M in NC alone).

 

[Belk]

IDs are state issued though.

SSN are a federal identification.

Lots of things that are illegal still happen. How would or could an audit even catch such a thing?

How would an audit show someone just made up a name to vote under? Fairly easily I would think.

NC voter photo ID cards offered free

Thank you. Get that sort of thing so it is truly free and does not exclude any eligible voter and I will have no qualms with voter ID.

It's hypocritical that opponents will decry that voter IDs must be provided at no cost, and then decry how much it's going to cost the state (ie: taxpayers) to implement the program (~$12M in NC alone).

Feel free to take that up with them.

 

[Valletta]

But the problem is: What if we can't completely TRUST the substance?

Other folks have already called into question certain bases within the article.

You should not trust the substance from any of the

But the problem is: What if we can't completely TRUST the substance?

Other folks have already called into question certain bases within the article.

I would bet they have been trained to do so.

 

[rambot]

You should not trust the substance from any of the

I would bet they have been trained to do so.

I would imagine it is not your goal but this attitude seems to be a pretty slippery slope towards "Don't learn anything".

 

[Valletta]

I would imagine it is not your goal but this attitude seems to be a pretty slippery slope towards "Don't learn anything".

You can correct that attitude! I watch and read from many sources, from Australia and Britain to MSNBC and Newmax. Try it.

 

[mmksparbud]

Good question. As far as I know, "independent" in the USA means "neither democrat nor republican". So a member of the American Nazi Party (yes, that's a thing) or the Communist Party USA would qualify. Right?

I am non of the above. I'm Independent, I do not choose by party but try to find the true character of who's running---very difficult to do sometimes. Then it is a matter of not which is the saintliest, but which would, hopefully, do the least amount of harm.

 

[disciple Clint]

Always diversify the fact-checkers. If their fact-checking is consistent with each other, then I can assume it must be the truth.

If you are distrustful of fact-checking sources, then what is your plan to filter out the lies from the truth in online news sources?

mostly liberal news services are verified by mostly liberal fact checkers and that is supposed to confirm that you are getting unbiased facts?

 

[Tanj]

You can correct that attitude! I watch and read from many sources, from Australia and Britain to MSNBC and Newmax. Try it.

Which Australian source?

 

[KCfromNC]

Here is a quote from the article
"H.R. 1 would quadruple down on everything that caused the legitimacy of the 2020 presidential election to be contested so adamantly."

I'm going to go out on a limb and say there's nothing in the bill about cloning 3 more copies of Rudy Giuliani...

So now that we know the editorial is not telling the truth, are there any actual legitimate objections to what's actually in the bill.

 

[98cwitr]

SSN are a federal identification.

So?

How would an audit show someone just made up a name to vote under? Fairly easily I would think.

How? Walk me through that. If there is no ID to confirm ID, I could register as anyone I wanted...potentially even multiple times. How would an audit catch that without ID?

Thank you. Get that sort of thing so it is truly free and does not exclude any eligible voter and I will have no qualms with voter ID.

I see no reason to assume Voter ID would exclude anyone who is eligible.

Feel free to take that up with them.

At every opportunity

 

[Arcangl86]

Because it's federal overreach. States get to determine their own voting laws.

Yes, for state elections. HR1 will only effect Congressional elections, and Congress has the power to override the states when it comes to almost all aspects of Congressional elections per Article 1 Section 4 of the Constitution.

 

[Albion]

Doesn't that power also require a Congressional Amendment?

 

[Belk]

So?

So federal regulation targeting federal ID is not a states rights issue.

How? Walk me through that. If there is no ID to confirm ID, I could register as anyone I wanted...potentially even multiple times. How would an audit catch that without ID?

By comparing the registration to it's own list of citizens? Or by using the SAVE federal system to check citizen status? Or by comparing the name to known aliases in the CIS system. That is just from someone who does not know all the systems that could be used. I feel confident there are plenty of other methods I am not privy to.

Now, a question for you. How often do you think a non citizen is going to put themselves in jeopardy of the severe penalties imposed for lying on a voter registration form? Why would someone put themselves at risk of jail, fines, and deportation simply to add a few votes to as system that would need thousands of votes to sway an election?

I see no reason to assume Voter ID would exclude anyone who is eligible.

Having read the judgement from the case in NC where it was found that voter registration was being targeted at minorities specifically to reduce their vote I see plenty of reason.
Knowing the history in the south of using various methods such as poll taxes and 'literacy tests' to exclude minority votes I se plenty of reason.

At every opportunity

 

[Speedwell]

So anyone without an ID, or here illegally, or being a felon can just file an absentee ballot under a false name? Yeah...no thanks!

. So how would that work, exactly? The miscreant would have to,
1. Know the name and address of an individual, a registered voter who he knew was not going to vote.
2. Be able to reproduce the signature of that individual to the satisfaction of an election official.
3. Provide the name and address and forge the signature of another real individual.

Do you really think that happens on a significant scale?

Non-sequitur since voter IDs are provided via taxpayer funding and are at no cost to the voter directly at the time of acquisition.

LOL!

 

[98cwitr]

So federal regulation targeting federal ID is not a states rights issue.

But states leverage federal services for these things. Not a big deal.

By comparing the registration to it's own list of citizens? Or by using the SAVE federal system to check citizen status? Or by comparing the name to known aliases in the CIS system. That is just from someone who does not know all the systems that could be used. I feel confident there are plenty of other methods I am not privy to.

What states have a citizen database? I'm not aware of one that would accurately apply for this scenario.

Now, a question for you. How often do you think a non citizen is going to put themselves in jeopardy of the severe penalties imposed for lying on a voter registration form? Why would someone put themselves at risk of jail, fines, and deportation simply to add a few votes to as system that would need thousands of votes to sway an election?

Often: Texas Woman, Rachel Rodriguez, Arrested For Alleged Election Fraud, Illegal Voting

Having read the judgement from the case in NC where it was found that voter registration was being targeted at minorities specifically to reduce their vote I see plenty of reason.
Knowing the history in the south of using various methods such as poll taxes and 'literacy tests' to exclude minority votes I se plenty of reason.

Yes and I think it's a poor and invalid excuse. Voter ID doesn't hurt anyone except those who want to commit fraud. The ID is free. Our Lt. Gov, who is black, is a vocal advocate for Voter ID. This race-baiting political strategy needs to end. By comparison, gun control has a proven racist history and yet those who decry "racism" when looking at voter ID charge forward with gun control despite it disproportionately removing 2A rights from black citizens. I just wish people would be consistent, less hypocritical, or just be open and honest regarding their motives: "We don't want Voter ID because Democrats would potentially lose elections/power if implemented."