House passes bill requiring proof of citizenship to vote

Valletta · Monday at 3:32 AM

A2SG said:
Um, that's irrelevant to the point I made. Even if every single American supported, say, the government banning guns, it would still be unconstitutional.

Since it is unconstitutional to impose a fee or any form of tax on the right to vote, then the government would have to provide any and all required IDs for free, even for those who may be able to afford it. Charging anything for required ID would be unconstitutional.

That part seems to be missing from the SAVE act.

-- A2SG, gotta wonder why.....

Requiring ID is not a tax on voting.

A2SG · Monday at 3:45 AM

Valletta said:
Requiring ID is not a tax on voting.

If the government imposes a fee to obtain the ID required to vote, then it is.

-- A2SG, and that's clearly unconstitutional.....

Bradskii · Monday at 4:20 AM

A2SG said:
Um, that's irrelevant to the point I made. Even if every single American supported, say, the government banning guns, it would still be unconstitutional.

But, as per Valetta's argument, if a large majority of the citizenry strongly support a policy then it should carry. So if a large percentage demand stronger gun laws (but not going as far as banning them), then it appears that he would support that. Just as he supports voter ID because 'a large majority of the citizenry strongly support' it. It's his argument after all.

I think it has some merit.

Valletta · Monday at 4:26 AM

A2SG said:
If the government imposes a fee to obtain the ID required to vote, then it is.

-- A2SG, and that's clearly unconstitutional.....

So you're saying that all states that currently require a driver's license or if not a driver then a state issued ID in order to register to vote are violating the Constitution?

A2SG · Monday at 4:35 AM

Valletta said:
A fee is not the same thing as a tax.

What's the difference, and how does that difference apply in the context of the 24th Amendment?

-- A2SG, seems if there is a difference, it's one that makes no difference.....

Valletta · Monday at 4:41 AM

Bradskii said:
But, as per Valetta's argument, if a large majority of the citizenry strongly support a policy then it should carry. So if a large percentage demand stronger gun laws (but not going as far as banning them), then it appears that he would support that. Just as he supports voter ID because 'a large majority of the citizenry strongly support' it. It's his argument after all.

I think it has some merit.

Never said that, it's not my "argument."

Bradskii · Monday at 5:58 AM

Valletta said:
Never said that, it's not my "argument."

Yes, it is. You quoted this part of the Pew poll:

"A colossal 83% of US adults support requiring some form of government-issued photo ID to vote, including 71% of Democrats and 95% of Republicans, a survey by Pew Research last year found.'

You are literally arguing that because a majority of the US populace supports something then it should be granted. It's the only reason you linked to the poll. So please allow me to make exactly the same argument:

"A colossal 83% of US adults support requiring some form of increased gun control, including 71% of Democrats and 95% of Republicans, a survey by Pew Research last year found.'

Now we can adjust the figures a little, but if you don't agree that my argument is valid then you are invalidating your argument. It's your call. Either the point you were making stands, in which my point likewise stands, or you disagree with mine making yours utterly fallacious.

The rather obvious point, in case you are still missing it, is that you can't dig up facts and figures to support a particular view that you like and then deny that the same application of facts and figures supports another view which you don't.

Hans Blaster · Monday at 8:15 AM

Valletta said:
If the law passes and if you don't have such an ID you'll have to get one in order to vote in a federal election. It would be a federal or state government or tribal ID that required proof of citizenship.

So, you're planning to deny my right to vote. Got it.

Hans Blaster · Monday at 8:17 AM

Valletta said:
"A colossal 83% of US adults support requiring some form of government-issued photo ID to vote, including 71% of Democrats and 95% of Republicans, a survey by Pew Research last year found.
Only 16% of American adults oppose it."

Dem pols battle against national voter ID rule despite 71% of their voters backing it

Top Democratic lawmakers are digging their heels in opposition to a federal voter identification requirement, despite polling showing that close to three-quarters of their voters back it.

nypost.com

it seems to me that if someone who wants to vote can't afford ID the government would have to supply such ID for free.

It's not a "Voter ID" bill. It's a "proof of citizenship" bill. They are *NOT* the same thing.

Valletta · Monday at 8:18 AM

Hans Blaster said:
It's not a "Voter ID" bill. It's a "proof of citizenship" bill. They are *NOT* the same thing.

They are the same unless illegals vote.

RDKirk · Monday at 8:19 AM

A2SG said:
Part of the problem here is the 24th Amendment specifically prohibits the government from imposing any form of tax on the right to vote, and in order to obtain any form of legal ID requires one pay a fee for that. Seems to me that, unless obtaining this proof of citizenship ID is free, a law requiring one that has to be paid for would be unconstitutional.

-- A2SG, it's also a problem when states place restrictions or difficulties in obtaining these required forms of ID....

Yes, that is going to be the bottom line--at least for people who are interesting in remaining in line with the Constitution.

Whatever ID they determine acceptable will have to be free. That could be an Enhanced RealID.

Edit: Not only will the ID have to be free, but the documents needed to secure it will also have to be available without direct cost.

Valletta · Monday at 8:23 AM

Hans Blaster said:
So, you're planning to deny my right to vote. Got it.

You have a right to vote but you required to do certain things, those are not denying you the right. Should the Act pass you have to REGISTER to vote, you have to SIGN your name, and you have PRODUCE identification with proof of citizenship.

A2SG · Monday at 8:29 AM

Valletta said:
So you're saying that all states that currently require a driver's license or if not a driver then a state issued ID in order to register to vote are violating the Constitution?

If voters have to pay anything in order to be allowed to vote, that violates the 24th Amendment.

-- A2SG, read the Amendment, it's pretty clear on that....

A2SG · Monday at 8:32 AM

Valletta said:
You have a right to vote but you required to do certain things...

Sure, but having to pay to exercise that right is clearly unconstitutional.

-- A2SG, is the amendment not specific enough?

Hans Blaster · Monday at 9:09 AM

Valletta said:
You have a right to vote but you required to do certain things, those are not denying you the right. Should the Act pass you have to REGISTER to vote, you have to SIGN your name, and you have PRODUCE identification with proof of citizenship.

I already had to register. And I already had to sign under oath that I was a citizen. Is my word no longer valid?

Akita Suggagaki · Monday at 11:02 AM

Valletta said:
Under the Save America Act a person needs to establish their citizenship

How is that done?

Pommer · Monday at 2:39 PM

Valletta said:
If the law passes and if you don't have such an ID you'll have to get one in order to vote in a federal election. It would be a federal or state government or tribal ID that required proof of citizenship.

The government assumes that the people are not honest enough to vouch for themselves as citizens?
My! It’s almost like the Government doesn’t trust us.

Pommer · Monday at 2:40 PM

Valletta said:
"A colossal 83% of US adults support requiring some form of government-issued photo ID to vote, including 71% of Democrats and 95% of Republicans, a survey by Pew Research last year found.
Only 16% of American adults oppose it."

Dem pols battle against national voter ID rule despite 71% of their voters backing it

Top Democratic lawmakers are digging their heels in opposition to a federal voter identification requirement, despite polling showing that close to three-quarters of their voters back it.

nypost.com

it seems to me that if someone who wants to vote can't afford ID the government would have to supply such ID for free.

You’re conflating two different things though.

Aryeh Jay · Monday at 4:22 PM

Pommer said:
The government assumes that the people are not honest enough to vouch for themselves as citizens?
My! It’s almost like the Government doesn’t trust us.

It's not that the government doesn't trust the people, just people who vote for Democrats.

Pommer · Monday at 6:01 PM

Aryeh Jay said:
It's not that the government doesn't trust the people, just people who vote for Democrats.

Well, once that that type of “behavior” is (officially) frowned upon, everything will sort itself out.

We hope the site problems here are now solved, however, if you still have any issues, please start a ticket in Contact Us

House passes bill requiring proof of citizenship to vote

Well-Known Member

Gumby

Under the Southern Cross I stand...

Well-Known Member

Gumby

Well-Known Member

Under the Southern Cross I stand...

Call Me Al

Call Me Al

Well-Known Member

Alien, Pilgrim, and Sojourner

Well-Known Member

Gumby

Gumby

Call Me Al

Well-Known Member

CoPacEtiC SkEpTic

CoPacEtiC SkEpTic

Stuck on a ship.

CoPacEtiC SkEpTic

Similar threads