House passes bill requiring proof of citizenship to vote

Pommer said:

Didn’t fall under HIPPA, wasn’t used for voting, which is what we’re talking about.

Click to expand...

Just shows the hypocrisy when people call it racist to demand papers when during covid, legislatures demanded papers (proof of vaccination) to perform more basic functions than voting. Just saying that when people are being manipulated and controlled by their heart strings and emotions, logic and consistency become irrelevant.

Oompa Loompa said:

Just shows the hypocrisy when people call it racist to demand papers when during covid, legislatures demanded papers (proof of vaccination) to perform more basic functions than voting. Just saying that when people are being manipulated and controlled by their heart strings and emotions, logic and consistency become irrelevant.

Click to expand...

Different things are different things.

Why should you be able to get your coffee cheaper than what it would cost to gather the necessary documents to (one time) prove that you’re a citizen and able to legally vote?
When did the government decide that the people weren’t to be trusted to say who they are on their voting registration?
When did that happen?

Valletta said:

Sorry, I didn't explain my point. First, you have a point, I think the government will have to subsidize anyone to whom it might be a financial burden to obtain a photo ID.

Click to expand...

Or simply make the required ID free and easily available.

Valletta said:

My point was that if a person is required to be a citizen to vote in a federal election (today it is a criminal act for a non-citizen to do so), it is implied (just as the Congressional oversight power is implied) that the government may implement a method to determine who is a citizen and who is not. Photography had not been invented yet at the time of the Constitution, but in today's society photo ID seems the most practical method to do so.

Click to expand...

Again, I'm not arguing against the concept of requiring proof of citizenship.

-- A2SG, so it's entirely irrelevant to anything I've posted.....

Valletta said:

Sorry, I didn't explain my point. First, you have a point, I think the government will have to subsidize anyone to whom it might be a financial burden to obtain a photo ID.

Click to expand...

OK. Then off you go. Do it. Make it simple and cost free to get whatever you need to vote in the next presidential election. Start now. Give us your plan for how it will work for everyone and we can discuss it.

Pommer said:

Different things are different things.

Why should you be able to get your coffee cheaper than what it would cost to gather the necessary documents to (one time) prove that you’re a citizen and able to legally vote?
When did the government decide that the people weren’t to be trusted to say who they are on their voting registration?
When did that happen?

Click to expand...

Again, heart strings and emotions.

Valletta said:

When over 10 million people flooded our country during one presidential term.

Click to expand...

I don’t follow, are you saying that a significant portion of these people will try to vote?

Oompa Loompa said:

Again, heart strings and emotions.

Click to expand...

We’re arguing “where the line is”.

Spinning my posts as “heart strings and emotions” doesn’t lessen the truth of them, friend.

Enjoy your evening.

Valletta said:

Sorry, I didn't explain my point. First, you have a point, I think the government will have to subsidize anyone to whom it might be a financial burden to obtain a photo ID.

Click to expand...

Are there any provisions for this as the act is written at the moment?

Valletta said:

My point was that if a person is required to be a citizen to vote in a federal election (today it is a criminal act for a non-citizen to do so), it is implied (just as the Congressional oversight power is implied) that the government may implement a method to determine who is a citizen and who is not. Photography had not been invented yet at the time of the Constitution, but in today's society photo ID seems the most practical method to do so.

Click to expand...

Valletta said:

Thanks for asking. There are going to be government entities and non-profits involved in getting people who want to register to vote (no fines like Australia for those who don't vote), but if a group or individual were put in charge of a bi-partisan effort they of course need to get input and find out anticipated problems from those who are currently involved in the process. It seems to me that while roughly half the populations have passports, most of the rest do not have IDs that indicate citizenship. Thus I would first be emphasizing to those states that don't offer licenses or state IDs with citizenship indication to quickly get with the program. It needs to be priority for states such as Mississippi, where fewer of the voters have passports.

Click to expand...

Okay, say we do all of this and everyone who votes is going to be a bona fide citizen.
What has “changed”?

Valletta said:

Sorry, I didn't explain my point. First, you have a point, I think the government will have to subsidize anyone to whom it might be a financial burden to obtain a photo ID. My point was that if a person is required to be a citizen to vote in a federal election (today it is a criminal act for a non-citizen to do so), it is implied (just as the Congressional oversight power is implied) that the government may implement a method to determine who is a citizen and who is not. Photography had not been invented yet at the time of the Constitution, but in today's society photo ID seems the most practical method to do so.

Click to expand...

I have a birth certificate and social security card. Our hospital didn't take foot or hand prints. Anyone can steal my info and shown up as Camille 70. There is nothing that ties my birth certificate to me. It's just a piece of paper and good faith. Thanks to DOGE all our ssn's are compromised and Trump has voter rolls for several states and I have no confidence they will properly secure and protect it. It's gaslighting imo to make it just about the ID. It's all the extra voting suppression along with it.

We have older Americans who may not even have a birth certificate because they were born at home or in a rural area.

These are links I've posted before when this discussion happened thr last time. Remember when this happened?






When the first struck down parts of the voting rights act, they closed polling places. They closed DMVs in Black areas so they had to drive long distances, disenfranchising people without cars. Posted the wrong hours or had erratic hours of operation and falsely told people what they brought was not acceptable for the ID.




SPARTA, Ga. — When the deputy sheriff’s patrol cruiser pulled up beside him as he walked down Broad Street at sunset last August, Martee Flournoy, a 32-year-old black man, was both confused and rattled. He had reason: In this corner of rural Georgia, African-Americans are arrested at a rate far higher than that of whites.

But the deputy had not come to arrest Mr. Flournoy. Rather, he had come to challenge Mr. Flournoy’s right to vote.

The majority-white Hancock County Board of Elections and Registration was systematically questioning the registrations of more than 180 black Sparta citizens — a fifth of the city’s registered voters — by dispatching deputies with summonses commanding them to appear in person to prove their residence or lose their voting rights. “When I read that letter, I was kind of nervous,” Mr. Flournoy said in an interview. “I didn’t know what to do.”

The board’s aim, a lawsuit later claimed, was to give an edge to white candidates in Sparta’s municipal elections — and that November, a white mayoral candidate won a narrow victory.

The ‘smoking gun’ proving North Carolina Republicans tried to disenfranchise black voters

In its ruling, a three-judge panel at the U.S. Appeals Court for the Fourth Circuit said the state legislature targeted African-Americans “with almost surgical precision.”


“We cannot ignore the recent evidence that, because of race, the legislature enacted one of the largest restrictions of the franchise in modern North Carolina history,” Judge Diana Motz wrote.


Not to mention people in areas affected by flooding and natural disasters who have lost everything including personal documents.

Oompa Loompa said:

Where in the Constitution does it say that voting a right?

Click to expand...

No idea. I’m not a constitutional law expert. You’re saying there’s no expressed right to vote anywhere in the constitution? You tell me what it says.

RileyG said:

Why would anyone be against showing an ID or proof of citizenship in order to vote? I cannot wrap my head around how that would be controversial.

It sounds rather routine and normal. Eh?

I don’t know.

Click to expand...

As has been said, if the ID requirement costs money, it is the equivalent of a poll tax, which is unconstitutional.

If the government provides the ID free of charge as well as whatever it requires to get that ID, then there is not that problem.

GoldenBoy89 said:

No idea. I’m not a constitutional law expert. You’re saying there’s no expressed right to vote anywhere in the constitution? You tell me what it says.

Click to expand...

The Constitution does not contain one single, general “right to vote” clause in the original 1787 text or the Bill of Rights; instead, voting rights are protected indirectly in the original document and then more explicitly through several amendments.

Article I, Section 2: Ties eligibility to vote for the U.S. House to whoever can vote for “the most numerous Branch of the State Legislature” in each state, effectively leaving voter qualifications to the states.

Article I, Section 4 (Elections Clause): Gives states (and Congress) power over the “Times, Places and Manner” of congressional elections, but not a general right to vote.

The Constitution as adopted in 1787 does not define who may vote or declare that all citizens have a right to vote.

Valletta said:

Our election process is more secure. What do you think "changed" when airlines and liquor stores and banks first required photo IDs?

Click to expand...

The liquor stores didn't chose to require ID. I'm sure they'd be happy to sell a fifths of vodka to HS seniors. Busybodies using government to interfere with private businesses.

Hans Blaster said:

The liquor stores didn't chose to require ID. I'm sure they'd be happy to sell a fifths of vodka to HS seniors. Busybodies using government to interfere with private businesses.

Click to expand...

Whatever. Next you will say that if we only allow Republicans to vote, only Republican candidates will be elected.