House passes bill requiring proof of citizenship to vote

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?

Click to expand...

Not for me. My entire state votes by mail.

And I recall that in every election there are really long lines to vote in many places around the country. You want to make that a lot worse? Every complication you add slows things down for something that has to be done in a relatively short amount of time. We have ID checks on registration, and the votes are checked against the registrations.

Yttrium said:

And I recall that in every election there are really long lines to vote in many places around the country. You want to make that a lot worse?

Click to expand...

That's the whole point.

Desk trauma said:

That's the whole point.

Click to expand...

Yeah, but I'm still giving RileyG the benefit of the doubt.

Oompa Loompa said:

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.

What Does the Constitution Say About the Right to Vote?

Read the latest by Democracy Docket.

www.democracydocket.com

Click to expand...

FYI, amendments are part of the Constitution.

RocksInMyHead said:

FYI, amendments are part of the Constitution.

Click to expand...

The phrase “the right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged…” appears in multiple amendments, each focused on a particular form of discrimination or election:

14th Amendment (1868): Establishes citizenship and, in Section 2, ties representation to denial of the vote to male citizens over 21, implicitly linking citizenship and voting, though it does not use the standard “shall not be denied” wording.

15th Amendment (1870): “The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged…on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.”

17th Amendment (1913): Requires direct popular election of U.S. Senators by the people of each state, embedding popular voting for the Senate.

19th Amendment (1920): “The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged…on account of sex.”

24th Amendment (1964): Prohibits denial of “the right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress” for failure to pay a poll tax or other tax.

26th Amendment (1971): “The right of citizens of the United States, who are eighteen years of age or older, to vote shall not be denied or abridged…on account of age.”

These voting-rights amendments make the right to vote one of the most frequently referenced rights in the Constitution, but always in the form of specific “shall not be denied or abridged” prohibitions rather than a single broad grant of suffrage.

Oompa Loompa said:

These voting-rights amendments make the right to vote one of the most frequently referenced rights in the Constitution, but always in the form of specific “shall not be denied or abridged” prohibitions rather than a single broad grant of suffrage.

Click to expand...

I think the situation here is that the Constitution specifically calls on electors to vote, but doesn't identify any other voting process (well, besides voting in Congress). If there's a vote, then all these citizens have the right to vote in it. The states can decide if they use public votes for stuff. There's no requirement for states to have a public vote in general elections. State legislatures could select electors directly if they wanted, if their states' constitutions and laws allowed for it.

RileyG said:

That wasn’t my point,

Click to expand...

It is, however, the point of the bill. Cause enough annoyance or cost so people will not bother to vote.

Let's not get twisted. This isn't about Voter integrity, it has long been all about vote suppression. Even from the mouths of the GOP themselves.