Jim Banks Calls for Passage of SAVE America Act to Require Proof of Citizenship to Vote

Pommer · 2026-02-18T00:22:59-0600

Landon Caeli said:
I think there's some cases where a donor-class disrupts the normal function of our democracy, but I don't think it's as widespread as some would have us believe. There are a lot of politicians who still act on their conscience, and who were elected by the people they represent.

A good, oh, let’s say, 42%, yes. 48% in a good year.

Landon Caeli said:
We do see a lot of infighting among the influencers in media, which trickles down to the citizens, and even to here. It creates an intolerant environment, and we already know that, and there is no solution.

Most of what we fight about is made-up nonsense to keep us busy sniping at one another. We’re allowed to quit at any time. That was always allowed. You quit first, then I will.

Landon Caeli said:
...We're still animals afterall.

Or I can quit first?

Pommer · 2026-02-18T00:24:22-0600

Landon Caeli said:
Hey that's fine too, but if it's not a big deal how young people decide to vote, as long as they get to, then let's not act like Trump voters somehow made a "bad" decision.

Yet I've seen them called names, and that doesn't make sense to me, if no kind of intelligence is even required, outside of how to pin the tail on the donkey, or check a random box.

We’ll see how Trump’s policies go, down the road, he’s got a lot of time to succeed.
He might still turn out halfway decent.

Pommer · 2026-02-18T00:32:12-0600

Landon Caeli said:
I like to see consistency and logic! I just don't see that a lot of the time in the arguments I hear.

There’s a lot of dross to sift through, yes. This has always been the case, whether on these forums or internet relay chat or the newsgroups and in newspapers before all of that.
Most people aren’t politically savvy enough to have anything near a cogent and considered opinion and (coincidentally enough) never know that they aren’t. We’re allowed to refute or ignore.

I remember tossing the poorly mimeographed warnings of this or that “impending doom!”, that were forced into my hands on street corners back-in-the-day…now they have a presence on X, SubStack TikTok with a slick website and plenty of opportunities to “donate”.

Pommer · 2026-02-18T00:34:06-0600

DaisyDay said:
Certainly running it like a private business for the profit of a few isn't working well for the many.

Right but it works great for them what’s got the power now, this is why power is coveted.
”How” one gets it, is less important than “having it.”

Ellesmere · 2026-02-18T05:12:50-0600

Valletta said:
This is a constitutional and commonsense security measure. Over 80% of Americans agree with Voter-ID laws. If you have to show ID in order to buy alcohol or rent a car, you should have to show ID in order to vote.

Jim Banks Calls for Passage of SAVE America Act to Require Proof of Citizenship to Vote

Sen. Jim Banks (R-IN), an original sponsor of the SAVE America Act, called for the passage of the legislation to require proof of citizenship to register to vote and mandate photo ID at the ballot box.

www.breitbart.com

People also have to show ID to get on an airplane or to receive government benefits. It is time.

1) Will the "SAVE AMERICA ACT" prevent President Trump, in the future, from pressuring Secretaries of State responsible for administrating federal and state elections to "adjust" their total vote count to "find" him with enough votes to provide him with a majority?

2) Will the "SAVE AMERICA ACT" prevent President Trump, in the future, from requesting Republican governors, as was the case of Texas, to "gerrymander" federal congressional boundaries in their state which would in turn allow the GOP to retain its majority in the House! - irrespective of the popular vote?

3) Having reviewed past federal elections, the Brennan Center reported that verifiable incidents of voter fraud varied from a mere 0.0003% to 0.0025% - isolated cases rendering it as an impractical method of actually influencing the outcome of elections!

4) Real election fraud is actually being perpetrated by the politicians themselves, including the same political party as the House members who are currently introducing legislation like the "SAVE AMERICA ACT"- meanwhile actively participating in the "gerrymandering" of congressional boundaries!

5) "Gerrymandering"-is the only effective method of manipulating the vote on a scale that can influence the outcome of an election - a means of rewarding political parties having a minority in the popular vote with the majority of electoral seats!

Debunking the Voter Fraud Myth

The president has continued to claim voter fraud was a problem in the 2016 election. A look at the facts makes clear fraud is rare, and does not happen on a scale even close to necessary to “rig” an election.

www.brennancenter.org

Aryeh Jay · 2026-02-18T05:34:09-0600

Ellesmere said:
View attachment 376644

1) Will the "SAVE AMERICA ACT" prevent President Trump, in the future, from pressuring Secretaries of State responsible for administrating federal and state elections to "adjust" their total vote count to "find" him with enough votes to provide him with a majority?

2) Will the "SAVE AMERICA ACT" prevent President Trump, in the future, from requesting Republican governors, as was the case of Texas, to "gerrymander" federal congressional boundaries in their state which would in turn allow the GOP to retain its majority in the House! - irrespective of the popular vote?

3) Having reviewed past federal elections, the Brennan Center reported that verifiable incidents of voter fraud varied from a mere 0.0003% to 0.0025% - isolated cases rendering it as an impractical method of actually influencing the outcome of elections!

4) Real election fraud is actually being perpetrated by the politicians themselves, including the same political party as the House members who are currently introducing legislation like the "SAVE AMERICA ACT"- meanwhile actively participating in the "gerrymandering" of congressional boundaries!

5) "Gerrymandering"-is the only effective method of manipulating the vote on a scale that can influence the outcome of an election - a means of rewarding political parties having a minority in the popular vote with the majority of electoral seats!

Debunking the Voter Fraud Myth

The president has continued to claim voter fraud was a problem in the 2016 election. A look at the facts makes clear fraud is rare, and does not happen on a scale even close to necessary to “rig” an election.

www.brennancenter.org

The "Save America Act" will ensure that we will never again have to worry about the correct person winning.

Valletta · 2026-02-18T05:52:11-0600

Ellesmere said:
View attachment 376644

1) Will the "SAVE AMERICA ACT" prevent President Trump, in the future, from pressuring Secretaries of State responsible for administrating federal and state elections to "adjust" their total vote count to "find" him with enough votes to provide him with a majority?

2) Will the "SAVE AMERICA ACT" prevent President Trump, in the future, from requesting Republican governors, as was the case of Texas, to "gerrymander" federal congressional boundaries in their state which would in turn allow the GOP to retain its majority in the House! - irrespective of the popular vote?

3) Having reviewed past federal elections, the Brennan Center reported that verifiable incidents of voter fraud varied from a mere 0.0003% to 0.0025% - isolated cases rendering it as an impractical method of actually influencing the outcome of elections!

4) Real election fraud is actually being perpetrated by the politicians themselves, including the same political party as the House members who are currently introducing legislation like the "SAVE AMERICA ACT"- meanwhile actively participating in the "gerrymandering" of congressional boundaries!

5) "Gerrymandering"-is the only effective method of manipulating the vote on a scale that can influence the outcome of an election - a means of rewarding political parties having a minority in the popular vote with the majority of electoral seats!

Debunking the Voter Fraud Myth

The president has continued to claim voter fraud was a problem in the 2016 election. A look at the facts makes clear fraud is rare, and does not happen on a scale even close to necessary to “rig” an election.

www.brennancenter.org

1) As much as prosecutors and judges love to go after Trump, such as making up ridiculous valuations of Mar-a-lago and faking photos of classified document covers on the floor, no one brought up charges for Trump asking about finding votes. That's because Trump clearly believed vote counts had been altered and he, like other candidates, was perfectly within his rights to ask to look for uncounted votes.
2) Democrats have been gerrymandering for decades and Republicans are finally fighting fire with fire by using Democrat tactics. Hopefully such efforts will cancel each other out.
3) Election "fraud" is a tiny subset of the election wrongdoing that takes place, and basing fraud on the number of convictions is not an accurate method to determine the amount of fraud nor does it represent other election wrongdoing. An analogy to show how fraud convictions can be underestimated would be realizing that the number of reported burglaries far outnumbers actual burglary convictions and basing the number of burglaries on convictions is folly.
4,5) What Democrats have done is flood our nation with more than 10 million "immigrants" in one presidential term in an attempt to bump up the future census numbers for more Democrat Congressional seats with hopes of making those immigrants citizens in an effort to make sure Democrats grab power and control. Leaders lied to the American public claiming the border was safe, secure, and closed all the while bringing in massive numbers of people. Human trafficking rose to a level not seen since the Civil War, many women were sexually attacked on their way here, and criminals were let in the country to prey upon innocent victims. So many people suffered, used as pawns in that quest for political power. Our country's social networks have been strained to the max, and too many Democrat leaders looked the other way from immigrant fraud.

wing2000 · 2026-02-18T06:05:00-0600

Ellesmere said:
3) Having reviewed past federal elections, the Brennan Center reported that verifiable incidents of voter fraud varied from a mere 0.0003% to 0.0025% - isolated cases rendering it as an impractical method of actually influencing the outcome of elections!

...and yet, Trump, realizing he may lose the House and Senate come November, will continue to assert there was significant voter fraud in 2020.

Valletta · 2026-02-18T06:43:09-0600

wing2000 said:
...and yet, Trump, realizing he may lose the House and Senate come November, will continue to assert there was significant voter fraud in 2020.

Fraud convictions very few, but there was serious wrongdoing in swing states like Georgia and Michigan. In Georgia numerous lies were certainly told. In Michigan Republican observers were often stopped from properly observing, in Detroit every time they removed a Republican observer (which happened over and over) Democrat elections workers cheered. As much government wrongdoing as I have encountered in my lifetime I was still taken aback by what happened in Detroit, I just hadn't imagined it would take place in our country. No one knows how much total wrongdoing there was or if it would have changed the result. Trump is entitled to his opinion.

wing2000 · 2026-02-18T06:52:37-0600

Valletta said:
Fraud convictions very few, but there was serious wrongdoing in swing states like Georgia and Michigan. In Georgia numerous lies were certainly told. In Michigan Republican observers were often stopped from properly observing, in Detroit every time they removed a Republican observer (which happened over and over) Democrat elections workers cheered. As much government wrongdoing as I have encountered in my lifetime I was still taken aback by what happened in Detroit, I just hadn't imagined it would take place in our country. No one knows how much total wrongdoing there was or if it would have changed the result. Trump is entitled to his opinion.

The POTUS is not entitled to undermine our election system with his lies.

Valletta · 2026-02-18T07:08:39-0600

wing2000 said:
The POTUS is not entitled to undermine our election system with his lies.

Whatever anyone's opinion, more attention was brought to the weaknesses in our election system. Security is a good thing. Last election Lara Trump organized over one hundred thousand observers and workers. Lack of voter ID is still a weakness, so is some absence of chain of custody and computers.

wing2000 · 2026-02-18T07:11:36-0600

Valletta said:
Whatever anyone's opinion, more attention was brought to the weaknesses in our election system. Security is a good thing. Last election Lara Trump organized over one hundred thousand observers and workers. Lack of voter ID is still a weakness, so is some absence of chain of custody and computers.

Chain of custody? The feds recently took 2020 ballots from the Georgia....no doubt Trump is still looking to find those additional votes.

essentialsaltes · 2026-02-18T08:36:34-0600

The SAVE America Act to require proof of citizenship nationwide to register to vote and overhaul voting laws has now topped 50 votes in the Republican-controlled Senate.

Sen. Susan Collins, the centrist from Maine who faces a competitive re-election bid this fall, became the 50th Republican supporter of the legislation, an elated Lee announced last week.

The tally guarantees a battle over the bill on the Senate floor as Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., has promised a vote. But he warned last week that there are “not even close” to enough votes for getting rid of the filibuster, despite Trump's calls to do so. [if the filibuster isn't nuked, the bill will fail to get the 60 votes needed.]

Republicans control 53 seats in the Senate. Some in the party have not signed on to the measure, including Sens. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, and Mitch McConnell, R-Ky. Murkowski called it an example of the “one-size-fits-all mandates from Washington” that Republicans regularly criticize. And McConnell, who hasn’t commented on the bill, has long said he believes states should run their own elections without federal intrusion.

ThatRobGuy · 2026-02-18T09:02:21-0600

Stopped_lurking said:
As a side note why would RATM fans or gun aficionados be low-informed voters?

If they aren't what is your problem with them registering to vote?

If someone hasn't had enough interest in the process to actually go register, and only do so if a convenient booth is set up at a music festival or gun show, then are they all that politically engaged?

It would seem as if a person had that much interest in politics, and they have the kind of free time to go spend at a music festival, then they would've had enough time to hop on google and say "How do I registered to vote in my state?"

Per the video I linked earlier from the ABC News piece, they went out an interviewed some of these newly minted voters at one such music festival.

Literally people saying "I think there's 52 states", "I want to say it's 12 senators per state???", "I think Roe v. Wade was the one about the White person and the Black person?", and not knowing who Ruth Bader Ginsburg was...

Those are not high information voters that just got added to the rolls. Those were kids at a music festival, who clearly didn't have much interest in politics, and wandered over to the registration tent because the singer on stage said "and while you're here, make sure you get over there and register!"

Stopped_lurking · 2026-02-18T09:27:58-0600

ThatRobGuy said:
If someone hasn't had enough interest in the process to actually go register, and only do so if a convenient booth is set up at a music festival or gun show, then are they all that politically engaged?

Yes. Why should you get to decide when others register?

ThatRobGuy said:
It would seem as if a person had that much interest in politics, and they have the kind of free time to go spend at a music festival, then they would've had enough time to hop on google and say "How do I registered to vote in my state?"

Perhaps they did, but realised they could do it at the concert they were going to. Do you have the numbers on that?

ThatRobGuy said:
Per the video I linked earlier from the ABC News piece, they went out an interviewed some of these newly minted voters at one such music festival.

Literally people saying "I think there's 52 states", "I want to say it's 12 senators per state???", "I think Roe v. Wade was the one about the White person and the Black person?", and not knowing who Ruth Bader Ginsburg was...

Those are not high information voters that just got added to the rolls. Those were kids at a music festival, who clearly didn't have much interest in politics, and wandered over to the registration tent because the singer on stage said "and while you're here, make sure you get over there and register!"

How did you determine their interest in politics? Did they show video of everyone that went to the booth? Did you tally up the responses? Where can I view the video and your tally? Has anybody else done the tally? Was it at a RATM concert, if not how is your response relevant to my post? Why should I believe they didn't they got informed after registering? Every step makes your case weaker.

My guess is that most people going to a RATM concert are politically savvy (at least in how they see themselves in relation to politics), and so I would guess are gun aficionados.

ThatRobGuy · 2026-02-18T10:13:42-0600

Stopped_lurking said:
How did you determine their interest in politics? Did they show video of everyone that went to the booth? Did you tally up the responses? Where can I view the video and your tally? Has anybody else done the tally? Was it at a RATM concert, if not how is your response relevant to my post? Why should I believe they didn't they got informed after registering? Every step makes your case weaker.

If someone doesn't know how many states there are, and doesn't know how many senators there are per state (which I guess I assumed most people would've learned and remembered from k-12), then it's a fairly safe assumption that interest in politics isn't high on their priority list.

My case hasn't gotten weaker, you're making a demand for increasingly perfect evidence (that you know doesn't exist) as the standard for "proof".

Stossel in that piece noted that while some got the answers right, the majority were getting some easy ones wrong.

What?, are you expecting that there's some sort longitudinal meta-analysis aggregating various studies where every single person at a music festival was interviewed for political competency immediately after registration in a voter registration drive organization's tent and then follows up with them 5 year later?

You know that doesn't exist. Nor do we need such a high evidentiary standard to determine that a 19 year old (who doesn't know how many states there are) who went over to the tent after the musician on the stage said "Make you get over there to register" was doing so at the direction of the guy on stage, and not because they were sincerely interested (if they were, they would've registered on their own without prodding)

Stopped_lurking said:
My guess is that most people going to a RATM concert are politically savvy (at least in how they see themselves in relation to politics), and so I would guess are gun aficionados.

Is a person who claims to hold up the mantle of progressivism while glorifying Che Guevara (for reasons that don't appear to be any deeper than "yeah, capitalism sucks dude!") a well-informed savvy person? They're certainly not well-informed about the guy pictured on their shirt.

Stopped_lurking · 2026-02-18T10:56:14-0600

ThatRobGuy said:
If someone doesn't know how many states there are, and doesn't know how many senators there are per state (which I guess I assumed most people would've learned and remembered from k-12), then it's a fairly safe assumption that interest in politics isn't high on their priority list.

No, this is your assertion. You prove it.

ThatRobGuy said:
My case hasn't gotten weaker, you're making a demand for increasingly perfect evidence (that you know doesn't exist) as the standard for "proof".

I'm not, I'm asking you to prove your assertions.

ThatRobGuy said:
Stossel in that piece noted that while some got the answers right, the majority were getting some easy ones wrong.

What?, are you expecting that there's some sort longitudinal meta-analysis aggregating various studies where every single person at a music festival was interviewed for political competency immediately after registration in a voter registration drive organization's tent and then follows up with them 5 year later?

Did I ask for that?

ThatRobGuy said:
You know that doesn't exist. Nor do we need such a high evidentiary standard to determine that a 19 year old (who doesn't know how many states there are) who went over to the tent after the musician on the stage said "Make you get over there to register" was doing so at the direction of the guy on stage, and not because they were sincerely interested (if they were, they would've registered on their own without prodding)

You are just boldly asserting this again. Perhaps they just waited for an opportune moment (why not at a concert you know you are going to attend?)

ThatRobGuy said:
Is a person who claims to hold up the mantle of progressivism while glorifying Che Guevara (for reasons that don't appear to be any deeper than "yeah, capitalism sucks dude!"

How did you determine their reasons?

ThatRobGuy said:
) a well-informed savvy person? They're certainly not well-informed about the guy pictured on their shirt.

They might be, at least if the information in question is about their own actual position. So how many of them was holding up the mantle of progressivism (what does that even mean?) while glorifying Che Guevara, I hope you didn't chose those characteristics just to create a nonsense point?

Besides, are you claiming that if you are wrong about Che Guevara you can't be right about your own political position?

Valletta · 2026-02-18T11:10:23-0600

essentialsaltes said:
The SAVE America Act to require proof of citizenship nationwide to register to vote and overhaul voting laws has now topped 50 votes in the Republican-controlled Senate.

Sen. Susan Collins, the centrist from Maine who faces a competitive re-election bid this fall, became the 50th Republican supporter of the legislation, an elated Lee announced last week.

The tally guarantees a battle over the bill on the Senate floor as Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., has promised a vote. But he warned last week that there are “not even close” to enough votes for getting rid of the filibuster, despite Trump's calls to do so. [if the filibuster isn't nuked, the bill will fail to get the 60 votes needed.]

Republicans control 53 seats in the Senate. Some in the party have not signed on to the measure, including Sens. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, and Mitch McConnell, R-Ky. Murkowski called it an example of the “one-size-fits-all mandates from Washington” that Republicans regularly criticize. And McConnell, who hasn’t commented on the bill, has long said he believes states should run their own elections without federal intrusion.

Schumer used to be a proponent of voter ID, that was before the flood the country with immigrants scheme. They really are going to have to get awrou

essentialsaltes said:
The SAVE America Act to require proof of citizenship nationwide to register to vote and overhaul voting laws has now topped 50 votes in the Republican-controlled Senate.

Sen. Susan Collins, the centrist from Maine who faces a competitive re-election bid this fall, became the 50th Republican supporter of the legislation, an elated Lee announced last week.

The tally guarantees a battle over the bill on the Senate floor as Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., has promised a vote. But he warned last week that there are “not even close” to enough votes for getting rid of the filibuster, despite Trump's calls to do so. [if the filibuster isn't nuked, the bill will fail to get the 60 votes needed.]

Republicans control 53 seats in the Senate. Some in the party have not signed on to the measure, including Sens. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, and Mitch McConnell, R-Ky. Murkowski called it an example of the “one-size-fits-all mandates from Washington” that Republicans regularly criticize. And McConnell, who hasn’t commented on the bill, has long said he believes states should run their own elections without federal intrusion.

They can do it with 51, the Democrats would need to speak (filibuster) to delay the vote and then they wait until the Democrats are talked out.

essentialsaltes · 2026-02-18T11:20:02-0600

Valletta said:
They can do it with 51, the Democrats would need to speak (filibuster) to delay the vote and then they wait until the Democrats are talked out.

The Senate rules are complicated, but I don't think the Republicans can reliably force a talking filibuster.

RocksInMyHead · 2026-02-18T11:42:14-0600

essentialsaltes said:
The Senate rules are complicated, but I don't think the Republicans can reliably force a talking filibuster.

Yeah, the talking filibuster hasn't really been a thing since the '70s.

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

Jim Banks Calls for Passage of SAVE America Act to Require Proof of Citizenship to Vote

CoPacEtiC SkEpTic

CoPacEtiC SkEpTic

CoPacEtiC SkEpTic

CoPacEtiC SkEpTic

Active Member

Stuck on a ship.

Well-Known Member

E pluribus unum

Well-Known Member

E pluribus unum

Well-Known Member

E pluribus unum

Fact-Based Lifeform

Part of the IT crowd

Well-Known Member

Part of the IT crowd

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Fact-Based Lifeform

God is innocent; Noah built on a floodplain!

Similar threads