House gop push bill that links federal funding to a citizenship check for new voters

[riclag]

Who’s gonna budge,

Shummer or Johnson on …

A noble cause  , requiring ID to register to vote!

 

“Congress needs to approve a stop-gap spending bill before the end of the budget year on Sept. 30 to avoid a government shutdown just a few weeks before voters go the polls and elect the next president”.

 

“Today, House Republicans are taking a critically important step to keep the federal government funded and to secure our federal election process,” Johnson said Friday. “Congress has a responsibility to do both, and we must ensure that only American citizens can decide American elections.”

 

https://nypost.com/2024/09/08/us-news/house-republicans-push-bill-that-links-federal-funding-to-a-citizenship-check-for-new-voters/

 

 

[cjinchiangrai]

Another ignorant fake bill to address a non-issue. Trump is trying for a shutdown so he can try and blame Democrats for the border after scuttling the first bipartisan border bill in decades. It is already illegal for non-citizens to vote. They already have checks in place.

 

[bendejo]

The GOP has been beating this dead horse since the 1990s, I suspect it was cooked up by Gingrich or Rove.  Now they're spending billions to solve a non-existent problem, and this is the party that is hell-bent on cutting everything else. 

And anyway if DT gets back into the WH they won't have to worry about ANYBODY'S votes.

Trump Declines to Back Away From ‘You Don’t Have to Vote Again’ Line

 

What the Dems should try for right now is to attempt to pass that immigration bill again before the election.  If the GOP votes it down again they will have to do a lot of tap dancing to explain why, enough to affect polling.

 

 

 

Edited September 8 by bendejo

[EVENKEEL]

4 hours ago, cjinchiangrai said:

Another ignorant fake bill to address a non-issue. Trump is trying for a shutdown so he can try and blame Democrats for the border after scuttling the first bipartisan border bill in decades. It is already illegal for non-citizens to vote. They already have checks in place.

 

If you cant prove you're a citizen then you shouldn't be voting. What is so hard to understand??

 

The Border problem lies directly on the Democrats shoulders. The minute Biden took office he rescinded a large portion of Trump's directives, stopped building portions of border barrier and then sold millions of dollars worth of barrier supplies pennies on the dollar.

 

Opponents say it is already against the law for noncitizens to vote in federal elections and that the document requirements would disenfranchise millions of people who do not have the necessary documents readily available when they get a chance to register, say at a concert, county fair or at a college voter registration drive.

[cjinchiangrai]

4 hours ago, EVENKEEL said:

If you cant prove you're a citizen then you shouldn't be voting. What is so hard to understand??

 

The Border problem lies directly on the Democrats shoulders. The minute Biden took office he rescinded a large portion of Trump's directives, stopped building portions of border barrier and then sold millions of dollars worth of barrier supplies pennies on the dollar.

 

Opponents say it is already against the law for noncitizens to vote in federal elections and that the document requirements would disenfranchise millions of people who do not have the necessary documents readily available when they get a chance to register, say at a concert, county fair or at a college voter registration drive.

It is already being done, what part don't you understand?

[cjinchiangrai]

8 hours ago, bendejo said:

The GOP has been beating this dead horse since the 1990s, I suspect it was cooked up by Gingrich or Rove.  Now they're spending billions to solve a non-existent problem, and this is the party that is hell-bent on cutting everything else. 

And anyway if DT gets back into the WH they won't have to worry about ANYBODY'S votes.

Trump Declines to Back Away From ‘You Don’t Have to Vote Again’ Line

 

What the Dems should try for right now is to attempt to pass that immigration bill again before the election.  If the GOP votes it down again they will have to do a lot of tap dancing to explain why, enough to affect polling.

 

 

 

The problem is that the bill includes additional vigilante wording allowing any anyone to challenge anyone's right to vote. It would create chaos and remove millions of voters.

 

I have a better plan that they use in Australia. Every citizen is automatically registered and you get fined for not voting. They also make election day a holiday.

[Hanaguma]

4 hours ago, EVENKEEL said:

If you cant prove you're a citizen then you shouldn't be voting. What is so hard to understand??

 

The Border problem lies directly on the Democrats shoulders. The minute Biden took office he rescinded a large portion of Trump's directives, stopped building portions of border barrier and then sold millions of dollars worth of barrier supplies pennies on the dollar.

 

Opponents say it is already against the law for noncitizens to vote in federal elections and that the document requirements would disenfranchise millions of people who do not have the necessary documents readily available when they get a chance to register, say at a concert, county fair or at a college voter registration drive.

AFAIK, most civilized countries require proof of citizenship to vote. Why should the Democratic party's policy be against it?

[maesariang]

5 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

AFAIK, most civilized countries require proof of citizenship to vote. Why should the Democratic party's policy be against it?

You need ID for everything else.

[EVENKEEL]

34 minutes ago, cjinchiangrai said:

It is already being done, what part don't you understand?

And yet the democrats are against it. Why?

[cjinchiangrai]

5 minutes ago, EVENKEEL said:

And yet the democrats are against it. Why?

Two reasons

 

1. It is unneeded as it is already being done.

 

2> It includes additional clauses to disrupt elections and voter rolls.

[Patong2021]

38 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

AFAIK, most civilized countries require proof of citizenship to vote. Why should the Democratic party's policy be against it?

 

It is not.

[EVENKEEL]

4 minutes ago, cjinchiangrai said:

Two reasons

 

1. It is unneeded as it is already being done.

 

2> It includes additional clauses to disrupt elections and voter rolls.

Why are democrats so against honest and fair voting restrictions?

[riclag]

According to Merriam Webster's Collegiate Dictionary, “a citizen is a member of a state to whom he or she owes allegiance and is entitled to its protection.” Hence, from this definition, it is implicit that a non-citizen is someone who is not a member of a state nor owes allegiance to the state he or she currently ...
 

http://hrlibrary.umn.edu/edumat/studyguides/noncitizens.html#:~:text=According to Merriam Webster's Collegiate,state he or she currently
 

People who come here by the millions  that enter illegally , have broke the law.The above  “allegiance” to my country is required to pass citizenship!

If you cant meet that requirement you have no business registering & or voting , it is taking away or discounting a American citizen’s vote.

 

I hope the Gop sticks to their cause.

 

Republican Majority Leader Steve Scalise of Louisiana in a Monday press conference called the bill “a safeguard to ensure that only American citizens vote in America’s elections.”

 

https://missouriindependent.com/2024/07/10/u-s-house-passes-bill-requiring-proof-of-citizenship-to-vote-in-federal-races/

 

Edited September 9 by riclag

[gargamon]

42 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

AFAIK, most civilized countries require proof of citizenship to vote. Why should the Democratic party's policy be against it?

 

45 minutes ago, cjinchiangrai said:

The problem is that the bill includes additional vigilante wording allowing any anyone to challenge anyone's right to vote. It would create chaos and remove millions of voters.

Asked and answered.

[maesariang]

1 minute ago, EVENKEEL said:

Why are democrats so against honest and fair voting restrictions?

They want illegals to vote.

[cjinchiangrai]

11 minutes ago, EVENKEEL said:

Why are democrats so against honest and fair voting restrictions?

They are not, it has already been done. There is no need for additional laws and agencies to do what has been done for two hundred years.

[Patong2021]

36 minutes ago, maesariang said:

You need ID for everything else.

 

The ID the  republicans want exceeds  requirements that are acceptable now. They act to exclude groups who do not have the identification cards  demanded.

 

The state of Arizona requires the following  identification in order to vote;

List1: -Valid Arizona driver license

-Valid Arizona non-operating identification license

--Tribal enrollment card or other form of tribal identification

Valid United States federal, state, or local government issued identification

Or

List 2: 2 of the following  identification without a photograph that bear the name and address of the elector 

-Utility bill of the elector that is dated within 90 days of the date of the election

-Bank or credit union statement that is dated within 90 days of the date of the election

-Valid Arizona Vehicle Registration

-Indian census card

-Property tax statement of the elector's residence

-Tribal enrollment card or other form of tribal identification

-Arizona vehicle insurance card

-Recorder's Certificate

-Valid United States federal, state, or local government issued identification, including a voter registration card issued by the County Recorder

 

Or a combination of the following;

-Any valid photo identification from List 1 in which the address does not reasonably match the precinct register accompanied by a non-photo identification from List 2 in which the address does reasonably match the precinct register

-U.S. Passport without address and one valid item from List 2

 

Consider the following three people;

 John Doe. A blind white person, gainfully employed who lives in an adapted living facility. The rent includes utilities as is common for many rentals. Bank statements are sent electronically (does anyone still receive bank statements  by  post anymore?) This person would not necessarily have  any of the  ids in list 1 or 2.

 

Jane Doe. A student  from small town AZ attending university. She does not drive, has never left the state and lives in student housing. She will not necessarily have any of the identification formats required. She would have a university id card, but this is not acceptable. At best she might have on e of the 2 requirements.

 

X Doe: A transgender person living off the grid. Their driver's license does not show the new gender and has a photo different than how they look now. Living off the grid, there is no likelihood of having any of the documentation required.

 

These are 3  examples of how people would be disenfranchised. It is why previous laws to impose various new rules have been ruled unconstitutional.

 

 

[bendejo]

1 hour ago, cjinchiangrai said:

I have a better plan that they use in Australia. Every citizen is automatically registered and you get fined for not voting. They also make election day a holiday.

Same-same Brazil, and people take it seriously -- they'll catch up with you and hit you with a fine.  I like the idea.  I also like the Thai thing where if the voter turnout is too low the election is voided.

 

[riclag]

43 minutes ago, EVENKEEL said:

And yet the democrats are against it. Why?

opinion piece
 

The problem, as the Brennan Center has made clear, is not an ID requirement per se — we have no problem with that. It’s requiring identification that too many people don’t have.)
https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/voting-rights-are-expanding-blue-states-contracting-red

 

So imop meet the requirement!

[cjinchiangrai]

1 minute ago, bendejo said:

Same-same Brazil, and people take it seriously -- they'll catch up with you and hit you with a fine.  I like the idea.  I also like the Thai thing where if the voter turnout is too low the election is voided.

 

I would love to hear the GQP screams about all citizen over 18 having to vote. What is wrong with everyone eligible to vote, actually doing it?

[maesariang]

18 minutes ago, Patong2021 said:

 

The ID the  republicans want exceeds  requirements that are acceptable now. They act to exclude groups who do not have the identification cards  demanded.

 

The state of Arizona requires the following  identification in order to vote;

List1: -Valid Arizona driver license

-Valid Arizona non-operating identification license

--Tribal enrollment card or other form of tribal identification

Valid United States federal, state, or local government issued identification

Or

List 2: 2 of the following  identification without a photograph that bear the name and address of the elector 

-Utility bill of the elector that is dated within 90 days of the date of the election

-Bank or credit union statement that is dated within 90 days of the date of the election

-Valid Arizona Vehicle Registration

-Indian census card

-Property tax statement of the elector's residence

-Tribal enrollment card or other form of tribal identification

-Arizona vehicle insurance card

-Recorder's Certificate

-Valid United States federal, state, or local government issued identification, including a voter registration card issued by the County Recorder

 

Or a combination of the following;

-Any valid photo identification from List 1 in which the address does not reasonably match the precinct register accompanied by a non-photo identification from List 2 in which the address does reasonably match the precinct register

-U.S. Passport without address and one valid item from List 2

 

Consider the following three people;

 John Doe. A blind white person, gainfully employed who lives in an adapted living facility. The rent includes utilities as is common for many rentals. Bank statements are sent electronically (does anyone still receive bank statements  by  post anymore?) This person would not necessarily have  any of the  ids in list 1 or 2.

 

Jane Doe. A student  from small town AZ attending university. She does not drive, has never left the state and lives in student housing. She will not necessarily have any of the identification formats required. She would have a university id card, but this is not acceptable. At best she might have on e of the 2 requirements.

 

X Doe: A transgender person living off the grid. Their driver's license does not show the new gender and has a photo different than how they look now. Living off the grid, there is no likelihood of having any of the documentation required.

 

These are 3  examples of how people would be disenfranchised. It is why previous laws to impose various new rules have been ruled unconstitutional.

 

 

Get the id or dont vote. Easy. You dont have to vote. 

[cjinchiangrai]

3 minutes ago, maesariang said:

Get the id or dont vote. Easy. You dont have to vote. 

And then they limit access to IDs. In Texas, I tried to add voter registration during my license renewal. There was not room on the form to write in my Anglo name. There is no way that any Hispanic could do it with their double names. This is a way that they restrict voting for minorities.

[EVENKEEL]

8 hours ago, cjinchiangrai said:

They are not, it has already been done. There is no need for additional laws and agencies to do what has been done for two hundred years.

Guess it's true that democrats would like for illegals and non US citizens to be given the vote.

[Rob Browder]

RFK-Jr proposed the fix for this, and eVerify, which is to allow those who cannot get a DL/ID from their state - for whatever reason - to get a Passport-Card at their local post-office without cost. 

 

Not having a form of photo-ID has many downsides, so this improves the lives of those who do not have one, beyond ability to prove who they are when voting or applying for a job.

 

Whether one believes that vote-fraud is a real-issue or not, this would remove all doubt, so we don't have ~1/2 the country not trusting our elections.  What is the downside?

 

Of course, that fix is not in this legislation, because it is being "used as an issue" - by both "sides" - neither actually wanting to solve the problem.  Instead, they use this as a circus-event, to distract from the many "bi-partisan" positions they hold, which are in opposition to the views of the majority of the electorate.

[cjinchiangrai]

24 minutes ago, EVENKEEL said:

Guess it's true that democrats would like for illegals and non US citizens to be given the vote.

Where did I say that? I sad it is already the law and is already enforced. 

[Rob Browder]

8 hours ago, cjinchiangrai said:

I would love to hear the GQP screams about all citizen over 18 having to vote. What is wrong with everyone eligible to vote, actually doing it?

As long as "none of the above" is available for every office, and if those reach a certain threshold, the listed candidates are barred, and a new election for that office(s) is held.  I wish that were possible for president this November.

[cjinchiangrai]

4 minutes ago, Rob Browder said:

As long as "none of the above" is available for every office, and if those reach a certain threshold, the listed candidates are barred, and a new election for that office(s) is held.  I wish that were possible for president this November.

Something to consider. None of the above is not very effective but ranked voting is gaining traction.

[Rob Browder]

1 minute ago, cjinchiangrai said:

Something to consider. None of the above is not very effective but ranked voting is gaining traction.

Yes, but that needs to be combined with making ballot-access much easier - preferably mandated by federal law - but those in-office have no incentive to help us fix things by replacing them.

[cjinchiangrai]

3 minutes ago, Rob Browder said:

Yes, but that needs to be combined with making ballot-access much easier - preferably mandated by federal law - but those in-office have no incentive to help us fix things by replacing them.

To really do it right, a constitutional amendment is needed. All citizens over 18 shall be required to vote on or prior to designated election days. 

[Patong2021]

11 hours ago, maesariang said:

Get the id or dont vote. Easy. You dont have to vote. 

 

The US Constitution says differently.