How likely for save act to pass senate?

[Anonymous]

Keep in mind, folks, back last summer the State Department laid off 1300 people whose job was to issue passports.

Now their solution to the SAVE Act is just get a Passport? Really?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Keep in mind, folks, back last summer the State Department laid off 1300 people whose job was to issue passports.

Now their solution to the SAVE Act is just get a Passport? Really?

Kind of like how they laid off all the people at CISA whose job was to protect against foreign interference in elections. Everyone can see what they’re trying to pull.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Keep in mind, folks, back last summer the State Department laid off 1300 people whose job was to issue passports.

Now their solution to the SAVE Act is just get a Passport? Really?

Just renewed my passport. Took way less time than they had said to allow. Filled form out and sent it by mail with tracking. Did not pay for it to be expedited.

And, if you were born here, why would you need a passport?

This Rep from Michigan just said the dumbest thing: that you have to change the name on your birth certificate.
Not true.

Some women do not change their names--no problem.
If you have a Social Security card and want to change your name, you provide a marriage certificate. This is not hard.

Do you ever want to receive Social Security? You need ID. Medicaid? ID. Welfare? ID Ever get on an airplane? ID.

This is a totally bogus attack.

Do better.

And, if you want to vote here and were not born here, you must surely have your naturalization papers.

This is a ridiculous argument.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Keep in mind, folks, back last summer the State Department laid off 1300 people whose job was to issue passports.

Now their solution to the SAVE Act is just get a Passport? Really?

Just renewed my passport. Took way less time than they had said to allow. Filled form out and sent it by mail with tracking. Did not pay for it to be expedited.

And, if you were born here, why would you need a passport?

This Rep from Michigan just said the dumbest thing: that you have to change the name on your birth certificate.
Not true.

Some women do not change their names--no problem.
If you have a Social Security card and want to change your name, you provide a marriage certificate. This is not hard.

Do you ever want to receive Social Security? You need ID. Medicaid? ID. Welfare? ID Ever get on an airplane? ID.

This is a totally bogus attack.

Do better.

And, if you want to vote here and were not born here, you must surely have your naturalization papers.

This is a ridiculous argument.

It is absolutely true that married women who took their husbands name will not be able to vote under the SAVE Act without documentation and remediation. Please stop telling us that is a lie. It isn't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Keep in mind, folks, back last summer the State Department laid off 1300 people whose job was to issue passports.

Now their solution to the SAVE Act is just get a Passport? Really?

Just renewed my passport. Took way less time than they had said to allow. Filled form out and sent it by mail with tracking. Did not pay for it to be expedited.

And, if you were born here, why would you need a passport?

This Rep from Michigan just said the dumbest thing: that you have to change the name on your birth certificate.
Not true.

Some women do not change their names--no problem.
If you have a Social Security card and want to change your name, you provide a marriage certificate. This is not hard.

Do you ever want to receive Social Security? You need ID. Medicaid? ID. Welfare? ID Ever get on an airplane? ID.

This is a totally bogus attack.

Do better.

And, if you want to vote here and were not born here, you must surely have your naturalization papers.

This is a ridiculous argument.

Are any of these things codified in the Constitution as a fundemental right? No? Then not the same.

and...if one has to pay for an ID as mandatory to vote, then it is a poll tax, which is illegal. So unless the GOP wants to fund everyone being able to get an ID for free, then it is a non-starter. Why won't the GOP allow those funds as has been asked time and time again in exchange for a voter ID law?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Keep in mind, folks, back last summer the State Department laid off 1300 people whose job was to issue passports.

Now their solution to the SAVE Act is just get a Passport? Really?

Just renewed my passport. Took way less time than they had said to allow. Filled form out and sent it by mail with tracking. Did not pay for it to be expedited.

And, if you were born here, why would you need a passport?

This Rep from Michigan just said the dumbest thing: that you have to change the name on your birth certificate.
Not true.

Some women do not change their names--no problem.
If you have a Social Security card and want to change your name, you provide a marriage certificate. This is not hard.

Do you ever want to receive Social Security? You need ID. Medicaid? ID. Welfare? ID Ever get on an airplane? ID.

This is a totally bogus attack.

Do better.

And, if you want to vote here and were not born here, you must surely have your naturalization papers.

This is a ridiculous argument.

It is absolutely true that married women who took their husbands name will not be able to vote under the SAVE Act without documentation and remediation. Please stop telling us that is a lie. It isn't.

Their vagueness was in purpose

So they can claim that disenfranchising women is not what this act is about

And these MAGA morons have no idea what a poll tax is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Keep in mind, folks, back last summer the State Department laid off 1300 people whose job was to issue passports.

Now their solution to the SAVE Act is just get a Passport? Really?

Just renewed my passport. Took way less time than they had said to allow. Filled form out and sent it by mail with tracking. Did not pay for it to be expedited.

And, if you were born here, why would you need a passport?

This Rep from Michigan just said the dumbest thing: that you have to change the name on your birth certificate.
Not true.

Some women do not change their names--no problem.
If you have a Social Security card and want to change your name, you provide a marriage certificate. This is not hard.

Do you ever want to receive Social Security? You need ID. Medicaid? ID. Welfare? ID Ever get on an airplane? ID.

This is a totally bogus attack.

Do better.

And, if you want to vote here and were not born here, you must surely have your naturalization papers.

This is a ridiculous argument.

Right. You renewed your password. That means you already had one. The voters who will get disenfranchised are those who have never had a passport.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Keep in mind, folks, back last summer the State Department laid off 1300 people whose job was to issue passports.

Now their solution to the SAVE Act is just get a Passport? Really?

Just renewed my passport. Took way less time than they had said to allow. Filled form out and sent it by mail with tracking. Did not pay for it to be expedited.

And, if you were born here, why would you need a passport?

This Rep from Michigan just said the dumbest thing: that you have to change the name on your birth certificate.
Not true.

Some women do not change their names--no problem.
If you have a Social Security card and want to change your name, you provide a marriage certificate. This is not hard.

Do you ever want to receive Social Security? You need ID. Medicaid? ID. Welfare? ID Ever get on an airplane? ID.

This is a totally bogus attack.

Do better.

And, if you want to vote here and were not born here, you must surely have your naturalization papers.

This is a ridiculous argument.

Right. You renewed your password. That means you already had one. The voters who will get disenfranchised are those who have never had a passport.

You don't need a passport to vote. I posted that in response to the poster who talked about the cutbacks at passport office at State Department. Passport came quickly--and it was in December when lots of people are not working. and, according to the post, the cuts were made last summer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Keep in mind, folks, back last summer the State Department laid off 1300 people whose job was to issue passports.

Now their solution to the SAVE Act is just get a Passport? Really?

Just renewed my passport. Took way less time than they had said to allow. Filled form out and sent it by mail with tracking. Did not pay for it to be expedited.

And, if you were born here, why would you need a passport?

This Rep from Michigan just said the dumbest thing: that you have to change the name on your birth certificate.
Not true.

Some women do not change their names--no problem.
If you have a Social Security card and want to change your name, you provide a marriage certificate. This is not hard.

Do you ever want to receive Social Security? You need ID. Medicaid? ID. Welfare? ID Ever get on an airplane? ID.

This is a totally bogus attack.

Do better.

And, if you want to vote here and were not born here, you must surely have your naturalization papers.

This is a ridiculous argument.

Could you please point to the part of the Constitution that specifically prohibits costs and burdens associated with doing anything you listed? I can point to one that does prohibit the direct or indirect imposition of costs and burdens on voting. The 24th Amendment.

[Anonymous]

If your ID reflects your married name, you needed documentation to do that. This is not a good argument against the SAVE ACT.

[Anonymous]

A valid U.S. Passport is the only way to prove citizenship.

Driver's licenses, SS cards and birth certificates do not prove U.S. citizenship.

Come to think of it, most MAGAs don't hold passports, so...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Keep in mind, folks, back last summer the State Department laid off 1300 people whose job was to issue passports.

Now their solution to the SAVE Act is just get a Passport? Really?

Just renewed my passport. Took way less time than they had said to allow. Filled form out and sent it by mail with tracking. Did not pay for it to be expedited.

And, if you were born here, why would you need a passport?

This Rep from Michigan just said the dumbest thing: that you have to change the name on your birth certificate.
Not true.

Some women do not change their names--no problem.
If you have a Social Security card and want to change your name, you provide a marriage certificate. This is not hard.

Do you ever want to receive Social Security? You need ID. Medicaid? ID. Welfare? ID Ever get on an airplane? ID.

This is a totally bogus attack.

Do better.

And, if you want to vote here and were not born here, you must surely have your naturalization papers.

This is a ridiculous argument.

Right. You renewed your password. That means you already had one. The voters who will get disenfranchised are those who have never had a passport.

You don't need a passport to vote. I posted that in response to the poster who talked about the cutbacks at passport office at State Department. Passport came quickly--and it was in December when lots of people are not working. and, according to the post, the cuts were made last summer.

And the rush will come AFTER the SAVE Act if passed and particularly next summer when people realize they cannot register to vote in the mid-terms as they have no passport, they don't have an authenticated birth certificate and cannot otherwise prove citizenship because all of the agencies responsible for issuing that paperwork are unbelievably overloaded with requests. Other people will not be able to vote because they may have a birth certificate, but isn't authenticated and they can't afford the fee.

Face it. This is a poll tax and imposes an impermissible burden on exercising the right to vote.

More authority? How about the US Supreme Court. Harmon v. Forssenius https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/380/528/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Keep in mind, folks, back last summer the State Department laid off 1300 people whose job was to issue passports.

Now their solution to the SAVE Act is just get a Passport? Really?

Just renewed my passport. Took way less time than they had said to allow. Filled form out and sent it by mail with tracking. Did not pay for it to be expedited.

And, if you were born here, why would you need a passport?

This Rep from Michigan just said the dumbest thing: that you have to change the name on your birth certificate.
Not true.

Some women do not change their names--no problem.
If you have a Social Security card and want to change your name, you provide a marriage certificate. This is not hard.

Do you ever want to receive Social Security? You need ID. Medicaid? ID. Welfare? ID Ever get on an airplane? ID.

This is a totally bogus attack.

Do better.

And, if you want to vote here and were not born here, you must surely have your naturalization papers.

This is a ridiculous argument.

Right. You renewed your password. That means you already had one. The voters who will get disenfranchised are those who have never had a passport.

You don't need a passport to vote. I posted that in response to the poster who talked about the cutbacks at passport office at State Department. Passport came quickly--and it was in December when lots of people are not working. and, according to the post, the cuts were made last summer.

And the rush will come AFTER the SAVE Act if passed and particularly next summer when people realize they cannot register to vote in the mid-terms as they have no passport, they don't have an authenticated birth certificate and cannot otherwise prove citizenship because all of the agencies responsible for issuing that paperwork are unbelievably overloaded with requests. Other people will not be able to vote because they may have a birth certificate, but isn't authenticated and they can't afford the fee.

Face it. This is a poll tax and imposes an impermissible burden on exercising the right to vote.

More authority? How about the US Supreme Court. Harmon v. Forssenius https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/380/528/

This is not a poll tax. People who do not have IDs in states that require them can get a waiver on the fee to get the ID.

A passport is certainly not the only evidence to prove citizenship. Where did you get that idea?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Keep in mind, folks, back last summer the State Department laid off 1300 people whose job was to issue passports.

Now their solution to the SAVE Act is just get a Passport? Really?

Just renewed my passport. Took way less time than they had said to allow. Filled form out and sent it by mail with tracking. Did not pay for it to be expedited.

And, if you were born here, why would you need a passport?

This Rep from Michigan just said the dumbest thing: that you have to change the name on your birth certificate.
Not true.

Some women do not change their names--no problem.
If you have a Social Security card and want to change your name, you provide a marriage certificate. This is not hard.

Do you ever want to receive Social Security? You need ID. Medicaid? ID. Welfare? ID Ever get on an airplane? ID.

This is a totally bogus attack.

Do better.

And, if you want to vote here and were not born here, you must surely have your naturalization papers.

This is a ridiculous argument.

Right. You renewed your password. That means you already had one. The voters who will get disenfranchised are those who have never had a passport.

You don't need a passport to vote. I posted that in response to the poster who talked about the cutbacks at passport office at State Department. Passport came quickly--and it was in December when lots of people are not working. and, according to the post, the cuts were made last summer.

And the rush will come AFTER the SAVE Act if passed and particularly next summer when people realize they cannot register to vote in the mid-terms as they have no passport, they don't have an authenticated birth certificate and cannot otherwise prove citizenship because all of the agencies responsible for issuing that paperwork are unbelievably overloaded with requests. Other people will not be able to vote because they may have a birth certificate, but isn't authenticated and they can't afford the fee.

Face it. This is a poll tax and imposes an impermissible burden on exercising the right to vote.

More authority? How about the US Supreme Court. Harmon v. Forssenius https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/380/528/

This is not a poll tax. People who do not have IDs in states that require them can get a waiver on the fee to get the ID.

A passport is certainly not the only evidence to prove citizenship. Where did you get that idea?

I suggest that you read the opinion that is linked.

[Anonymous]

If 60 votes are needed then no way it passes.