Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There needs to be a lot of outrage over this. In 1992 I stood in the college quad with an ironing board helping students sign up to vote in the hopes that Clinton would win.

No more voter registration drives allowed. I never could have imagined then that my future children would have so many fewer rights than me.

If you’re not outraged, they’re going to take more from you.

In Europe they all need passports. Really shouldn’t be too much trouble for Americans to get one.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There needs to be a lot of outrage over this. In 1992 I stood in the college quad with an ironing board helping students sign up to vote in the hopes that Clinton would win.

No more voter registration drives allowed. I never could have imagined then that my future children would have so many fewer rights than me.

If you’re not outraged, they’re going to take more from you.

In Europe they all need passports. Really shouldn’t be too much trouble for Americans to get one.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There needs to be a lot of outrage over this. In 1992 I stood in the college quad with an ironing board helping students sign up to vote in the hopes that Clinton would win.

No more voter registration drives allowed. I never could have imagined then that my future children would have so many fewer rights than me.

If you’re not outraged, they’re going to take more from you.

In Europe they all need passports. Really shouldn’t be too much trouble for Americans to get one.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I changed my last name but have a passport. I’m registered to vote in PA. My sister thinks it will definitely pass and screw over all married women who changed names. I think she’s jumping the gun along with a lot people apparently on social media. Why isn’t anyone talking about this on dcum?

They are talking about it. Do you follow/read any free press? Any international press? It is everywhere. And it passed. Sounds like you are late to game- like most Americans- some who are in shock and just can’t believe it. Start paying more attention and do your due diligence. Blogger sites shouldn’t be the only way you get your press.

I had a baby 3 months ago. I listen to my alexia speaker every once and while. Too stressful listening to the news but I’m surprised no one is talking about it on here.

Anonymous wrote:There needs to be a lot of outrage over this. In 1992 I stood in the college quad with an ironing board helping students sign up to vote in the hopes that Clinton would win.

No more voter registration drives allowed. I never could have imagined then that my future children would have so many fewer rights than me.

If you’re not outraged, they’re going to take more from you.

Anonymous wrote:Good thing is that wealthy, educated people are more likely to have passports - and to vote D.

Feeling awfully good about being too lazy/stubborn to change my name when I got married.

Also why why why are they trying to drag us back into the dark ages.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/22

Here is the bill. You can interpret it many ways. The problem is it is vague. The Dems tried to get the Republicans to pass an amendment to this bill stating that already registered women would not have to re-register- they voted it down right before this bill passed. They want to keep it vague so they have power to do what they want. This is the issue. You MAY have to re-register. Also, it says “and”- meaning you will have to have 2 forms of identification. That being a birth certificate and the only other Federal approval voting document which is a passport. If they don’t match you MAY be screwed this is where things are fuzzy for all. There is no clarification. It’s to scare people, fear=control.

Not to mention- this can/will affect anyone who has changed their legal name. Trans, low income families, military families/people. It’s so broad it could have LOTS of implications.

Anonymous wrote:https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/22

Here is the bill. You can interpret it many ways. The problem is it is vague. The Dems tried to get the Republicans to pass an amendment to this bill stating that already registered women would not have to re-register- they voted it down right before this bill passed. They want to keep it vague so they have power to do what they want. This is the issue. You MAY have to re-register. Also, it says “and”- meaning you will have to have 2 forms of identification. That being a birth certificate and the only other Federal approval voting document which is a passport. If they don’t match you MAY be screwed this is where things are fuzzy for all. There is no clarification. It’s to scare people, fear=control.

Anonymous wrote:Good thing is that wealthy, educated people are more likely to have passports - and to vote D.

Feeling awfully good about being too lazy/stubborn to change my name when I got married.

Also why why why are they trying to drag us back into the dark ages.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People are talking about it. It's a draconian law to solve a rare problem, that will potentially hurt married women when they try to vote. But sadly, it's not the worst thing Republicans are doing to women under this administration.
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/10/us/politics/house-citizenship-elections.html

Democrats opposing the bill framed it as an unnecessary effort to address a rare practice that is already illegal. And they warned that the legislation would have substantial unintended consequences, making it more difficult for large swaths of Americans — including women who change their name upon marriage — to vote.

“Republicans would force Americans into a paperwork nightmare, burying voter registration under a mountain of bureaucracy and red tape,” Representative Joseph D. Morelle of New York said.

Much of their argument focused on married women whose birth certificates have names that do not match their current legal names. Democrats argued that they would find it difficult to produce the documentation required by the bill, thus disenfranchising them.

“Are you a woman who changed your name when you got married?” Hillary Rodham Clinton, the former secretary of state and Democratic presidential nominee, wrote in a message on social media. “Congress is considering a bill that could make it much harder for you to vote.” Her post urged women to call their congressional representatives to oppose the bill, and after the measure passed, she added another message encouraging them to “make sure your senators know you expect them to stand against it.”

Mr. Morelle responded to every Republican who spoke in favor of the measure by citing the number of women in their district who might be affected by it and the number of residents without passports who might find themselves unable to register to vote.

I don’t think Republicans consider it a problem for women to not be allowed to vote.

They should- lots of married conservative women vote for them. I think a majority white women voted for Trump, right?

Anonymous wrote:If I am already registered, what do I need to bring on election day to vote? I still have my birth name.