Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At least 80% of Americans want voter ID.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/403052/eight-americans-favor-early-voting-photo-laws.aspx

There is no good excuse - none - for Democrats to vote against this.

I'd support it assuming that we also provide the funds and make it easy for Americans to get a voter ID. Oh wait, it's expensive and time consuming and made deliberately difficult, especially in red states (https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/challenge-obtaining-voter-identification).

"Many ID-issuing offices maintain limited business hours. For example, the office in Sauk City, Wisconsin is open only on the fifth Wednesday of any month. But only four months in 2012 — February, May, August, and October — have five Wednesdays. In other states — Alabama, Georgia, Mississippi, and Texas — many part-time ID-issuing offices are in the rural regions with the highest concentrations of people of color and people in poverty."

If it was as easy as showing up with your social security card or birth certificate and getting it immediately processed, then I'd be all for it but these red states abuse it to deliberately disenfranchise people, especially POCs.

Nonsense.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yW2LpFkVfYk

People can get ID's. To say they can't is YOU being the racist.

You didn't address any of the facts of what I provided. Typical, you only watch force fed echo chamber news videos rather than doing any reading or actual diligence. It is difficult and expensive to get voter IDs. But you conveniently deny this because it doesn't suit your agenda.

Expensive and Time Consuming:
https://www.aclu.org/documents/oppose-voter-id-legislation-fact-sheet

Some counties in Texas require you to travel up to 175 miles to get to a place where you get one. So fine, let's put voter ID requirements in place and also fund the cost of acquiring one AND make it easy and accessible for all to do so, including those in rural areas. Now tell me why you're opposed to making it cheap and easily accessible to all Americans other than some ad hominem attack.

Then you go to get your ID. You need and ID to open an account, drive a car, buy alcohol, travel...you need one to vote.

If you don't support and ID to vote you hate democracy it's that simple. All western liberalized countries require and ID to vote. America is the only country stupid enough to not require and ID to cast a vote.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It was already illegal for non-citizens to vote. Obviously this was meant to intimidate legitimate voters.

By requiring and ID? How's that intimidation? Just get an ID. Everyone can get one.

Seems to me you hate democracy.

Actually, if your license is expired or suspended in one state and you lose it in another, then its almost impossible to get a new one. Just FYI. My younger brother who is a very busy kid kept procrastinating changing his license over, it expired and then his wallet got stolen. The state he is in requires an original birth certificate, which he ordered, and it took 4 months to arrive. And then he went back to get the license and they said he needed additional proof so my MOM has to fly out to where he lives to show HER ORIGINAL BIRTH CERTIFICATE so they will give my brother a license. Because apparently having a valid original birth certificate is not enough, they need to see that my mom exists or something?

Did he make a stupid mistake- yes. Did he hopefully learn a listen- jesus christ, I hope so. Is it just as easy as walking in and getting one, no, not always.

So your idiot brother is the reason we should forgo election security, not protect our democracy and allow illegals to vote?

That's on your brother for being stupid, 99.9% of people can get an ID. To say they can't means you're the racist or the idiot. Which one is your brother? The idiot. Most people arguing minorities don't know how to use the internet or how to get to the DMV are racists. Jim Crowe Joe supports allowing illegals to vote.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At least 80% of Americans want voter ID.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/403052/eight-americans-favor-early-voting-photo-laws.aspx

There is no good excuse - none - for Democrats to vote against this.

I'd support it assuming that we also provide the funds and make it easy for Americans to get a voter ID. Oh wait, it's expensive and time consuming and made deliberately difficult, especially in red states (https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/challenge-obtaining-voter-identification).

"Many ID-issuing offices maintain limited business hours. For example, the office in Sauk City, Wisconsin is open only on the fifth Wednesday of any month. But only four months in 2012 — February, May, August, and October — have five Wednesdays. In other states — Alabama, Georgia, Mississippi, and Texas — many part-time ID-issuing offices are in the rural regions with the highest concentrations of people of color and people in poverty."

If it was as easy as showing up with your social security card or birth certificate and getting it immediately processed, then I'd be all for it but these red states abuse it to deliberately disenfranchise people, especially POCs.

Nonsense.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yW2LpFkVfYk

People can get ID's. To say they can't is YOU being the racist.

You didn't address any of the facts of what I provided. Typical, you only watch force fed echo chamber news videos rather than doing any reading or actual diligence. It is difficult and expensive to get voter IDs. But you conveniently deny this because it doesn't suit your agenda.

Expensive and Time Consuming:
https://www.aclu.org/documents/oppose-voter-id-legislation-fact-sheet

Some counties in Texas require you to travel up to 175 miles to get to a place where you get one. So fine, let's put voter ID requirements in place and also fund the cost of acquiring one AND make it easy and accessible for all to do so, including those in rural areas. Now tell me why you're opposed to making it cheap and easily accessible to all Americans other than some ad hominem attack.

This vote seems like an example of where Democrats may technically be right, but it may have been better to be strategic about not giving MAGA dummies a big rallying point weeks before an election where Trump is on the ballot, and none of the people whom this bill benefits will be voting anyway.

Don't let Perfect be the enemy of Good. Save the nuance for when guys like John McCain or Mitt Romney are on the ballot.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It was already illegal for non-citizens to vote. Obviously this was meant to intimidate legitimate voters.

By requiring and ID? How's that intimidation? Just get an ID. Everyone can get one.

Seems to me you hate democracy.

Actually, if your license is expired or suspended in one state and you lose it in another, then its almost impossible to get a new one. Just FYI. My younger brother who is a very busy kid kept procrastinating changing his license over, it expired and then his wallet got stolen. The state he is in requires an original birth certificate, which he ordered, and it took 4 months to arrive. And then he went back to get the license and they said he needed additional proof so my MOM has to fly out to where he lives to show HER ORIGINAL BIRTH CERTIFICATE so they will give my brother a license. Because apparently having a valid original birth certificate is not enough, they need to see that my mom exists or something?

Did he make a stupid mistake- yes. Did he hopefully learn a listen- jesus christ, I hope so. Is it just as easy as walking in and getting one, no, not always.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At least 80% of Americans want voter ID.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/403052/eight-americans-favor-early-voting-photo-laws.aspx

There is no good excuse - none - for Democrats to vote against this.

I'd support it assuming that we also provide the funds and make it easy for Americans to get a voter ID. Oh wait, it's expensive and time consuming and made deliberately difficult, especially in red states (https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/challenge-obtaining-voter-identification).

"Many ID-issuing offices maintain limited business hours. For example, the office in Sauk City, Wisconsin is open only on the fifth Wednesday of any month. But only four months in 2012 — February, May, August, and October — have five Wednesdays. In other states — Alabama, Georgia, Mississippi, and Texas — many part-time ID-issuing offices are in the rural regions with the highest concentrations of people of color and people in poverty."

If it was as easy as showing up with your social security card or birth certificate and getting it immediately processed, then I'd be all for it but these red states abuse it to deliberately disenfranchise people, especially POCs.

Nonsense.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yW2LpFkVfYk

People can get ID's. To say they can't is YOU being the racist.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I mean many places are trying to normalize non citizens voting. Looking at you Takoma Park…

Federalism says that is a local government decision, not Congress’s. Aren’t Republicans all about federalism and state and local authority?

Don’t play this BS on people. It makes no sense that illegal immigrants are legally voting in some local elections. The vast majority of Americans do not support this and it is a losing issue for Democrats.

Local elections are about property taxes and schools and water and sewer and other infrastructure for local residents. Legal residents own property, pay property and sales taxes, are impacted by local services and infrastructure, enroll their kids in public schools, etc. If the local government allows them to vote in local elections, it should be none of Congress’s business according to the Federalist Society’s SCOTUS.

Immigration is absolutely Congress’s concern, but you know this.

This is not an immigration issue. It is a taxation without representation issue for legal residents.

All immigration, legal or illegal, is controlled at the federal level. Not the states. Not the localities. Illegal immigrants shouldn’t be here in the first place to then vote in local elections. That’s common sense!

Local governments that allow legal residents to vote are not in conflict with federal immigration policy.

This is a redundant law that accomplishes nothing new.

Non-citizens are already prohibited from voting by numerous laws and statutes, for example:

18 U.S. Code § 611: This federal law explicitly prohibits non-citizens from voting in federal elections, stating: "It shall be unlawful for any alien to vote in any election held solely or in part for the purpose of electing a candidate for the office of President, Vice President, Presidential elector, Member of the Senate, Member of the House of Representatives, Delegate from the District of Columbia, or Resident Commissioner, unless (1) the election is held partly for some other purpose; (2) aliens are authorized to vote for such other purpose under a State constitution or statute or a local ordinance; and (3) voting for such other purpose is conducted independently of voting for one of the offices referred to in this subsection."

National Voter Registration Act of 1993 (NVRA): This act requires that states provide voter registration forms that include an affirmation that the registrant is a U.S. citizen.

Help America Vote Act of 2002 (HAVA): This law mandates that first-time voters who register by mail provide identification to verify their identity and citizenship.

Also, the Constitution effectively limits voting to citizens.

This bill is redundant, accomplishes nothing new, wasted time and money, and was nothing but performative theater by the Republicans for no good reason other than to feed into their BS narrative that illegal aliens are "replacing" Americans at the polls and everywhere else. These false Republican claims have repeatedly been debunked and disproven. https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2024/may/20/mike-johnson/mike-johnsons-false-claim-that-immigrants-paroled/

Anonymous wrote:At least 80% of Americans want voter ID.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/403052/eight-americans-favor-early-voting-photo-laws.aspx

There is no good excuse - none - for Democrats to vote against this.

I'd support it assuming that we also provide the funds and make it easy for Americans to get a voter ID. Oh wait, it's expensive and time consuming and made deliberately difficult, especially in red states (https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/challenge-obtaining-voter-identification).

"Many ID-issuing offices maintain limited business hours. For example, the office in Sauk City, Wisconsin is open only on the fifth Wednesday of any month. But only four months in 2012 — February, May, August, and October — have five Wednesdays. In other states — Alabama, Georgia, Mississippi, and Texas — many part-time ID-issuing offices are in the rural regions with the highest concentrations of people of color and people in poverty."

If it was as easy as showing up with your social security card or birth certificate and getting it immediately processed, then I'd be all for it but these red states abuse it to deliberately disenfranchise people, especially POCs.

Anonymous wrote:It was already illegal for non-citizens to vote. Obviously this was meant to intimidate legitimate voters.

By requiring and ID? How's that intimidation? Just get an ID. Everyone can get one.

Seems to me you hate democracy.

Anonymous wrote:It’s not needed. GOP has not proved that non-citizens vote.

Thought y’all were about small government.

Why don't you want to protect democracy? It's hard to say they don't or do vote by virtue of the fact they don't have ID's and some places don't require an ID. It's easy for them to vote, since some states let them have drivers licenses and the voter registration is automatic in some cases.

Every Western democracy/republic requires and ID to vote. To not means you don't care about democracy.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I mean many places are trying to normalize non citizens voting. Looking at you Takoma Park…

Federalism says that is a local government decision, not Congress’s. Aren’t Republicans all about federalism and state and local authority?

Don’t play this BS on people. It makes no sense that illegal immigrants are legally voting in some local elections. The vast majority of Americans do not support this and it is a losing issue for Democrats.

Local elections are about property taxes and schools and water and sewer and other infrastructure for local residents. Legal residents own property, pay property and sales taxes, are impacted by local services and infrastructure, enroll their kids in public schools, etc. If the local government allows them to vote in local elections, it should be none of Congress’s business according to the Federalist Society’s SCOTUS.

Immigration is absolutely Congress’s concern, but you know this.

This is not an immigration issue. It is a taxation without representation issue for legal residents.

All immigration, legal or illegal, is controlled at the federal level. Not the states. Not the localities. Illegal immigrants shouldn’t be here in the first place to then vote in local elections. That’s common sense!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I mean many places are trying to normalize non citizens voting. Looking at you Takoma Park…

Federalism says that is a local government decision, not Congress’s. Aren’t Republicans all about federalism and state and local authority?

Don’t play this BS on people. It makes no sense that illegal immigrants are legally voting in some local elections. The vast majority of Americans do not support this and it is a losing issue for Democrats.

Local elections are about property taxes and schools and water and sewer and other infrastructure for local residents. Legal residents own property, pay property and sales taxes, are impacted by local services and infrastructure, enroll their kids in public schools, etc. If the local government allows them to vote in local elections, it should be none of Congress’s business according to the Federalist Society’s SCOTUS.

Immigration is absolutely Congress’s concern, but you know this.

This is not an immigration issue. It is a taxation without representation issue for legal residents.

https://www.townofchevychase.org/DocumentCenter/View/2876/TOCC-Voter-Registration-Application-final

TO REGISTER USING THIS FORM, YOU MUST:
 Be a resident of the Town of Chevy Chase, Maryland;
 Be legally authorized to reside in the United States;
 Not have been convicted of a felony and currently serving a court-ordered sentence of imprisonment for the conviction;
 Not be under guardianship for mental disability or, if you are, not have been found by a court to be unable to communicate a desire to vote;
 Not have been convicted of buying or selling votes.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I mean many places are trying to normalize non citizens voting. Looking at you Takoma Park…

Federalism says that is a local government decision, not Congress’s. Aren’t Republicans all about federalism and state and local authority?

Don’t play this BS on people. It makes no sense that illegal immigrants are legally voting in some local elections. The vast majority of Americans do not support this and it is a losing issue for Democrats.

Local elections are about property taxes and schools and water and sewer and other infrastructure for local residents. Legal residents own property, pay property and sales taxes, are impacted by local services and infrastructure, enroll their kids in public schools, etc. If the local government allows them to vote in local elections, it should be none of Congress’s business according to the Federalist Society’s SCOTUS.

Immigration is absolutely Congress’s concern, but you know this.