691
submitted 3 months ago by jeffw@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Kusimulkku@lemm.ee 17 points 3 months ago

Johnson plans to pair a bill funding the government for six months with a Republican bill called the “Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act” or “SAVE Act,” that would require new voters to submit “documentary proof of United States citizenship,” such as a passport or a birth certificate, in order to register to vote.

That doesn't seem like an outrageous ask but then access to such documents should also be safeguarded, that is if the actual reason was just to prevent voter fraud/illegally voting

[-] revelrous@sopuli.xyz 46 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

This usually places undue burden on women, poor and generally anybody not a white dude.

Say you are a woman, okay you've got your certified copy of your birth certificate $10-but wait the name doesn't match because you got married.

Now you need a marriage certificate, thats another $10 and the trouble of contacting another municipal office.

Oh were you married twice? Thats tracking down another 2 municipal offices, another $10 marriage cert and now a certified judgement of divorce which will cost-ooh was your children's custody agreement a part of that? $40. Did you not remember your divorce file number from 30 years ago? It'll be an additional $5 per name per every 2 years searched.

I've seen women spend like $200 just on certified copies to get a realID driver's license. Has a chilling effect on registering, to solve a problem of voter fraud that doesn't really exist.

[-] Kusimulkku@lemm.ee 6 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

If the intention was to actually fight current or future voter fraud then they should really have an easy way of submitting that documentary proof. I don't know what form that would take in the US and how expensive it would get, considering you'd want some stipulation that it shouldn't have much cost to acquiring such documents, shouldn't be too difficult and whatnot. Assuming you'd want to do that right. Not that I think that's their genuine intention.

Where I live in Finland we don't have voter registering. We do check IDs when you vote, that part just seems sensible, but there isn't an actual ID requirement. You just need to be identified without a doubt, but the form isn't set. In specific circumstances it could even be that the officials there know you and guarantee who you are. But if you don't have a passport (rare not to have it here), you don't have driver's license or ID card, you can get a temporary ID for free from the police station just for voting. But then you need to be also somehow identified there, so sorta the same problem again, but at least you have more time there than in the voting place.

[-] IamAnonymous@lemmy.world 10 points 3 months ago

The intention is to make it hard to register to vote. Imagine if you are going through a hard time in your life and you forget to check your mail or forget to register, then you just can’t vote.

It’s hard for me to believe that there are a lot of illegal voters. If you illegally voted you will not be granted a citizenship so anyone with the intention to be a citizen will not vote illegally.

The solution is to auto-enroll citizens. The government can easily check my citizenship if they wanted to. They can send a ID letter stating take this to the voting booth if you don’t have an ID, but this bill is not going to get passed because the main intent is not to prevent fraud.

[-] Kusimulkku@lemm.ee 2 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

According to the article the sort of voter fraud this would prevent isn't much of an issue at all.

The solution is to auto-enroll citizens. The government can easily check my citizenship if they wanted to. They can send a ID letter stating take this to the voting booth if you don’t have an ID, but this bill is not going to get passed because the main intent is not to prevent fraud.

I wonder if that would cause concern over how secure the mail is. I guess you could put in some additional safeguards on this, where you fill out a web form if you want to get such temporary ID so it'd be a lot harder to use those mailed IDs to cause widespread issues since not every needs it and they'd already know how many have ordered them and so on. But like said, lot of effort to solve, at least of now, a barely existing issue.

[-] Facebones@reddthat.com 8 points 3 months ago

In the US, it isn't about identification or fraud, its about hoops. The more hoops you have to jump through, the less likely "undesirables" (POC, poors, etc) are yo get it done. Like most things here, its a relic of Jim Crow and related policies. It flies so well even today because it all seems menial to somebody well off (you see it in these comments "Its only $10 what's the problem")

Here, the Department of Motor Vehicles tends to be your central point of anything ID related driver or not. My city's used to be on the bus line, but they moved it to the county far from any public transit. So if you don't drive, that $10 is now $10 + $20 taxi/uber there + $20 ride home and depending on what you're doing/getting you may need to go back which is another $40. So really you're looking at $50-100 to get whatever it is.

In my state at one time (I do think its changed here but assume its probably the same in other states) to get a birth certificate you had to go to the state capital (4 hour drive for me one way.) If you dont drive, sucks to suck. Pay someone to take you or hope you have greyhound where you live.

I could go on, but you get the point.

[-] morbidcactus@lemmy.ca 22 points 3 months ago

What issue is it trying to solve? To my knowledge electoral fraud is so extremely rare in general (article cites figures in the double digits since 2000) let alone non-citizen voting, what this is though is anti-voter legislation, part of their election denial bullshit

[-] solomon42069@lemmy.world 18 points 3 months ago

What issue is it trying to solve?

Votes for Democrats. The Republicans have been using voter suppression tactics to get elected for decades. At this point it's the only way they can cling onto power.

[-] SirDerpy@lemmy.world 5 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

2016 GE poll worker, inspector. I watched an elderly couple look at the polling results from the machines then write down a different result on their submission to the county. Their problem was that they also needed my signature. When I refused they signed for me. When I objected to the Secretary of State nothing happened.

There's all sorts of voter fraud. But, it's not being effected by the voters.

[-] Kusimulkku@lemm.ee 0 points 3 months ago

Having such safeguards in place to make sure it doesn't become an issue does seem alright to me. But they seem to be doing this as a form of voter suppression.

[-] Dkarma@lemmy.world 23 points 3 months ago

Hasn't been an issue ever, statistically. This is the GOP trying to suppress voting

[-] Kusimulkku@lemm.ee -1 points 3 months ago

That's... what I am saying. It's like you think I'm in favour of their move or something.

[-] kandoh@reddthat.com 7 points 3 months ago

That's the game, if dems were as unscrupulous they could do this too:

Election Security is our #1 priority. That's why we're creating secure polling stations located throughout every major city in every state. Rural polling stations will be closed as they are not secure enough to guarantee the integrity of our elections. Rural Americans frequently go into cities for sporting events and concerts so there will be no issue of disenfranchisement when their local polling stations close.

[-] Kusimulkku@lemm.ee 2 points 3 months ago

Republicans and Democrats going all out like this (or I guess Democrats retaliating in kind) would make for some interesting times for the US. Even more so than they are having now.

[-] PriorityMotif@lemmy.world 8 points 3 months ago

I would have to figure out how the NYC birth certificate system works and I live halfway across the country. It's too close to the election to do that, and getting a passport can take months and hundreds of dollars.

[-] Kusimulkku@lemm.ee 6 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

It's not very subtle to try and push these "safeguards" now, yeah

[-] bitjunkie@lemmy.world 5 points 3 months ago

Republicans wanting a bill to "protect voting rights" is some highly unsubtle Minitrue shit

this post was submitted on 10 Sep 2024
691 points (97.8% liked)

News

23608 readers
3426 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS