Nationalized Voting

#178
#178
NorthDallas40 said:
Someone needs to tell the Senate Majority Leader he has no idea what he is talking about. And it would appear after some searching the House Speaker has found his spine.

www.foxnews.com

Trump doubles down on calls for GOP to 'nationalize' voting as congressional leaders balk

President Donald Trump calls for Republicans to "nationalize" voting in certain areas, defending federal election takeover despite constitutional concerns.
www.foxnews.com www.foxnews.com

Prominent Republicans have hesitated to fall in behind Trump on the issue. Senate Majority Leader John Thune outright rejected the idea when asked about it later Tuesday.

"I’m not in favor of federalizing elections, no. I think that’s a constitutional issue," he told reporters.

House Speaker Mike Johnson sought to make excuses for Trump's suggestion when he was asked about the issue. He argued Trump was simply "expressing his frustration" about election issues. Nevertheless, he ultimately said he would not support federalizing elections either.
Click to expand...
We need to require proof of citizenship and photo IDs with audits of voter rolls and procedures.
A federal takeover would be unconstitutional.
 
Last edited:
#179
#179
NashVol11 said:
This seems like a stupid bill. ID but not driver's licenses??

Click to expand...

I have been pointing out for a while that most states issued drivers license doesn't indicate citizenship. at most it establishes residency, and not even "legal" residency.

I mean its in the name DRIVERS LICENSE. its a license to drive, not a proof of citizenship.
 
  • Like
Reactions: McDad
#180
#180
LouderVol said:
I have been pointing out for a while that most states issued drivers license doesn't indicate citizenship. at most it establishes residency, and not even "legal" residency.

I mean its in the name DRIVERS LICENSE. its a license to drive, not a proof of citizenship.
Click to expand...
That makes sense, but if "voter ID" excludes what is by far the most common form of ID, people are going to hate it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: McDad
#181
#181
NashVol11 said:
This seems like a stupid bill. ID but not driver's licenses??

Click to expand...

I may be wrong about this bc I secured my license almost 40 years ago...but I don't think you have to be an American citizen to test for, and be granted, a driver's license. If that is accurate, securing the authenticity of the vote cannot be accomplished through DLs.

I am not an expert of voting around the world. I get the impression voting is a more vetted process in other countries less advanced than America. And, of course, there are countries with a lot of voter fraud that I do not think exists in America.

I am surprised with all the ways to verify identities that America seems unwilling to use wrt to voting.
 
  • Like
Reactions: whodeycin85 and hog88
#183
#183
McDad said:
I may be wrong about this bc I secured my license almost 40 years ago...but I don't think you have to be an American citizen to test for, and be granted, a driver's license. If that is accurate, securing the authenticity of the vote cannot be accomplished through DLs.

I am not an expert of voting around the world. I get the impression voting is a more vetted process in other countries less advanced than America. And, of course, there are countries with a lot of voter fraud that I do not think exists in America.

I am surprised with all the ways to verify identities that America seems unwilling to use wrt to voting.
Click to expand...
At a high level, I think as the most fundamental civic duty we have, voting should be easy and accessible. Setting other countries aside, when we start requiring people to bring their birth certificate to their polling place, we are losing the plot on ease and accessibility IMO. It should not be hard to vote.
 
#184
#184
NashVol11 said:
That makes sense, but if "voter ID" excludes what is by far the most common form of ID, people are going to hate it
Click to expand...
exactly. that is something I have been trying to point out to the MAGA crowd when they have said you can show a drivers license to ICE and just walk away. it doesn't work there, and it wouldn't work for voting.

states COULD establish citizenship on the drivers license, but pretty much none do, I feel like there is one state that puts a symbol on the actual ID. a couple states do require proof of citizenship to get a drivers license, but its not indicated. even the "Real ID" doesn't.
 
  • Like
Reactions: USF grad in TN and NashVol11
#186
#186
NashVol11 said:
At a high level, I think as the most fundamental civic duty we have, voting should be easy and accessible. Setting other countries aside, when we start requiring people to bring their birth certificate to their polling place, we are losing the plot on ease and accessibility IMO. It should not be hard to vote.
Click to expand...
I am not sure I can 'sign off' of "ease" because I don't know how you apply that to voting. I think voting should be unrestricted to citizens. We have accepted higher standards to other rights like speech and 2A. I think it is reasonable to apply some additional standards to the right to vote. For the record, I don't think the verification has to be hard for voters to satisfy. I think the process can still be "easy" or unrestricted.
 
#187
#187
LouderVol said:
exactly. that is something I have been trying to point out to the MAGA crowd when they have said you can show a drivers license to ICE and just walk away. it doesn't work there, and it wouldn't work for voting.

states COULD establish citizenship on the drivers license, but pretty much none do, I feel like there is one state that puts a symbol on the actual ID. a couple states do require proof of citizenship to get a drivers license, but its not indicated. even the "Real ID" doesn't.
Click to expand...
Another option would be to accept the drivers license for identification but require polls to have documentation of which drivers have a right to vote based on citizenship confirmed in advance.
 
  • Like
Reactions: McDad
#188
#188
McDad said:
I am not sure I can 'sign off' of "ease" because I don't know how you apply that to voting. I think voting should be unrestricted to citizens. We have accepted higher standards to other rights like speech and 2A. I think it is reasonable to apply some additional standards to the right to vote. For the record, I don't think the verification has to be hard for voters to satisfy. I think the process can still be "easy" or unrestricted.
Click to expand...
I agree with the bolded in particular, I'm fine with additional standards so long as they don't make voting seem more difficult than it's worth - particularly for those with less time or less money. I have a passport, but needing to track down my birth certificate in order to vote would make it feel like much more of a chore to me personally
 
  • Like
Reactions: McDad
#190
#190
NashVol11 said:
I agree with the bolded in particular, I'm fine with additional standards so long as they don't make voting seem more difficult than it's worth, particularly for those with less time or less money. I have a passport, but needing to track down my birth certificate in order to vote would make it feel like much more of a chore to me personally
Click to expand...
Agreed. Assuming we trust technology...or we can get our tech to a point of trustworthiness, there should be many different ways to digitally verify the person voting.

Think about how many unique numbers we have associated with our identity; SS#, DL#, Passport #, etc and how many ways we can verify a person fingerprints, retina, facial recognition. The risk, and it is extreme, is having that information in a national database. Many americans would, rightfully so, be wary of that level of intrusion.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NashVol11
#191
#191
NashVol11 said:
I agree with the bolded in particular, I'm fine with additional standards so long as they don't make voting seem more difficult than it's worth - particularly for those with less time or less money. I have a passport, but needing to track down my birth certificate in order to vote would make it feel like much more of a chore to me personally
Click to expand...
So, we should lower the barrier for those who don't care as much to do it?

(If I recall, I had to run down at least that much proof of identification, pay for and endure a federal background check, take classes, etc to fulfill my constitutional right to carry a firearm. I didn't sit around *****ing about it. I just did it.)
 
  • Like
Reactions: whodeycin85 and USF grad in TN
#193
#193
McDad said:
Agreed. Assuming we trust technology...or we can get our tech to a point of trustworthiness, there should be many different ways to digitally verify the person voting.

Think about how many unique numbers we have associated with our identity; SS#, DL#, Passport #, etc and how many ways we can verify a person fingerprints, retina, facial recognition. The risk, and it is extreme, is having that information in a national database. Many americans would, rightfully so, be wary of that level of intrusion.
Click to expand...
It seems like an easier fix would be for all the states to NOT give DLs to illegal aliens, and to issue drivers licenses that designate citizenship.

1770303396475.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: McDad
#196
#196
Orange_Crush said:
It seems like an easier fix would be for all the states to NOT give DLs to illegal aliens, and to issue drivers licenses that designate citizenship.

View attachment 812569
Click to expand...
Legal residents need to have a DL to legally drive that’s why. They cannot vote but they can use public roads. That is the impetus behind real ID which only establishes legal residency but not citizenship and that ID is used for freedom of travel.
 
  • Like
Reactions: USF grad in TN
#197
#197
Orange_Crush said:
So, we should lower the barrier for those who don't care as much to do it?

(If I recall, I had to run down at least that much proof of identification, pay for and endure a federal background check, take classes, etc to fulfill my constitutional right to carry a firearm. I didn't sit around *****ing about it. I just did it.)
Click to expand...
I'm not sure voting should require the same documentation as carrying a gun, but even if you think it should, I would be more receptive to requiring less documentation for firearms than to making it more (unnecessarily) difficult to vote
 
#198
#198
NashVol11 said:
I'm not sure voting should require the same documentation as carrying a gun, but even if it should, I would be more receptive to requiring less documentation for firearms than to making it more (unnecessarily) difficult to vote
Click to expand...
Constitutional carry requires no documentation you just do it. In the states that have passed it that is. The burden is on the carrier to know if they meet the requirements or not.
 
New Posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

Advertisement



Back
Top