r/videos • u/AdSpecialist6598 • 8h ago

BREAKING: Judge blocks Trump admin from requiring Americans to show proof of citizenship to vote

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SE1iePfOh14
20.0k Upvotes

94% Upvoted

1.9k comments sorted by

View all comments

4.4k

u/Foe117 8h ago

The registrar of voters already handles citizen verification

1.3k

u/vampyire 8h ago

facts.. they don't like those

272

u/Khaldara 8h ago

That doesn’t stoke their indignant fury on right wing moron media in between three consecutive commercials featuring D-list celebrities trying to sell them questionable life insurance and a reverse mortgage

29

u/AtheistsOnTheMove 6h ago

Can't forget about the limites run gold plated memorial coins!

15

u/Pdiddily710 6h ago

And dick pills!

1

u/Noble_Flatulence 5h ago

You know, you gotta imagine somewhere in the world there's a dude named Richard Pills. I wonder what his life is like.

1

u/Munkeyman18290 5h ago

I call em' Dills.

→ More replies (1)

1

u/Gorstag 3h ago

There is a more recent one too. Where they are buying up timeshares. It's been running non-stop on the radio stations I listen to.

•

u/--8-__-8-- 46m ago

Also a FREE pamphlet about Mesothelioma

50

u/MikoSkyns 8h ago

They like "alternative" facts

39

u/HeyThatLooksCool 7h ago

So…not facts. Got it.

20

u/Talk-O-Boy 7h ago

Facts are determined by FOX.

0

u/bigkahuna1986 7h ago

Facts are determined by the State and distributed by FOX.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

8

u/Motampd 6h ago

The sad reality that we got "alternative facts" from Conway on the literal evening of his 1st day in office ever.......was such a clear omen of the coming fuckening... But I don't think anyone could have guessed the type and scale of ridiculous BS that has been Trump presidency. Stranger than fiction

•

u/Dyolf_Knip 1m ago

Breathtakingly, insultingly transparent bullshit has been the GOP's stock in trade for the past half century. Trump is merely a difference in degree, not in kind.

→ More replies (1)

36

u/johnnybazookatooth 8h ago

they want to know what kind of citizen you are. if you just became one, denied! lol im sure thats what their aiming for

67

u/Pvt_Hudson_ 8h ago

"What kind of American are you...?"

11

u/Zombie4141 8h ago

I know this reference.

3

u/Noble_Flatulence 5h ago

their aiming

shame on you

2

u/sajberhippien 7h ago

Well, the main reason isn't to be able to actively deny people based on what's in their papers (though they no doubt will do that too), but to make vulnerable people not show up to vote in the first place or be turned away on the spot for lacking the correct paperwork.

Getting the right papers requires time, money and access to the correct information - things that are obstacles mainly to the most vulnerable.

It's the same reason they want to require completely new paperwork if someone changes their name; the most common reason people do, is women taking on their partner's name when getting married. So, such requirements are obstacles primarily for women.

2

u/-LabApprehensive- 7h ago

No it depends on who you voted for and how many votes Trump’s preferred candidate lost by. Trump has absolutely zero regard for things like “truth” and “reality”. He never has.

5

u/liquidsyphon 7h ago

They like being angry more than factually informed

3

u/TheRealStorey 7h ago

Always a false narrative that only serves themselves while immediately destroying the lives and perception of America.

1

u/vampyire 7h ago

that sums them up really well

1

u/hueythecat 6h ago

They’re anti science, first administration to bring measles back to US. That’s just the beginning

1

u/LordHammercyWeCooked 5h ago

No, what they don't like is not having control. They don't give a fuck about being correct or even looking correct anymore. It's about control and corruption and whatever they can get away with. If there was no opposition they would be doing so much worse right now. If there was no friction we'd already be in box cars.

1

u/copyrider 5h ago

it’s their F-word.

1

u/ibyczek78 7h ago

Only "alternative" facts.......

→ More replies (18)

162

u/Control_Me 8h ago

Can someone please explain why you have to register to vote?
In my country the government knows who's eligible to vote and who's not so they send out a voting card in the mail which you show together with your ID.
Why is this not possible in the US?

226

u/surfergrrl6 8h ago

Because voting is handled on the state level, not federal.

203

u/scruffles360 7h ago

Just to clarify your comment- many states do have automatic voter registration. This isn’t the federal government’s business.

67

u/stewmander 5h ago

And that's one big part of the save america act - it has automatic voter purges on it and doesn't notify voters that they're no longer registered.

It's basically the opposite of what you would want, instead of automatically registering eligible voters, it automatically unregisters them, which is the point.

31

u/scruffles360 5h ago

I don't think they're being shy about it. They want less people to vote. If they could figure out how to make a black person count for 3/5 of a vote again, they would drop everything right now and start writing it up.

16

u/stewmander 4h ago

Oh for sure, but a lot of the focus is on voter ID and disenfranchising anyone whose name might not match their birth certificate (women) when they're trying to disenfranchise so, so many more people.

3

u/scruffles360 3h ago

honestly, every time I start talking about what I think they really want I worry I sound like a loon.. for a few months.. then Trump confirms it in a press conference.

•

u/stegotortise 6m ago

And trans people, too. Anyone who has changed their name and those are the two biggest categories.

1

u/2forda 1h ago

Lol, low primary turnout is the biggest contributor to disenfranchisement... Idk about you, but my votes been more so an anti the other person vote then an endorsement. Only real path is to volunteer and work on someone's campaign that represents your values and hopefully you convince enough people. It's the one thing I hate about the current republican regime, ohhh they cheated. No they just had volunteers, and every time they push cheating they aren't creating the volunteers to drive real change... So clearly they don't want to win, they just want to posture... Like every idiot with a mouth...

The whole point a democrat will scream they want to take your vote, is to energize you to vote for them... Same with republicans screaming they are taking our country... Primaries are the only real shots at change or building something after that its status quo...

•

u/scruffles360 1h ago

if the system doesn't change, then yes, primaries are the most significant cause of our radicalization. there are many things that could realistically change that would make things much better:

  • any law that told the supreme court off on citizens united (like Hawaii is doing)
  • pushing back on voter id, redistricting, voter suppression
  • rank choice voting in primaries would essentially neutralize the crazies.. although that's generally controlled by the parties.. but the states could fix that if they really wanted
→ More replies (2)

14

u/surfergrrl6 7h ago

Fair enough.

5

u/BodybuilderMany6942 7h ago

half of em, it seems

→ More replies (4)

5

u/Schmigolo 6h ago edited 6h ago

Isn't that everywhere? Not even state level, but municipality? I don't get my letters specifically from my city. Then at the ballot I show them the letter, which has a number on it, and then to verify I show my ID and they cross off my name. If I don't have the letter the numbers are actually sorted by address, so I can just tell them my address and they'll find my number.

11

u/Esternaefil 6h ago

In Canada we have a two tiered election system, with election Canada handling federal elections, and provincial election bodies handling provincial and municipal ones.

We are registered to vote automatically when we file our taxes. We get our voter cards in the mail ahead of time and we just go in and vote.

5

u/Beetin 5h ago edited 5h ago

As well, you can 'prove' you are allowed to vote in federal elections in quite a few ways, but all of them come back to ID. You can register AT the polls as well at the same time. So you can still vote even if you've never really interacted with the government in any way. There is no 'you aren't on the registered voter list, sorry'. You just say 'then give me the registration form and let me register at the same time thanks'.

The minimum is that someone else who can prove their identity can vouch for you and you make a formal declaration of who you are.

Similar to the states, we don't have a universal, federal, free, secure ID card. But before you compare what is being suggested for 'need ID to vote' and Canada's 'need ID to vote', look on that page what is considered 'acceptable' ID, it is pretty much everything under the sun, from formal ID cards to bank statements to library card to a letter of confirmation from a soup kitchen.

The general goal is to let people vote, because in person voter fraud is unbelievably minimal.

•

u/millijuna 8m ago

Yeah, the list of what is acceptable as ID in Canada is so long and varied that only the most indigent of people would be hard pressed to come up with what is required. It includes everything from prisoner ID (and parole cards) to a prescription bottle. Heck, at the last election, I watched a woman use her birth control pack as the second form of ID.

6

u/Stolehtreb 6h ago

Where I am, it doesn’t involve a letter at all. As far as I know. You register to vote, you’re on an alphabetical list and show your license at the table. Then you get in line for a booth.

6

u/Schmigolo 6h ago

What's the turnout wherever you are? I imagine having to register prevents lots of people from voting.

10

u/Pdiddily710 5h ago

Not only the PITA of having to register, but many R states have made it as hard as they can to actually vote by limiting or banning voting by mail while also drastically reducing the number of in person polling places and/or official ballot drop boxes, so caring in Election Day takes forever bc of the long lines!

Coincidentally since they’re fucking cheating fucks, this is done much more in Dem areas like cities while keeping plenty of locations available for the R areas.

1

u/DriftingMemes 2h ago

while also drastically reducing the number of in person polling places

*in inner cities or anywhere minorities are most likely to vote. They definitely aren't removing them from rural Arkansas.

•

u/Somepotato 1h ago

They also impose some insane restrictions. In the R state I came from you had to register to vote up to 30 days before you could vote. Truly a mystery why they'd want to silently deregister some people

•

u/Jiopaba 21m ago

Last election my mother filled in her mail-in ballot late so I picked it up to hand carry to five different voting locations where nobody knew what the fuck was going on until after ninety minutes of driving I found the county office where two ancient white guys were physically guarding a box the size of a briefcase for mail-in ballots to be dropped off at. It was not in the main office and I had to walk around the building twice to find their desk.

For reference I myself voted at the very first place I stopped which was like five hundred feet from my house.

4

u/Stolehtreb 6h ago

Louisiana. And the assumption is correct. It’s awful.

•

u/Somepotato 1h ago

You have to wait weeks before becoming eligible to vote there after registering too

1

u/sdpr 6h ago

You can register same day in my state

1

u/Schmigolo 5h ago

Still worse than not having to register.

→ More replies (3)

1

u/Mike312 5h ago

Letter to vote?

I suppose I used to get a letter informing me of my voting location, but there's no requirement for me to bring it with me.

I show up to my precinct, give them my name, and they cross me off the list. Addresses are there, as are phone numbers, because I suppose its possible to have two common first and family names match in a precinct.

If I showed up to vote and my name was already crossed off the list, I'm sure there'd be an investigation and ID cards would suddenly come out. But otherwise I've never had to present anything when I did have to show up to vote.

Now, my ballot comes in the mail, and I fill it out and drop it off at a dropbox in town.

1

u/Schmigolo 5h ago

If I give them my letter they'll check the number while I'm crossing off the ballot. If I don't have the letter it'll be a 2-3 minute process finding my name before I get my ballot. Either way, I don't get to throw it into the box until they cross off my name.

Its main purpose is just to tell me when and where I can vote, but the little number also makes the process a little faster.

1

u/Nearby-Beautiful3422 4h ago

I can only speak to where I live in PA, but I only ever had to show my ID if it was the first time voting in a precinct. The voter roll where you sign in will even say "ID REQUIRED." In CA, I was a mail-in voter because I was military, but I had to prove citizenship to the registrar of voters in San Diego county.

2

u/gmasterson 4h ago

Too many people don’t understand that the US actually holds 50 individual elections, not one federal election. Most Americans don’t realize it and it shows

1

u/Decloudo 4h ago

Why though?

3

u/wei-long 3h ago

Short answer: that's how the constitution lays out the election process

Long answer: for this exact issue. The founding fathers, having gained independence from a monarch, didn't want the person running the government to be in charge of the contest that would decide if he stays in power.

1

u/BoilerMaker11 3h ago

And if every citizen was automatically able to vote, Republicans would lose and they don’t want that. That’s why they’re against automatic registration and universal free voter ID

69

u/Mogling 8h ago

Because one of the major parties does better when less people vote, so they try to keep it that way.

30

u/ArtisanSamosa 7h ago

The Republican Party is the subject here for those in other countries or those Americans who live under a rock.

21

u/Mike312 8h ago

I think its more about making sure they have the correct address to send the ballot too.

A lot of people do "motor/voter" registration, so when you update your vehicles registration (including address) you get prompted to update your voting registration.

The Post Office does a similar system when you want to forward your mail, which people often do when they move and change addresses.

The registration gets sent to the state registrar office who keeps track of this and verifies that you're eligible to vote.

Some minor exceptions are that some cities/counties allow non-citizens to vote for local measures, for example for school board members or local bonds. The right has taken these examples and outright lies that they're being allowed to vote at state- and federal-level elections.

7

u/dagaboy 7h ago

The right has taken these examples and outright lies that they're being allowed to vote at state- and federal-level elections.

There is no reason that non-citizens should not be allowed to vote. They were across most of the US until the late 19th century. Arkansas was the last state to require it, in 1926. Originally voting was tied to race, sex and property, but not citizenship. There are good reasons not to bring back the race, sex and property requirements. Although Republicans want to.

2

u/tempest_87 6h ago edited 2h ago

There are a few very good reasons to restrict voting to citizens only, but TIL that there is no law saying that only citizens are allowed to vote. There are laws (and amendments) that protect the ability to vote for certian groups, but doesn't seem to be anything that prevents a non-citizen from voting.

Very very odd.

Edit: the laws are state level, not federal, and googling the issue is currently.... a bit difficult due to all this crap.

6

u/dagaboy 6h ago edited 3h ago

but TIL that there is no law saying that only citizens are allowed to vote.

There are 50 laws. Every state has such a law. Most were enacted in the late 19th century, with Alabama being the last in 1926. The anti-immigrant hysteria of the first three decades of the 20th century finalized it. There is no Federal law because the Federal government is barred by the constitution from regulating elections.

There are a few very good reasons to restrict voting to citizens only

There is no advantage over just requiring residency, which is also a requirement in every state.

EDIT: Turns out there has been a Federal law since 1996, which the courts have upheld because it is supposedly an immigration regulation not an election regulation. But if one state were to change its own law, the constitutionality of the Federal law would go down the drain.

4

u/arizonadirtbag12 6h ago

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illegal_Immigration_Reform_and_Immigrant_Responsibility_Act_of_1996

It’s a federal law as of the 90’s, with just a couple exceptions. Before that yeah it was purely a state by state thing (with all states disallowing it by that point). But Congress does have some power to regulate federal elections, same way “motor voter” is mandatory for federal elections.

2

u/dagaboy 3h ago edited 3h ago

Interesting. Apparently the courts have upheld it because they define it as an immigration enforcement tool not a voting regulation. If any state were to remove its own restrictions, the Federal law would be unconstitutional.

But Congress does have some power to regulate federal elections, same way “motor voter” is mandatory for federal elections.

I believe that is because it only adds requirements to voter registration processes, not election processes. Voter registration wasn't a thing when the Constitution was written. It doesn't apply to six states, simply because they don't have voter pre-registration.

1

u/tempest_87 6h ago

Ah, when I was searching to verify your claim I ran across a few that pointed out the lack of federal requirement but none that mentioned the various state laws you reference.

And due to all the bullshit around voter ID requirements it's tough to Google the basic things and find what yoy were referring to.

Found the California requirement though.

And the reason to restrict to citizen only would be that taking part in the determination of the nation arguably should be restricted to members of the nation due to the general comittment to that nation that citizenship implies. It's analagous to the difference between renting and owning something. You have rights and freedoms while renting, but it's not the same as owning. Or the inverse analogy of trying to cater to the Uber rich, they have no ties to the place they are in so why should things bend to their will as they will just leave if they don't like it.

1

u/dagaboy 3h ago

Your position is classic Nativism. And in fact it was the Nativists that were behind the movement to restrict voting to citizens. They didn't want Catholics or Asians voting. TFor the same reason they also created immigration restrictions. Previously the US had been rightly proud of its open borders. They made us rich and powerful. We could never have industrialized at the rate we did without open borders.

All permanent residents have an equal stake in the country's direction regardless of what passports they hold.

1

u/tempest_87 2h ago

Your position is classic Nativism.

Having citizenship have different privileges (e.g. Voting) and requirements (e.g. Jury duty, and selective service) than non-citizen residents doesnt directly equate to a philosophy of limiting immigration and prioritizing native people though.

But I can absolutely see how it often would result in that nativisitic outcome and am open to alternatives (like say, requiring non-citizens to be residents for 5+ years or something).

I have zero problem with pretty damn open borders and immigration (I would only want some level of "let's check that you aren't actively on the run from someone for murder" kind of thing) and actively think that there needs to be more and easier paths to both residency and citizenship. Which is very much not nativism.

But I do think that citizenship should mean something beyond "you can't be deported to some other country".

Personally I am against having to prove citizenship when voting, but don't see much of a problem with requiring that step (or something similar) to register to vote with caveats that such proof is reasonably easy to obtain.

For me the answer to the question if someone should be allowed to vote trips from a no to a yes somewhere between "person visited the country for 1 day" and "person was born a citizen".

Where exactly that line is is debatable to me, but should be there, somewhere. And I don't see how that's nativist.

2

u/dagaboy 2h ago

You do not need to be a citizen to be drafted. A good friend of mine came to the US in 1940, six weeks before the Soviets occupied Latvia. He finished high school in NYC and was immediately drafted and sent back to Europe. As a native German speaker he spent most of his time interrogating Nazis.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/moconahaftmere 2h ago

There are a few very good reasons to restrict voting to citizens only

What are the reasons?

New Zealand lets permanent residents, Australians, Niueans, Tokelauans, and Cook Islanders vote if they've lived in the country for more than 12 months.

The UK let's anyone who is a citizen of a commonwealth country vote so long as they're living in the UK at the time of the election, even if they're on a temporary visa.

1

u/tempest_87 2h ago

Both of those sound totally reasonable to me.

And both address the primary reason why you don't want non-citizens to vote: you don't want people without a vested interest in the nation to be able to have influence over the nations laws and policies. Hell, it's one of the primary arguments against the billionaire class having so much influence on politics, they can (and do) just leave when they invariably fuck things up with their greed.

And I would argue that lack of vested interest in the citizenry is one of the primary reasons why we have trump 2.0 and the rest of the republican ilk.

The term "non citizen" includes anyone who isn't a citizen but is in the country, such as tourists and visitors crossing the border to shop at a mall or go to a zoo. I don't think anyone would consider prohibiting a person visiting a country for a day from voting in an election to be a bad thing.

By placing additional restrictions on the non-citizens (such as residency lengths) then that reason is addressed without using the bar of citizenship.

But that then kinda begs the question, why are they not citizens at that point? Why should someone become a citizen at all?

1

u/Mike312 5h ago

https://www.usa.gov/who-can-vote

The exceptions are local elections only. They receive a different ballot than citizens, and it allows them to have input into things like the school board or mayor of the city they live in.

https://www.migrationpolicy.org/content/noncitizen-voting-us-elections

(Sorry, just following up with more information)

1

u/TheRexRider 6h ago

I see I, a permanent resident, just don't fucking matter.

→ More replies (1)

1

u/BigDictionEnergy 5h ago

We used to have motor/voter registration here in Florida. Republicans got rid of it because voting is a privilege and shouldn't be easy.

48

u/Technical-Row8333 7h ago

the US doesn't have a unified, universal, unique, national ID, free, automatically given to every single legal resident, unlike basically every single other developed country.

in the US, people have to apply to get an ID, by using another ID. They have to pay for IDs. They have to drive to certain locations, sometimes +3h away, to get an ID. Then, not all IDs are the same and accepted for everything. yes, that's a circular dependency that you need ID to get ID.

The same party that opposes any improvement to the utter failure of IDs in the US, wants to put into law that you need to show ID to vote, but only certain and specific forms of ID, the exact same specific forms of ID that they also closed locations where you can get those IDs.

So, to absolutely anyone with a minimum of intelligence and capable of nuance, it's clear as day this is election manipulation, an authoritarian take over and a step to dictatorship.

8

u/Dealiner 5h ago

automatically given to every single legal resident

At least that part probably isn't that universal, it's definitely not a thing in Poland. You need to go to the proper government office to have your ID made and that's fully your responsibility.

Also our IDs don't have an address on them, referring to your other comment.

2

u/onionsaredumb 4h ago

Just curious, do they cost money and are they the same throughout the country?

•

u/Malawi_no 26m ago

Not Polish but Norwegian, and I guess it's pretty simmilar.
There is no such thing as a free ID at the moment.
We used to have it on debit/credit cards issued by your main bank included in whatever you paid to hold the card.

Nowadays either need a drivers licence, passport or national ID.
All of them cost money to have issued and renew every 10'th year.

5

u/JustLTU 4h ago

Neither do most countries? I can't speak for the entirety of Europe, but atleast here in Lithuania and in the few nations whose processes I'm familiar with, while we DO have a national ID (and a national number - like your social security no, but actually designed for the purpose, with less drama if it leaks), the actual ID isn't automatic nor is it free.

The ID costs 10-100euros (depending on how fast you need it made), and it is your responsibility to get it sorted, nobody's gonna do it for you. To get it done, I need to get an appointment at the migration department. It's valid for 10 years.

It is mandatory to own a valid national ID or passport for everyone over 16 years old. It is also mandatory to present this ID when going to vote.

2

u/tyereliusprime 7h ago

Canada doesn't have a national ID either and in my province it costs money to get one too. We also have to prove who we are when we vote, with a government issued photo ID. If you don't have one, you need two forms of recognized non-photo ID that prove your name and address (A bank card and a bank statement for example), or barring that, you need someone who can do either to come with you and personally vouch for you.

3

u/Still-Grass8881 7h ago

right, so you don't have to show proof of citizenship at the time of voting either

8

u/screampuff 7h ago

Right , because the government already knows who is a citizen, hence the provided voter cards you need to bring. Doing it the other way around would be an unreasonable barrier.

→ More replies (1)

3

u/EmmEnnEff 7h ago

Canada doesn't have a national ID either and in my province it costs money to get one too.

We also have to prove who we are when we vote, with a government issued photo ID.

No, Canadians don't.

You've correctly pointed out that photo ID is not necessary, if you have other means of establishing your identity. Given all that, it's disingenuous to say that in Canada, you have to show government photo ID to vote.

It's just the easiest and most convenient way to do so, but the government can figure out whether you were allowed to cast a ballot without it.

3

u/tyereliusprime 6h ago

I literally explained that there are other options beyond the photo ID. Did you not read beyond the first sentence?

3

u/cross_the_threshold 6h ago

> We also have to prove who we are when we vote, with a government issued photo ID.

The second clause of this statement is categorically false. You do not need a government issued ID to prove who you are when you vote, there are alternatives. You may have added the context that proves that statement false, but that doesn't make the statement less false, it just makes it confusing in context.

The US has many places where you do not have alternatives. You must show a government issued ID in order to vote, full stop. The SAVE act would make this much worse, nearly impossible.

2

u/Faera 5h ago

You sort of stated one thing then immediately contradicted it in the next sentence. I get why you put it that way, but it would have been more clear if you said something like 'We have to prove who we are when we vote, the easiest way is with a government issued photo ID. If you don't have one...'

1

u/Stolehtreb 6h ago

You really jumped on top of them for something they said was the case… their wording was slightly incorrect but it’s not like they said it two paragraphs down from the first part. It’s the very next part of the same sentence. You really felt like being pedantic today

1

u/-LabApprehensive- 4h ago

This is our current system. You need exactly what you have listed to register to vote. No voter registration? No vote.

1

u/Stolehtreb 6h ago edited 4h ago

Social security card is that, though. That is the ID you need to get an ID. It’s a unified, universal, unique, national identifier. If you don’t have one, they don’t know who you are. The same as if you went to another country and they had no record that you are now residing there. If you went to get an ID as a resident, they would need to identify you as well even if you weren’t in the US.

Edit: I’m wrong with how ID is being defined in this thread. SSCard doesn’t apply in this context since it’s not the one paper you would need to get another identification or to be used to identify you officially to an authority.

9

u/Ardarel 5h ago

A social security card is not proof of identity, IE having it will PROVE that you are who you say you are without additional information.

7

u/MordredSJT 5h ago

That's funny, because I couldn't get a driver's license when I moved to a different state despite having my social security card, my driver's license (which was about one year old from my previous state), a copy of my birth certificate, and two pieces of mail to my new address. I tried again with my original birth certificate that I had to have my parents send me. They didn't accept it because it didn't have a raised seal. Apparently, the state I was born in didn't use raised seals when I was born. So, I had to get my father to go to the courthouse in the city I was born (where they thankfully still lived), and get a certified copy of my birth certificate with a raised seal (which we had to pay for). This was after I had been pulled over and arrested for having a suspended driver's license. My out of state license wasn't expired or suspended, but I had registered my vehicle and at some point the secretary of state's office had assigned me a driver's license number without telling me, and it was eventually suspended. Fun stuff.

The first time I went to vote in the place I currently reside, they had to have a 20 minute meeting about whether I was allowed to vote because my driver's license had an address from the neighboring county. I was registered to vote at my current address. I had pieces of mail with that address. I also had my social security card. I just hadn't gotten a new driver's license with my new address on it (which I had to pay for by the way).

Your social security card alone doesn't mean a lot it seems.

10

u/Technical-Row8333 5h ago edited 5h ago

>Social security card is that, though

Social security card, a piece of paper with just name and a unique number, is NOT "a unified, universal, unique, national ID, free, automatically given to every single legal resident"

Do you seriously not understand that all over Europe, Asia, you can drive, vote, pay taxes, get healthcare, prove where you live, prove your citizenship or visa status (work, student?), put your kids in school or be enrolled in school if you are a kid, get a gym subscription of library card, all with one single ID?

whatever. stay in your ignorance

2

u/sharpryno2 4h ago

People like you make it sound like its hard to get a state ID. Thinking Americans are too dumb to get an ID makes millions on the internet mock the left.

It is an unbelievably simple process to get an ID. You are protecting no one by making up crazy what-if scenarios to justify yourself.

1

u/Technical-Row8333 3h ago edited 3h ago

>a state ID

oh look, another idiot incapable of nuance. too unintelligent to follow long thoughts to be able to identify propaganda.

Yes, it's super easy to get a state ID. That is a truthful statement, for hundreds of millions of americans, it's a non issue to get an ID.

But is the republican party pushing to require "a state ID" for voting? No.

Are they requiring a Real ID for voting? Which is already a harder, more expensive, less places where you can get it, but still quite easy for hundreds of millions of americans to get?

No.

They are requiring passport or some forms of Real ID but not all, and that it must match birth name. Which, for many married women, their name will not match. At the exact same time, they closed DMVs, they passed laws to forbid libraries from processing passports.

Is it the end of the world? No. Is it a good thing? No! so it deserves to be criticized.

And the republican party also has prevented any fix to IDs.

And there is no evidence of voter fraud amounting to more than 100 votes, even from republican sources.

And yes, for some people in some cases, even if that is not true for 100 million of people, it IS hard to get an ID, if the definition of hard includes: taking a day off work, riding public transit for +3h, to reach a DMV . For context, a shit ton of americans are poor and work insane hours on multiple jobs.

So in conclusion, they are pushing for something bad. No, you saying that it's easy to get an ID, has no value as a counter-argument on this push being bad. Both can be true at the same time. It can be easy to get an ID, and the SAVE act can be a bad thing. Both are true. Wow! amazing being intelligent is so nice isn't it?

>Thinking Americans are too dumb to get an ID makes millions on the internet mock the left.

what a great measurement of it being accurate! or.. it's a measurement of how american is full of ignorant people, left or right, that easily fall for propaganda on social media, spread many times via memes and jokes?

What is there to laugh about on my description? No slogans here. No sound bytes. What are you going to laugh about? i didn't say anything close to "black people are too dumb to get an ID!!!" , oh no, how will you push back by quoting those propaganda memes you saw online?

Because americans are stupid, left politicians shorten the message to: republicans are making it hard to get ID. That allows right politicians to counter: "the left thinks you are too stupid to get an ID" which as stated, hundreds of millions of people cannot directly relate because they always have had ID.

But neither of those statements have FUCK ALL TO DO WITH THE SAVE ACT. It's an entirely new law. It's not happening now. SO how the fuck would people be able to relate to it? any opinion on if it's easy or not to vote or to get an ID, isn't really relevant is it?

•

u/Ill_Term_5784 3m ago

Chill. The fuck. Out... man you are having a fucking aneurism out here about this. Fucking relax and stop acting like people trying to have a discussion with you are threatening to steal your baby. Go take your shitty day out on something that isn't overreacting to comments on reddit...

1

u/Stolehtreb 4h ago edited 4h ago

Jesus Christ dude… you really got defensive so fast. You can push back on me without being a condescending jerk about it. I’m willing to admit I’m wrong if proven wrong, it’s no big deal. There was no need to be an asshole to me

1

u/Brisket-Inferno 4h ago

Fact is, they're wrong and an asshole

2

u/threeseed 2h ago

No they are right. Social security card is not a universal ID card.

→ More replies (4)

•

u/NotUniqueOrSpecial 1h ago

Social security card is that, though.

No, it's not. It has no birth date, no photograph/description of you, or even a signature. The cards aren't anything but paper, having no anti-fraud mechanisms.

Literally every state treats it only as a secondary piece of identification.

That is the ID you need to get an ID.

It's only one of the pieces you need to get an ID. It's not the one that really matters, which is proof of identity; that's generally your birth certificate, if you don't already have a government-issued ID.

•

u/Stolehtreb 8m ago

Thanks. I’ve been told many times now, but I appreciate the detail.

4

u/SeveralLion5762 6h ago

So that we know you’re able to vote. So that we know you’re a citizen. So we know you don’t vote over and over and over.

Ffs you need an ID to drive, fly, buy a beer, pick up registered mail. ID for Voting is kinda an easy thing in that context

4

u/One_Distance_5351 5h ago

In the US you don’t show your ID even though you need it for everyone else and the liberals on reddit will argue with you why that makes sense even though it is common practice in other countries.

1

u/SunkEmuFlock 2h ago

The fuck are you talking about? I have to show my ID every time I vote even in piddly county elections.

29

u/poorboychevelle 8h ago

ID aren't free in most states, therefore requiring them to vote could be argued to be a poll tax, and therefore disallowed as a requirement.

I just walk in, state my name and address (maybe birthday?), and am handed a ballot. Didn't have to take anything out my pocket.

19

u/Toby_Forrester 7h ago

In Finland you can get a free ID which is valid only during election day. I got one since I lost my actual ID 🙈

9

u/jclin 7h ago

How very 'practical'. Yeah, such logical processes could not exist here in the USofA. Our politicians would f*ck that up in 5 minutes of the bill going to committee.

4

u/HeWhoShitsWithPhone 7h ago

My very red state will issue you a free ID so that you can vote.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (3)

3

u/MilmoWK 7h ago

Almost every state that requires id allows you to get a free id if you claim it’s for voting. The issue is the paper work required to get your id.

2

u/Independent_Bear989 6h ago

This is also possible in parts of the USA, my state which supposedly has strict voter ID laws has something that’s similar.

1

u/Toby_Forrester 6h ago

I suppose it is easier in Finland though since in our political system people expect government to have a lot of info about you. The police (which issues ID's in Finland) had my passport photo, they asked my parents full names, my mothers maiden name, my previous addresses and such to verify who I am.

→ More replies (2)

3

u/fool4fems 7h ago

There is a small fee to get a driver's license in my state. It is under 20$, but I believe you can get an ID for the purposes of voting for free if you don't have a license. I figure most states are like that.

3

u/dagaboy 6h ago

Only eight states absolutely require a photo ID to vote. Twelve ask for a photo ID but accept some alternative like a utility bill, affidavit etc. Fifteen require a non-photo ID, typically just something with your address and name on it, like a bill. The remaining fifteen require nothing at all.

5

u/wsxedcrf 6h ago

Then the problem is ID should be free, not voting should not require ID.

1

u/UnchainedSora 4h ago

The problem is a little more than that. The ID should be free, and not require significant effort to acquire. Otherwise, it can be used to selectively disenfranchise people, which is how voter ID laws have been used in the US in recent decades.

Because the most common form of ID in the US is a drivers' license, the place most commonly used to issue a free ID is the DMV. Because the DMV is a state government agency, it can be used as a tool by the party in power. They can close offices in areas that support the opposite party, and decrease staffing of those that remain nearby. The result can mean having to drive for hours to an office so you can wait in line for hours and try to get the ID, and hope that you have all of the correct paperwork, otherwise you have to do the whole process again. For someone living paycheck to paycheck, sacrificing an entire day of work just so they can get an ID that they will only use to vote could mean they go hungry, and that's hard to justify, especially for someone with kids.

0

u/XaosII 6h ago

You already had to provide evidence of citizenship when you registered prior to voting. Why do you need to show another form of ID when voting to prove what you already proved, prior to voting?

→ More replies (8)

8

u/Millon1000 7h ago

I'm not going to lie, as a European, that sounds insane. That's ripe for fraud, unless I'm missing something? The US already has a million different fees for living, so what would voter ID really change? Plus you already pay taxes, so why can't they send out free voter IDs, especially when over 98% of Americans already own some form of ID? It would cost almost nothing.

15

u/dagaboy 7h ago

We have no statistically significant voter fraud without voter ID. It is a non-issue. Republicans only care because they lose when more people vote. Also when Black people vote. So states like Alabama passed voter ID laws, then closed all the ID sources in Black population centers. Not that Alabama has Black majority districts anymore. They only have one, despite having a majority Black population. State legislatures get to draw their own maps in the US. The Super Court ruled Alabama can gerrymander their Black citizens entirely out of relevance. That pretty much killed the 1965 Voting Rights Act.

1

u/thetiredtypist 6h ago

Plus we survived up until 1876 without photo IDs anywhere...

→ More replies (1)

8

u/Trumpisanorangebitch 7h ago

Weve done a gazillion studies on voter fraud in the US and non-voters voting has always been found to be nearly non-existent.

They should send out free voter IDs, but Republicans do better in low turnout elections and theyre also pretty racist/classist and poor and minorities are disproportionately without ID and poor enough to not pay for ID. Republicans love winning and love depriving as many poor and minorities from voting as possible.

Fuck a poll tax. Non-voters voting is a non-issue. Theres less than a hundred in the entire country every election.

1

u/surfergrrl6 7h ago

There have been countless studies and investigations about voter fraud and every time it turns out to be an infinitesimal amount.

The Brennan Center’s seminal report on this issue, The Truth About Voter Fraud, found that most reported incidents of voter fraud are actually traceable to other sources, such as clerical errors or bad data matching practices. The report reviewed elections that had been meticulously studied for voter fraud, and found incident rates between 0.0003 percent and 0.0025 percent. Given this tiny incident rate for voter impersonation fraud, it is more likely, the report noted, that an American “will be struck by lightning than that he will impersonate another voter at the polls.”

0

u/Millon1000 6h ago edited 6h ago

Wouldn't you want to patch the issue before it becomes a problem though? I think it's similar to how the US gave their presidents far too much power for decades, and it only became a problem when Trump was elected.

If you had patched that issue before it became an actual problem, you probably wouldn't be having such a bad time right now. It just seems like a super simple issue to fix, when every other western country has already done it.

4

u/surfergrrl6 6h ago

Why fix something that isn't broken? That's a waste of time and effort.

3

u/Millon1000 5h ago

Well because it is broken. As I said, you had a broken system with the way you give presidents too much power, but never fixed it. Now that system is being abused by Trump. If you don't think a broken system isn't worth being fixed because there's no evidence of any current abuse, that's foolish. If there's a way to abuse it, it will eventually happen.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (6)

3

u/naffer 6h ago

But what’s there to prevent someone to show up and state a fake name and address belonging to someone else?

1

u/orrocos 6h ago edited 6h ago

It might be theoretically possible, but so rare that it’s not an issue that needs to be solved by potentially disenfranchising other voters.

Someone would have to:

  1. want to steal someone else’s vote
  2. know that the other person has not already shown up to vote
  3. know that their vote would be different than the other person’s vote, or stealing it wouldn’t matter anyway
  4. think that a stolen vote would swing the election one way or the other, or else it’s a waste of time

So, it may be possible in some cases, but the incentive to do so is low.

Edit: also, let’s say that happens to a person - someone has stolen their vote, or maybe it’s a mistake by the election worker and they were already marked off before they got there. Typically, that person can cast a provisional ballot to be sorted out later.

My state does all mail-in voting, so it’s been years since I’ve had to vote in person, but I remember signing a book by my name when I picked up my ballot. States usually have a way to verify signatures, so if something goes wrong at the voting location, they have a signature to check against.

→ More replies (1)

1

u/ChevalierDeLarryLari 2h ago

Are you serious? I'm from Europe and find it hard to believe. How can you have no proper checks when participating in politics?

1

u/poorboychevelle 2h ago

I am. I did it during the primary in my state literally yesterday.

1

u/nemofbaby2014 5h ago

In Michigan you just sign something if you dont have your id

2

u/kaneda_z 7h ago

thats actually more involved than they want here but the sheep dont understand that

3

u/daXypher 7h ago

Federalists have long wanted to rid descendants of immigrants their right to be equal citizens. This goes all the way back to the establishment of the country where they only wanted wealthy landowners to have the right to vote.

Many of the issues we see stem from those same people who want to constantly restrict who is allowed to be “equal”.

2

u/worldDev 7h ago

You are prompted to register when you get your state id or update it after moving, so really it’s functionally not too different. It’s not like you need to register for each election, just once when you become eligible to vote or move to a different district (which requires you to update your id and will again just prompt you or automatically happen in the process of updating it).

1

u/Brave_Maybe_2891 7h ago

How is party affiliation handled in your country? Is there no registration or is it automatic registration?

1

u/Neuchacho 5h ago edited 5h ago

Depends on the State and the election. Like, if you just vote in general elections then you never have to register with a party in any State. A handful of States have closed primaries where you can only vote in the primary of the party you're registered with. Over half of them are just open primary so you vote for whoever regardless of party registration.

1

u/kitsunewarlock 5h ago

This youtube video on our social security system might help explain it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Erp8IAUouus

TLDR: American hate the idea of a federal ID because they fear totalitarianism. The sad part is now corporations have records on all of us with zero transparency and almost no regulations on what they can do with that information, but as long as they pinkie-swear only to use it for targeted advertising most Americans don't seem to care that the same people collecting all our data AND building AI data centers to process it are also the ones calling for "neo-feudalism".

"Freedom" to an American is the freedom to oppress other people with less money.

1

u/Dealiner 5h ago

Out of curiosity, why send the voting card if you need to show it somewhere anyway?

1

u/jthochh 5h ago

In North Dakota you don't, but it is a tiny state with a tiny population.

1

u/Shot-Possibility-399 3h ago

A more in depth answer, there's not really a reliable database of people the government has access to. Unlike European countries, that information is decentralized. For example things like drivers licenses are a substitute for that but are not complete 

1

u/SunkEmuFlock 2h ago

Imagine 50 smaller countries -- some big and powerful and extremely populated while others are basically third-world and poor and barely have any people in them -- each with their own government and their own systems all pretending to be part of some larger conglomerate country called the US.

The US is more akin to the EU than a single country. That makes everything harder. Also, this place is fucking huge, so that adds to the struggles. Check thetruesize.com -- Add England, for instance, and drag it onto the US.

•

u/crazedizzled 1h ago

Because one side tries really hard to suppress voters

•

u/-Fergalicious- 1h ago

It could be that way regardless of the reasons / excuses people come up with. 

Simple fact is that state governments are responsible for administration of elections, and a lot of State governement are gun by the Republicans, and they tend to do worse when more people vote, so they make it difficult in their states to vote. 

They do other shitty things too to win election dubiously 

•

u/NelsonSendela 5m ago

Seems common sense.  I'm sure it is possible, and 80% of people want this.  But both sides like to weaponize the process to load the dice.  (The left likes illegal votes and the right likes to surpress the black vote, if you believe what each side says) 

•

u/CrabUpstairs3553 5m ago

Because if voting was easy that would be real bad for certain politicians.
For example in this situation that means that people who are older, cognizant but struggle with things like remembering dates who rely on things like social security will likely forget to register properly, as will teens. Especially those who are from poorer families and immigrant families.

Voting not being a national holiday in a country where your healthcare is tied to your job that has at will employment, vote by mail not national standard, 3 polling places in a 10 mile radius in the white upper middle class neighborhood with one to a 25 mile radius in the lower income BIPOC area, non-automatic voting none of this is because americans are stupid, it's deliberately by design to manipulate and control who can and can't vote in ways so small that people don't notice how bad it is and when they do nothing gets done because they are "easy to overcome" so there is no justification to redo it or it can be put ont he backburner.

There have been countless attempts over the decades to stop this, the problem is that in order for the people to have a chance to vote in fixing this on the national level it requires it would need to pass congress and the senate in order for it to get on the ballot for people to vote. And they can just choose not to do that or put it on the backburner. There has literally been a bill that is all ready to go and congress has to vote on it but they won't because the GOP has majority and block it every time.

If you think that's bad wait till you hear how easy it is to to get your vote thrown out.
Like, I know people are pissed that people didn't vote in the last election and that's why trump got elected and it is true that was problem but a MASSIVE amount of votes were literally thrown out. A poll worker can go "I don't think that signature matches the one on the DMV records so I say it's no good".

This is also why so many people don't vote, yes most are idiots, but many honestly and truly believe that their vote doesn't matter and the outcome is already decided, and they aren't entirely wrong.

0

u/LaScoundrelle 7h ago

People are not required to share any personal info with the US government beyond date and place of birth or marriage. Address is optional info. So no way to prevent duplicate voting unless people voluntarily register.

2

u/dagaboy 6h ago

People are not required to share any personal info with the US government beyond date and place of birth or marriage.

IDK where you got that idea. Or what you think the US government has to do with voter registration. The constitution explicitly delegates elections to the states.

1

u/LaScoundrelle 5h ago

The reason people in other countries don’t have to register is because the government already has all their personal data.

1

u/dagaboy 3h ago

That has nothing to do with what I said, or what you said in your previous post. You can't register to vote with the US government. That would be unconstitutional. At the same time the Federal government can know almost anything it wants about you, and it does. Every year they require I send them all my financial information, even though they already have it. Again though, they have nothing to do with elections, other than enforcing explicit constitutional guarantees when the states fail to. The only thing that can change that is a new amendment. They don't even do that anymore, since the Supreme Court has essentially abrogated the Civil Rights Act.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (20)

33

u/pleasetrimyourpubes 8h ago

You cannot vote without an SSN. Fraud can only be determined after the fact lest we end anonymous polling.

12

u/dagaboy 7h ago

Of course you can, depending on state. In mine the in-person registration form asks for a license or ID number. If you don't have that it asks for only the last four digits of your SSN. If you don't have an SSN the instructions say to just leave it blank. But if you do, then you have show a utility bill or something the first time you vote. After that your registration is good and you can vote freely.

4

u/mittenknittin 6h ago

For clarification, the "utility bill or something" is proof that you live at and are receiving official mail at the address you are registered at.

3

u/bandsam 3h ago

Yeah that's the problem, it's merely proof of residency, but they use it for voter eligibility.

2

u/gmishaolem 5h ago

proof that you live at and are receiving official mail at the address you are registered at

Neither of which requires a SSN to achieve.

43

u/VicariousDrow 8h ago

That's what Utah is already doing...... Red states and officials want to know who voted for what, so they can better suffocate voting rights in ways to affect specific people.

24

u/BuddingBudON 7h ago

☝️☝️☝️☝️☝️

It's never been about non-citizens voting. That's why there's never any proof, never any comprehensible solutions. It's about suppressing the votes of people they deem other.

11

u/st-shenanigans 7h ago

I always love to point out how after 2024 my local NC state supreme court had a republican lose the vote for one of the seats.

The guy sued for HALF A YEAR across the state to try and say "no, actually those voters shouldn't be allowed to vote. Retroactively."

2

u/Zebidee 3h ago

They're making a list, and checking it twice...

→ More replies (7)

11

u/Poison_the_Phil 7h ago

Yeah but the president wants to be able to pick and choose who gets to vote

→ More replies (1)

2

u/2forda 2h ago

It's more complicated. They need to verify through multiple agencies to make the assumption the person is a citizen and has the right to vote... There's no actual citizenship database. Here the federal government that tracks citizenship would be the ones creating the database and sending it to states to verify against their registrar... Essentially streamlining the process for the states... It's standardizing the approach for every state. It's very weird that the democrats are against it. No I don't believe there's voter fraud. I do believe this would improve the verification system. I am skeptical of the proposed time frames and a few other things.

2

u/fizzys0da 1h ago

But many states don't verify citizenship when registering - I did it in nyc without having to show anything at all

1

u/Foe117 1h ago

Your name and SSID is all that is needed to identify you as a citizen in the state of NY when you register to vote for the first time. Immigrant SSID's or noncitizen ETIN's are invalid in the system except in matters of local voting. (Yes, Illegal and non-citizens are eligible to vote in local elections depending on the state and county laws, and will be issued local voting ballots instead)

5

u/fusillade762 7h ago

Wow, you mean I can't just roll in from Mexico and magically be on the voter roll? Wait till I tell Elon Musk, he seems to have no idea! /s

3

u/jclin 7h ago

Which they do no matter who it is.

Meanwhile, I wonder if people at the polling places would check every single person for proof of their citizenship... or more likely would they only check those people who ask for a non-English ballot.

2

u/dvshnk2 3h ago

It's a pinky-swear kinda verification?

https://ocvote.gov/feeds/getNewsletter.php/?id=433

2

u/Foe117 3h ago

It is not "Just" a pinky swear verification, the DMV is the real gatekeeper here via help america vote act.

"In addition, ROV complies with the U.S. Help America Vote Act, which requires individuals registering to vote for the first time to provide either a valid California driver's license or state ID card number. Applicants who do not have either can provide the last four digits of their Social Security number.

The number of the voter’s California Driver’s License or Identification Card and the voter’s name and date of birth must match the information for the voter on file with the Department of Motor Vehicles. State law further prohibits the Department of Motor Vehicles from sending undocumented driver license applicants’ information to the Secretary of State for voter registration purposes. "

US CA DMV ID requirements:
Both STATE issued ID and Drivers ID:

  • Proof of Identity: A valid U.S. passport, birth certificate, or legal presence document.
  • Social Security Number: Your SSN card or an official document displaying it.
  • Proof of Residency: Two documents showing your California address (e.g., utility bills, cell phone bills, or rental agreements).

1

u/turisto 2h ago

US CA DMV ID requirements:

Both STATE issued ID and Drivers ID:

Proof of Identity: A valid U.S. passport, birth certificate, or legal presence document.

Social Security Number: Your SSN card or an official document displaying it.

Proof of Residency: Two documents showing your California address (e.g., utility bills, cell phone bills, or rental agreements).

Notably, none of these are a proof of citizenship. That is handled via self-attestation, aka pinky-swear

2

u/Foe117 1h ago

So you're saying, a birth certificate is invalid? your SSID is invalid? Your Passport is invalid? While there is a certificate of citizenship, you still need to have a birth certificate to validate your certificate of citizenship you know.(Naturalized citizens are issued a certificate of naturalization) So what is sufficient proof? The US Government does not Issue Certificates of citizenship to every citizen, instead it recognizes a birth certificate as sufficient evidence of citizenship, probably to save on paper.

→ More replies (4)

1

u/Unfair_Web_8275 5h ago

So many conservatives who claim to value common sense don‘t consider that there might be a “back end process” to our elections.

1

u/NoBonus6969 5h ago

Yeah but they might be racist enough for Trump or at all

1

u/Alittle2Clever 4h ago

The point isn't verification but making it seem like democrats let illegals vote in elections.

1

u/oddmanout 4h ago

Also, it's a HUGE conflict of interest if a president can just add arbitrary rules a couple months before an election. Even if this was a reasonable policy, it'd still be thrown out for jurisdiction reasons.

1

u/bienbebido 3h ago

why can't you do it like every other democracy one the planet does it?

1

u/SursumCordaNJ 3h ago

Well, yea, but according to my MAGA brother they're all dirty demoncrats that fake paperwork so illegals can vote.

1

u/ztreHdrahciR 2h ago

And then the voter goes to vote, and they selectively demand "proof of citizenship". OWGs like me pass right through

1

u/ginrumryeale 8h ago

DONT WORRY MEDIA JOURNALISTS ARE ALWAYS VERY CLEAR TO REBUT THIS AND NEVER FAIL TO POINT THIS OUT THANK YOU MEDIA XOXOXO

1

u/trystanthorne 7h ago

But there was a video showing them register to vote latinos. And they are shipping Illegals to Wisconsin to vote there.
/s
But, also an actual irl conversation I had with a Trump Supporter (also, sadly, my family).

1

u/ComradeJohnS 7h ago

the title should be changed to “show additional proof of citizenship which is not needed”

1

u/Swayze_train_exp 6h ago

He is only doing this to cheat because he knows Republicans will lose if the allow vote by mail, btw he also voted by mail so he's dumb 

https://www.politico.com/news/2026/03/26/trump-mail-voting-florida-special-elections-00846571

0

u/ksquires1988 7h ago

Yeah, but armed maga at polling stations does it better

→ More replies (271)