Re this one, didn't you write that state's actually could allow non-citizens to vote if they wanted to?5) Because non-citizens registering to vote in the United States is largely not a real problem, we find it appalling that anyone would support this sort of trade-off: making it harder for Americans to vote in order to gain zero benefit to the country.
If true, you could view this as a prophylactic measure. But I think the real reason is that many of the people pushing this think there is a lot of undetected illegal voting going on. Not sure how you disprove that.
I do think they are smart enough to know that it will lead to fewer people voting and that this will probably be a voter demographic shift that favors conservatives, but that's really only among the strategists. Among the vast swath of regular old folks who think this is a good idea, I think it's probably because they honestly believe loads of undocumented immigrants are being shipped here and given voter registrations.
I think the notion that voter turnout would decrease is nonsense. 35-40% of people already don't vote. For the people who do vote getting a passport or birth certificate isn't going to stop them (and I'd wouldn't be surprised if 80-90% of them already have one or both).
Law of large numbers. This isn't a Greek city-state. There are many millions of voters. Anything we do to change the voting process will lead to either an increase or decrease in actual turnout. This law would lead to a decrease in registration, and therefore turnout. What you're really saying is this added step wouldn't stop you, so you don't see why it should stop anyone else, but when dealing with this many people, not everyone will behave the same way. Some of them will be like you and still want to vote. Some won't.
If 90%+ of people were voting I'd agree with you. I am a complete f#ck off and miss place everything and somehow have both. After one election cycle the numbers would be back to the same. I disagree with your notion that it's a hindrance to the voting populace. The people it would stop from voting already don't vote. Unfortunately, we won't get to find out who is right.
I think you're too nearly dividing people into discrete groups who will all behave the same, i.e., after one cycle they will all get it together. In real life, in groups as large as this, that's nearly impossible. Some will, some won't.
yup, rather ironic that the person calling me a troll has no issues throwing insults and false accusations themselves.
Anyone that doesn't like the insults I toss back at posters should also not like the insults I was responding to...but we all know what posters get angry about is not the insults but the politics of the poster.
You know what the inside of a school locker looks like, don't you? Do you own any AR scary military type "assault" weapons? What is your address again, I think we misplaced it.
If men were any more stupid, we would have breed for the extinction of women. Proof yet again that WE are the best thing they have going for them.
I think that is a good idea (even though I vote that way a lot of times). They have people verifying the signature on a ballot that are probably no better than I would be. I think mail-in is easily open to fraud.Trump also wants to ban mail-in voting except for just a few exceptions (e.g., military, business travelers)
There are 10 types of people in this world, those who know binary and those who don't.
I think it applies only to new registrations or changing a registration. For example, when a Democrat dies, the registration will require proof of citizenship for the deceased to continue voting.
Re this one, didn't you write that state's actually could allow non-citizens to vote if they wanted to?5) Because non-citizens registering to vote in the United States is largely not a real problem, we find it appalling that anyone would support this sort of trade-off: making it harder for Americans to vote in order to gain zero benefit to the country.
If true, you could view this as a prophylactic measure. But I think the real reason is that many of the people pushing this think there is a lot of undetected illegal voting going on. Not sure how you disprove that.
I do think they are smart enough to know that it will lead to fewer people voting and that this will probably be a voter demographic shift that favors conservatives, but that's really only among the strategists. Among the vast swath of regular old folks who think this is a good idea, I think it's probably because they honestly believe loads of undocumented immigrants are being shipped here and given voter registrations.
I think the notion that voter turnout would decrease is nonsense. 35-40% of people already don't vote. For the people who do vote getting a passport or birth certificate isn't going to stop them (and I'd wouldn't be surprised if 80-90% of them already have one or both).
Law of large numbers. This isn't a Greek city-state. There are many millions of voters. Anything we do to change the voting process will lead to either an increase or decrease in actual turnout. This law would lead to a decrease in registration, and therefore turnout. What you're really saying is this added step wouldn't stop you, so you don't see why it should stop anyone else, but when dealing with this many people, not everyone will behave the same way. Some of them will be like you and still want to vote. Some won't.
If 90%+ of people were voting I'd agree with you. I am a complete f#ck off and miss place everything and somehow have both. After one election cycle the numbers would be back to the same. I disagree with your notion that it's a hindrance to the voting populace. The people it would stop from voting already don't vote. Unfortunately, we won't get to find out who is right.
I think you're too nearly dividing people into discrete groups who will all behave the same, i.e., after one cycle they will all get it together. In real life, in groups as large as this, that's nearly impossible. Some will, some won't.
Don’t we always hear from the increase government crowd…”Don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good”?….or something along those lines?
I think it applies only to new registrations or changing a registration.
If you were to move to a nursing home, what is the likelihood that you would be in the same voting precinct? Almost zero. Anyone moving to assisted living needs to change voter registration to stay on the voter rolls.
Also, there is some confusion between the SAVE Act, the SAVE America Act (which requires photo ID at the time of voting), and the MEGA act, which adds on:
Ban of universal mail voting (the automatic mailing of ballots to all eligible registered voters)
Require mail ballots be received by Election Day to be counted
Require election offices to process mail ballots upon receipt, but delay tabulation until polls close
Require voting systems to use voter-verifiable paper ballots, among other adjustments to voting technology
https://bipartisanpolicy.org/article/five-things-to-know-about-the-save-act/
--
We don't have to guess much about necessity, or unintended consequences. It's been done before.
Utah went to great expense in performing a citizenship review of its entire voter registration list from April 2025 through January 2026. After a time-intensive, multi-step review of more than 2 million registered voters, they identified only one confirmed instance of noncitizen registration and zero instances of noncitizen voting.
Kansas and Arizona both adopted SAVE-like restrictions on voting and there were a host of negative consequences. Arizona’s law, once adopted, reduced voter rolls, keeping ~35,000 voters from voting in state and local elections, including disproportionately high numbers of voters who live on Tribal lands or college campuses.
discussion here specific to suppressing voting by Native Americans: https://narf.org/save-act-hurts-native-voters/
"You can't make someone listen to reason if they aren't willing to think"-- Ray Bradbury, Fahrenheit 451
I can also tell you from recent personal experience with four different elderly relatives that no such assistance was provided. Maybe they had to demand it, or maybe it was because none of the nursing homes involved met the 120 bed requirement. My expericenes were with 4 different nursing homes in Columbus IN, Seymour IN, and Holland MI.
I do recall at least two of them providing a shuttle on election day so that the patients could go and vote in person.
In Indiana, facilities with fewer than 120 beds that aren't required to have a social worker on-site still must legally provide accommodations to residents.
Michigan should also comply with that under the 1987 Nursing Home Reform Act, just like Indiana does.
If those facilities aren't, they're probably operating in violation of federal law, and you should speak up so other residents aren't denied the right to vote.
Hope is not optimism, which expects things to turn out well, but something rooted in the conviction that there is good worth working for. - Seamus Heaney, Irish poet and likely Hoosier basketball fan.
POTFB
Is this the last try and will it succeed?
Trump allies plan Senate floor takeover to pass SAVE America Act
Don’t we always hear from the increase government crowd…”Don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good”?….or something along those lines?
Yep, and if you think the good of this bill outweighs the potential costs, that's fine. I actually don't think the bill offers anything good, because I don't think noncitizens voting is a serious problem, therefore I think the potential costs are entirely unjustifiable.
Oh......the wife left you. Hunting cougars are ya? Game respects game.
Oh dude, you have no idea. She's been in California with her dad since Nov of '24. In Jan of '25 they said he had 6 weeks, 2 months tops and he went into hospice care. We decided that she'd stay with him until the end, since her shit bird brother and his wife only visit once/month because "it's an hour each way with traffic". Fast forward, and he's still hanging in there, and I'm still flying back and forth.
Hope is not optimism, which expects things to turn out well, but something rooted in the conviction that there is good worth working for. - Seamus Heaney, Irish poet and likely Hoosier basketball fan.
POTFB
Kegger at hooky's!!!!Oh......the wife left you. Hunting cougars are ya? Game respects game.
Oh dude, you have no idea. She's been in California with her dad since Nov of '24. In Jan of '25 they said he had 6 weeks, 2 months tops and he went into hospice care. We decided that she'd stay with him until the end, since her shit bird brother and his wife only visit once/month because "it's an hour each way with traffic". Fast forward, and he's still hanging in there, and I'm still flying back and forth.
Oh......the wife left you. Hunting cougars are ya? Game respects game.
Oh dude, you have no idea. She's been in California with her dad since Nov of '24. In Jan of '25 they said he had 6 weeks, 2 months tops and he went into hospice care. We decided that she'd stay with him until the end, since her shit bird brother and his wife only visit once/month because "it's an hour each way with traffic". Fast forward, and he's still hanging in there, and I'm still flying back and forth.
You're a good dude.
You're a good dude.
Thanks, but he's the OG good dude in this. I hit the Father-in-Law lottery with him. The thought of him being alone like that was heartbreaking. He deserves to have someone he loves, and who loves him, that's there with him every day.
It's sad to see how many people who are there never get visitors.
Hope is not optimism, which expects things to turn out well, but something rooted in the conviction that there is good worth working for. - Seamus Heaney, Irish poet and likely Hoosier basketball fan.
POTFB
If it supresses more Republicans so be it....It's not difficult to get a birth certificate unless you are really old and it was never recorded (which I have known at least one person like that).Exactly. No serious person objects strongly to voter ID like we have in Indiana, but the proof of citizenship requirement for registration is onerous and will suppress voting. And I'm not convinced it won't suppress as many or more Republican voters than Democrat.
There are 10 types of people in this world, those who know binary and those who don't.
For the people here who think that illegals are highly motivated to illegally register to vote, and then to illegally vote.
WHY?
I would think that, if I were here illegally, I would want to be basically invisible to anyone having anything to do with the government. Keep your head down. Make money. Feed your family. Make no waves (which is also why their crime rates are actually quite low, as well).
Would I be eager to voluntarily give someone my name and address? Of course not. I don't want anyone knowing I'm here. Is it a priority of mine to elect Democrats, more important than keeping a low profile? I also think not.
What would drive the illegal to stand up and be counted? It makes no sense on just a basic human motivational level. I don't want to be caught. I don't want to be noticed.
"You can't make someone listen to reason if they aren't willing to think"-- Ray Bradbury, Fahrenheit 451
Latest Post: Portal Kombat (Basketball Edition) Our newest member: Mark Wittenbrink Recent Posts Unread Posts
