House speaker takes another crack at spending bill linked to proof of citizenship for new voters
House speaker takes another crack at spending bill linked to proof of citizenship for new voters
The House scheduled a vote Wednesday evening on Speaker Mike Johnson's proposal that links the funding of the federal government for the new budget year with a mandate that states require proof of citizenship when people register to vote.
From WABE Politics News:
The House scheduled a vote Wednesday evening on Speaker Mike Johnson’s proposal that links the funding of the federal government for the new budget year with a mandate that states […]
Can someone eli5 why it is controversial to require proof of citizenship to vote in the USA?
Because there are already multiple checks and barriers to entry in order to register to vote.
"What's the harm in adding one more" you might ask?
Historically speaking, voter fraud happens at extremely low rates, and not nearly often enough to influence national or state level elections. When voter fraud does happen it's predominantly someone (cough republicans cough) casting a vote for a recently deceased relative, and not an illegal alien voting fraudulently. Barriers to voting have a long and storied history in the US of specifically targeting minorities instead of preserving the power of the people.
This is why it is controversial. It's targeting a non-issue, distracting from the actual issue, and intended to suppress the votes of vulnerable citizens.
We already do, this isn't about proof of citizenship it's about removing certain types of voters from the pool. In the USA it is extremely rare that any voter fraud happens (we are talking like 30-40 cases over a billion votes cast) this kind of law is basically a vote tax, you wanna vote? This is a pay to vote plan, you wanna vote pay 60 bucks to get your passport, pay another 50 for your real ID. Not everyone has that money to spend so they can't vote
Not to mention... It takes extra time to check that info when you vote. Even if it takes just an extra 10 seconds to confirm an ID number. Out in rural (red) areas, it may only add a few minutes to the queue time to vote, but for urban (blue) areas, some voting stations see 40000+ people, adding literally hundreds of hours (distributed across a few lines) to the time it takes to vote. Factor in that voting is officially 1 day, and not a federal holiday. Who can afford to wait in line a few extra hours to vote in those areas? Who can take the whole day off instead of just their lunch, in order to vote? Who is going to have stability in their housing in order to keep the necessary documents safe and readily available?
It's all a plan to target the poor and working class in cities, suppress their votes, and erode the foundation of democracy, that everyone get 1 equal vote.
Short answer (that clears things up for most non-Americans): There is no national ID card.
When you register to vote, you're expected to provide proof of citizenship, which for most Americans (who don't have or have use for a passport) means a birth certificate plus some photo ID (which ultimately proves that a person with your name and your birthday was born on US soil and you are in possession of their birth certificate -- so it's very likely you). Bringing your birth certificate to vote would be kind of risky, since it's the origin of all of your other ID and pretty much the only record that you're a citizen. (Work visa holders and permanent residents get social security cards, for example.)
Funnily enough, if you're an adult immigrant it's almost safer, because there's a huge federal paper trail of photos and records proving your citizenship (versus this flimsy piece of state-issued paper that native-born citizens have).
Of course, if election officials have some discretion on who needs to prove their citizenship, it's rife for abuse.
Because it makes it more difficult for legitimate voters to vote, and there is no actual problem that it fixes. There is no evidence of any widespread voting by non citizens. It's a law with only down sides, unless your intent is actually to disenfranchise legitimate voters.
Non-citizens are already not voting. They want this to stop eligible citizens from voting. There would be less opposition if it was quick and easy to obtain the proof.