Ignorance about the SAVE Act and which ID is required to prove citizenship persists. What I hear is," What's wrong. I get to show my driver's license for other services. Guess what: driver's licenses are NOT an acceptable ID per the SAVE ACT, which for many must be a surprise. Got a current passport? Got a state-certified copy of your birth certificate? Those count.to prove citizenship. Driver's licenses do not. If your name changed because of marriage, or other reasons, or you are too old or from a rural area to even have a birth certificate, or too poor to get a passport, you would be SOL if this SAVE Act became law..Those hurt the most by this SAVE act are married women who took their husband's name, the poor, and the rural elderly.. That fits the profile of many GOP voters. The SAVE ACT failed to pass in the Senate, though it passed in the House.
The attack by the GOP on voters' rights has other issues of import than the defeated SAVE Act, with its burdensome proof-of-citizenship requirements with which many in both parties could not comply.. The GOP candidate for Attorney General "Prefers" in-person voting, which means the end of mail-in ballots. The current secretary of state, Jena Griswold, is running for Colorado Attorney General as a Democrat.
This statement appeared on a Facebook site on October 7, attacking her opponent. Note that her GOP opponent prefers "in-person voting," which is a code for ending mail-in ballots that 90% of Colorado voters use to cast ballots, and his opponent also wants ID verification- a vague comment when his party came of with the now-defeated SAVE Act as part of that ending mail-in voting, requiring in-person voting at a polling place. This end of mail-in voting is a loser in Colorado,
"As Colorado’s Secretary of State, Jena Griswold refused to turn over Coloradans’ sensitive voter data to the federal government and has consistently stood up against Trump's attacks on elections. But where does Michael Allen stand? In 2024, he said, “I would prefer in-person voting that includes ID verification.” And he was silent as Trump tried to take federal control over mail ballots. "The end of mail-in voting is a loser in Colorado,
"As Colorado’s Secretary of State, Jena Griswold refused to turn over Coloradans’ sensitive voter data to the federal government and has consistently stood up against Trump's attacks on elections. But where does Michael Allen stand? In 2024, he said “I would prefer in-person voting that includes ID verification.” And he was silent as Trump tried to take federal control over mail ballots. "I
From a prior post:SAVE us from SAVE: The radical piece of legislation before the Senate would have at least three particularly obnoxious provisions designed to keep certain groups of people from voting, or would require extraordinary efforts and money to prove citizenship. Particularly harmed by the requirement to provide proof of citizenship would be married women, the poor, and seniors who do not have passports or cannot find or get certified copies of birth certificates, divorce, and name change papers so they match driver's licenses with a photo. ID.. It would expose personal data now held by separate states to partisan centralized federal officials, for suppression targeting methods and dirty tricks. The motivation for this piece of legislation is not to enhance vote integrity but to give the advantage to the GOP in the midterms. Trump has admitted that.
Their whole premise is built on a lie that illegals voted and caused Trump to lose in 2020, for which no evidence has ever been found.
Another excuse Trump likes to make for his loss in 2020 was that there was extensive fraud in mail-in ballots. Therefore, his answer: only ballots received by election day should be counted... cutting out most active military votes or leaving them subject to the whims of the postal delivery service. (A lower court also scotched that postal service role this week)Some states would have to change their already existing rules and laws to conform. In fact, a study taken exposes Trump's claim as BS, and I cannot find any evidence to the contrary. (The SCOTUS 6/29 decision left the status quo in place)
More on the SAVE attack on voters' ability to vote:
1) It would keep married women from voting if their ID does not match their birth certificate names or even passport names. (Estimated 50 percent of voters do not have passports). What does your driver's license have as your photo ID name? Divorce papers would also have to be produced, or legal documentation of name changes would have to be provided.
2) All of your personal information, driver's licenses, Social Security numbers, and personal data held by State officials would have to be handed over to the Department of Homeland Security as they search first for registered illegals, turn out ICE to "protect" their own voting interests at polling places,, and God knows what else it could be used for if say a dictator who may not be one you supports takes over now or in the future.
3) This federalization enables big brother government to manipulate elections to suit the outcome they want by giving them the tools to identify targeting groups or kinds of legal voters that may not support them by voting roll purges and other strategies. The beauty of the current state control of such information is that 50 states can control their data instead of one federal government, in the hands of a party or single strong leader, being able to affect the outcome and votes in elections.
.The premise used to rationalize this legislation is stopping illegals from voting, a line MAGA has swallowed whole without any thought or care about evidence. For over 6 years, proof of the"steal" of the 2020 vote has been investigated, rejected by courts and hearings, and never proved. It is still just a theory to excuse a loss or a suspicion. Never mind, keeping certain voters from voting is a political strategy that MAGA embraces because they see a political advantage for them in the midterms. Heads up MAGA. You may not always be in control of the Oval Office, Congress, or the judiciary. What happens if the shoe is on the other foot, and the people you consider to be political enemies are now in power?
