Stella's Place

“(3) STATE REQUIREMENTS.—Each State shall take affirmative steps on an ongoing basis to ensure that only United States citizens are registered to vote under the provisions of this Act, which shall include the establishment of a program described in paragraph (4) not later than 30 days after the date of the enactment of this subsection.

“(4) PROGRAM DESCRIBED.—A State may meet the requirements of paragraph (3) by establishing a program under which the State identifies individuals who are not United States citizens using information supplied by one or more of the following sources:

“(A) The Department of Homeland Security through the Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (‘SAVE’) or otherwise.

“(B) The Social Security Administration through the Social Security Number Verification Service, or otherwise.

“(C) State agencies that supply State identification cards or driver’s licenses where the agency confirms the United States citizenship status of applicants.

“(D) Other sources, including databases, which provide confirmation of United States citizenship status.

An interesting and factual take on the subject (from mike bsiki, on X; @BskiMike22802):

Dear @RepMcGovern,

You are absolutely right – the SAVE Act IS anti-democracy. So are the Founding Fathers. So is the Constitution. So is America itself.

Congratulations on accidentally making our argument while demonstrating you have about as much sense as a screen door on a submarine.

AMERICA IS NOT A DEMOCRACY

Madison warned in Federalist No. 10 that “democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention… and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths.”

Article IV, Section 4 guarantees every state a “REPUBLICAN Form of Government” – not democratic, REPUBLICAN.

The SAVE Act is anti-democracy the same way the Electoral College is anti-democracy. The same way separation of powers is anti-democracy. Because the Founders DESIGNED our republic to PREVENT pure democracy – which they correctly understood as mob rule.

Your complaint reveals you either do not understand basic civics or you are deliberately misleading your constituents. Given your distinguished colleagues, I am betting on the former.

SPEAKING OF YOUR BRILLIANT COLLEAGUES

Let me remind you who you are standing with:

Rep. Hank Johnson (D-GA) – worried Guam would “tip over and capsize”
Rep. LaMonica McIver (D-NJ) – asked a witness “Do you think you are going to hell?”
Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) – asked Google why searching “idiot” shows Trump
Sheriff Garry McFadden (D-NC) – could not name the three branches of government, thought sheriffs are judicial branch

So when you call the SAVE Act “anti-American,” you are standing on the intellectual shoulders of people who think islands can capsize. You are not exactly the sharpest knife in the drawer yourself – more like a spoon in the knife drawer. The lights are on but nobody is home.

YOUR ACTUAL CLAIMS ARE GARBAGE

“It’s already illegal for noncitizens to vote” – Great! Then you should have NO PROBLEM with enforcement. That is like saying murder is already illegal so we do not need police. Your brain is running on dial-up speed in a fiber optic world.

“Voter fraud is rarer than rare” – How would we KNOW when most states have ZERO verification? You are arguing that since we are not catching people, the crime must not exist. The wheel is spinning but the hamster is dead, Representative.

“When it does occur, it’s often MAGA” – The Heritage Foundation documented over 1,400 proven instances of voter fraud. Meanwhile Biden’s administration FOUGHT states trying to remove noncitizens from voter rolls. But sure, tell me more about who is rigging things. You are dumber than a box of rocks.

“Make it harder for married women” – My wife changed her name across three states when we got married. Somehow she managed. Are you saying women are too incompetent to get updated documentation? Because THAT is what your sexist argument actually claims.

THREE QUESTIONS YOU NEED TO ANSWER

Did you actually READ HR 22, or just parrot DNC talking points?

Are you not smart enough to UNDERSTAND the bill accepts TEN forms of documentation?

Are you comfortable DELIBERATELY DECEIVING your constituents?

Pick one. You are clearly not playing with a full deck.

THE SAVE ACT ACCEPTS TEN FORMS OF DOCUMENTATION

Just ONE is required:
– REAL ID showing citizenship
– US Passport
– Military ID with service record
– Government photo ID showing US birth
– Birth certificate
– Hospital birth record
– Adoption decree
– Consular Report of Birth Abroad
– Naturalization Certificate
– American Indian Card

Women can get passports with married names. They can get REAL IDs with married names. They can present birth certificates with marriage certificates. This is not rocket science unless you have the intellectual capacity of a broken calculator.

THE REAL QUESTION

WHY are you opposed to ensuring only citizens vote?

Every developed nation requires ID. Mexico, Canada, all of Europe. But when America wants to verify citizenship, you call it “rigging the system”?

This is Quinn’s Law #1 in action – liberalism always generates the opposite of its stated intent. You claim to protect voting rights while fighting electoral integrity. You claim to defend democracy while opposing citizenship verification.

What are you AFRAID we might discover?

You need photo ID to enter YOUR office. To board planes. Open bank accounts. Rent cars. But asking for citizenship proof to vote is somehow oppressive?

You are either intellectually dishonest or genuinely too dim to understand what you are criticizing. Given your colleagues who think islands capsize, I am betting on the latter. You are about as sharp as a bowling ball and your gene pool could use some chlorine.

Stop using women as political props. Stop pretending basic documentation is discriminatory. And maybe try READING legislation before spouting off like some half-wit with a Twitter account.

But what do I know? I am just someone who actually read the bill and understands constitutional principles – unlike your colleague who thinks islands capsize or the sheriff who cannot name the three branches of government.