Well if it ain't time for some good old fashioned religion

[Bucky Cornstarch]

Why is it so important to Republicans to reduce the voter pool?

[SuperHoneyBadger]

the voter pool?

Have you not heard what goes on in Democrat pools? I think they're trying to avoid these types of interactions with minors given the current state of affairs.

[jstell]

that indicates U.S. citizenship.

Section 1, page 1.
https://democrats-cha.house.gov/sites/evo-subsites/democrats-cha.house.gov/files/evo-media-document/SAVE%20Act%20Section-by-Section_BRANDED.pdf

Only specialized "enhanced" driver's licenses (available in a few states like MI, MN, NY, VT, WA) that specifically designate U.S. citizenship might qualify.

https://bipartisanpolicy.org/article/five-things-to-know-about-the-save-act/

https://campaignlegal.org/update/what-you-need-know-about-save-act

https://www.americanprogress.org/article/the-save-act-overview-and-facts/

[jstell]

Why is it so important to Republicans to reduce the voter pool?

The funnier thing, kind of like injecting bleach or the politicization of masks and vax killing folks unnecessarily, it seems to be their own voters that they want to eliminate.

[Rstewart]

Why is it so important to Republicans to reduce the voter pool?

I believe Americans want Americans to vote.  Why is this so difficult?

[Rstewart]

Only specialized "enhanced" driver's licenses (available in a few states like MI, MN, NY, VT, WA) that specifically designate U.S. citizenship might qualify.

https://bipartisanpolicy.org/article/five-things-to-know-about-the-save-act/

I liked the state this website picked out - Kansas LOL, Big shocker there isn't a lot of non-citizen voters there

Kansas offers a case study of how a documentary proof requirement would likely play out in practice. Before the law took effect, noncitizen registration in Kansas was exceedingly rare, accounting for about 0.002% of registered voters. After adoption, the documentary proof of citizenship requirement prevented roughly 31,000 eligible citizens, or 12% of all applicants, from registering to vote. In short, the law prevented far more citizens from registering to vote than noncitizens.

Let's do a case study on CA, MN, NY, IL, etc...

[TylerBeer]

No, I think they should make that a law.  This would be aimed mostly at those "Check into Cash" places.  The penalties would be on the place of business, two strikes and you're out.

So it's not 'within' the law, but a new law? path to citizenship can't happen without non-citizen legal residency. Shutting down immigration completely is.. an idea I guess?

[mowens]

I don't believe 31,000 eligible voters were prevented from registering in Kansas.

[Bucky Cornstarch]

I believe Americans want Americans to vote.  Why is this so difficult?

Americans are the ones who vote, lil' Stewie. How long have your guys had to come up with evidence of widespread voter fraud?

(And Stewie, I don't think you're as dumb as you let on, and you actually know the reason Republicans want to thin the voter pool.)

[jstell]

I don't believe 31,000 eligible voters were prevented from registering.

There's a link https://www.aclu.org/cases/fish-v-schwab-formerly-fish-v-kobach in the article quoted above.  The ACLU says 35,000 in 2013-2016.

[mowens]

I still don't believe it. I know how numbers can be manipulated to support a position. Besides, this was during the Brownback administration. Everything was shit then.

[jstell]

In June 2018, a federal trial court struck down the law after finding it violated the National Voter Registration Act and the U.S. Constitution. The state appealed.

Clearly numbers can be twisted by sampling size and all sorts of other intentional means. But if precedent is followed, the SAVE Act should likely be struck down for the same reasons.

The point though is that far more citizens are likely to prevented from registering to vote than non-citizens kept from voting.  Because non-citizens are already voting in such low numbers as to be statistically insignificant. 
https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/non-citizens-are-not-voting-here-are-facts

[Bucky Cornstarch]

Because non-citizens are already voting in such low numbers as to be statistically insignificant.
https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/non-citizens-are-not-voting-here-are-facts

.

[jstell]

I liked the state this website picked out - Kansas LOL, Big shocker there isn't a lot of non-citizen voters there

Let's do a case study on CA, MN, NY, IL, etc...

https://www.sos.state.tx.us/about/newsreleases/2025/102025.shtml
Texas went thru their voter records from 2016 and found 33 (not 33k, just 33) votes cast by non-citizens - out of 8,969,226 votes cast (.00037%).  They also found 2724 potential non-citizens out of their 15,101,087 registered voters (at the time of 2016 presidential election - .018%).  Potential meaning they were flagged and had the opportunity to update/submit additional proof of citizenship.  I did not find stats on how many were re-instated.

[Newbeeee™]

found 33

Nice masonic number....it's always 33....