politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
Imagine a woman being born a Smith. She marries a Jones and changes her name and license. Her birth certificate is still Smith. She will be required to have the same name on her BC and License. She will have to choose and change one of them at her expense.
I don't quite follow the last part. "She will have to choose and change one of them at her expense"
Obviously you need to update your license if you change your name.
So she can update her BC to match her new name? Or is that impossible, thus making her unable to vote because of it.
The new law requires either a birth certificate or passport to register to vote. A driver's license or state issued ID isn't good enough.
Lots of people don't have passports (and they can take a LONG time to get) and don't have updated birth certificates (mostly women since they're the ones primarily to change their name).
Ok... That doesn't seem that difficult, costs $50 to update a birth certificate. It says processing time is 4 to 8 weeks, and you have 4 years until it needs to be done.
https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/replace-certify-docs/requesting-a-record/replace-amend-CRBA.html
Voting is a right, not a privilege. Adding $50 here and $30 there every time something happens removes the right and makes it something only people with money can do. Are you being intentionally dense here? If it cost $0 and took no time I could understand your point, but it takes both money and time. IDs aren't free, passports aren't either, updating birth certificates also isn't free, and in many cases it has to be done in person with multiple forms of additional documentation which also takes time, effort and money to procure.
Last but not least, in its current form the people who will be impacted by it are two groups of people and one financial class of person, primarily -- women and transgender who changed their name from their birth name, and people who don't have the money to update their ID, get a passport, or pay to have their birth certificate updated. So, it's not even effective at what it is trying to do, it's only effective at making sure it's harder for women, trans people who have changed their names, and poor people to vote. All three groups who historically tend to lean democrat with their votes -- who would have guessed.
Rich white men will never have a problem, miraculously. If what you're trying to say is you're OK if it's harder for women and trans people and poor people to vote, then just come out and say it, otherwise you need to realize that this voting bill does that and only that and re-think your position.
Voting is a right, is that true for those convicted of felonies as well? Because if not, then it sounds an awful lot like a privilege to me. So either you have a large population of people whose rights are being infringed upon, or it's not a right. Pick one. You cannot have it both ways.
And listen to yourself for a second. Women and transgender, who changed their name. Seemingly have enough money to do so, but then not enough money to also change their birth certificate? Because changing your name isn't free either.
I agree that it's incredibly stupid your birth certificate for one, isn't digitally available to the voting registration process, and secondly, isn't automatically amended when you filed for name change. But that's another topic.
Damn, all those white homeless men I saw in the US must have had a lot of make-up on I guess.
You don't have to put words in my mouth. If you want to know what I think, this is it. I think every citizen of legal age of a nation should be allowed to vote in their elections. I think their process should be easy and available.
I understand you think this is the dumbest act ever. That's fine.
I don't think it's that big of a deal that you need to prove you are who you say you are. I think that's the norm across the world, and I think there are a lot of things you need to address regarding your elections that isn't about proving that voters are who they say they are.
We have to put words in your mouth because the ones you are letting slide out of there are not doing the job.
Yes, convicted felons should get to vote. Several states allow it. Some states don't, and those are the problem. Once you serve your time (and pay any associated fines), your debt to society should be considered paid.
If you need an ID to vote, the government should supply that ID, otherwise it's a poll tax. You've got money to pay for Internet and time to post dumb shit on the internet? Then you should have time to research this so randos like me dont have to explain it to you, and you should be willing to pay to post your opinions to us, right? You obviously have the means.
In the rest of the world, supplying identification is indeed not a problem, but the ID situation is decidedly less stupid everywhere else I've spent any time (western Europe vs US).
Your whole thread here is either intentionally ignorant, assholish, or my dude you gotta buy a good helmet and make sure you wear it. I'm going to go with assholish as a matter of generosity.
If you got money to change your name. You SHOULD have money to change your birth certificate. It seems like common sense to have your documentation in order. Kind of like, if you got money to buy a car, you should have money to buy fuel. At least I think that sounds like a good idea.
It sounds incredibly stupid that it's not automatically amended, what do you want to say? It should be, I'm sorry it's not, but at the end of the day. It's your responsibility to make sure your documentation is in order.
Not sure it is like this everywhere, but in my state it costs nothing to change your surname when getting married. Updating your social security card in this instance is also free. This is proof enough to vote. You do have to pay a small fee to change your name on your driver's license/State id and pay around $130 for a passport.
Friend, I don't think anyone is arguing that it's impossible. The problem is that there's an additional burden (financial and administrative- have you ever changed your name? It's a nightmare.) being targeted at mainly women with a side benefit to the Republicans of affecting trans folks.
Do you see how that is inequitable access to voting?
Yes, I'm aware of the administrative process of changing ones name in the US. I've been intimately present during one.
That is one of the reasons I don't think it's that much of an issue. If you have money to make the filings to changing your name. You have the money to do one more additional request of amending your birth certificate.
It's a shame that it isn't done automatically. But really, in the whole process of things, it's not that much more work. It's just one more form to fill out.
The entire concept of having to manually register to vote is inequitable access to voting. Every citizen should be registered, automatically.
To me, it sounds like you're fighting about if voting should be "Super difficult" or "Incredibly difficult" to which all I can say is. Maybe it shouldn't be difficult, at all....
It sounds that we are on the same page, in that it should not be difficult to vote. Logically it follows that introducing barriers to voting is wrong.
As for the financial piece- all I will say is that circumstances change. $50 dollars may not be much to you (or it may not have been much at the time of the initial name change), but it could mean the choice is between being able to vote or being able to eat.