Why is an ID mandate for voting such a problem?

[hlthe2b]

3. Let's simplify it. Voter ID is NOT the issue. It is RESTRICTIVE ID... That means the type

of IDs that take time, money, and investigative resources for some (who don't have a birth certificate for whatever reason and whose parents are long gone or non-responsive). Those who live in the same state of birth maintain it is easy to get a birth certificate. Sure, if you can take time off from work, drive down to the state or county office, and produce the considerable documentation and fee to receive one. Alternatively, if you have those same documents, you can do so via mail, but most states require a certified submission. And if you are doing so outside the state, the same level of documentation, but beyond the fees, may be some pretty substantial mailing fees that include a special (beyond USPS) tracking. You think you already have one in that baby book your mother carefully created? Well, unless you have used it to get a passport, I would not be so sure. Many people think the hospital-issued certificate of birth is a birth certificate, but in actuality, it is a keepsake document with no legal authority. Whereas a certified birth certificate is a government-issued legal document, often with a raised seal, needed for official identification, passports, and school enrollment. The hospital document is just a souvenir, whereas the state-issued certificate is the official proof of birth.

The birth certificate has always and can continue to prove your citizenship for MOST (for now). That is, as long as birthright citizenship is not overturned, causing ALL of us to prove the citizenship of our parents as well.

So, you say, you will just get a passport or renew one? Well, on the former, you are going to need those certified birth certificates (I say plural because you are nuts if you trust that it might not get misplaced during the process. Everyone should have at least two certified copies. The cost and hoops one must jump through the first time (or if yours has already expired) are considerable. If all were required to have one, the time to get an appointment for processing, not to mention the turnaround time to receive one may leave one incredulous and far too late for many for upcoming elections or other purposes.


So, that quaint little term, "Voter ID," is just that. So, Dems who think that is all they are talking about and want to sound "reasonable" by agreeing with "VOTER ID" as a measure and concept, need to stop it right now!!!! The RW and Trump want it to be, in reality, a RESTRICTIVE ID to rule out as many as possible from voting. STOP using the term "VOTER ID," which most see as innocuous and nonproblematic--just your routine driver's license or other ID. NOPE, the measure SAVE ACT and others being promoted are for RESTRICTIVE ID--those that "prove" citizenship and perhaps in the future, will require proving that of one's parents too, if "birthright" citizenship is overturned by SCOTUS.

In that vein, I would ask the OP, whose post I agree with- after it gets to the lower half, but leads the reader to initially think they are "agreeing with what is only to be "voter ID," to be cautious of that. Many do not have time to read long posts, so the subject line and first paragraph may be all they read. We cannot allow the RW to mask their intent under the guise of simple "voter ID."