Watch the Democrats Closely on the SAVE Act

It is something that has been talked about ad infinitum for decades. Voter ID. Yet the left, of course, has forever been adamantly opposed to it. They say it is an attempt by Republicans to oppress and disenfranchise certain sectors of society and make it harder for them to vote.

The reality is that voter ID requirements would do neither of those things. In fact, it would ensure the integrity of our elections and protect every single American and ensure all votes in elections are fairly cast.

Our elections in this country are one of the most sacred things we have to maintain our Republic the way that our founding fathers intended. The voice of the People matters in our representative system of government, and it ought to be taken damn seriously.

Recently, U.S. Senators John Kennedy and Mike Lee joined forces, along with other Republican colleagues, to introduce the SAVE Act, or the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act, which would provide an amendment to the National Voter Registration Act to make it clear that states must require proof of citizenship when they register individuals to vote in federal elections.

The main concern is the massive influx of illegal border crossings that are occurring as a result of the disastrous border policies of the current administration.

While it is already set in law that only citizens can vote in federal elections, how do you safeguard that when you don't know who is casting the vote, or whether they are truly eligible to vote at all? And what is the potential, say, if even just 1% of the illegals who have entered the country do vote somehow? That's potentially hundreds of thousands of votes which can very much impact the results.

The SAVE Act does not require voter ID. It simply requires states to prove votes are cast by confirmed citizens. But it does leave it up to the states to determine how they go about this.

The bill would also require states to clean up their existing voter rolls and remove any current non-citizens from them. It would provide for more accountability, creating higher federal penalties for registering non-citizens to vote, and ensure that "proof of citizenship" is provided by voters in acceptable ways that can be verified.

I think it's a no-brainer law, frankly. It's sad we need it. But we do.

It's a Republican lead bill and what will be interesting to see is how Democrats decide to vote on it. You'd think it would be a slam-dunk bi-partisan bill. But you can almost bet Democrats will oppose it. If and when they do oppose it, I think Americans need to listen very closely to the reasons they provide against it.

The question is, what would be the harm in simply making sure the voters who vote in our federal elections are actually citizens of the United States?

We're not talking about people being oppressed or disenfranchised here. We're simply saying, "Prove you are an American citizen." Because without there being a set law that at least requires citizenship to be verified, the door is wide open for anyone to vote.

Including illegal immigrants.

The bill is up in the air for now. But I think it's one to pay close attention to especially as we draw nearer to the upcoming November presidential election. The border crisis is one created by design by the Democrat party and Biden's border policies. Do we accept that it's simply an action taken in the interest of "inclusion and acceptance of people simply seeking better lives," or if they adamantly oppose the SAVE Act can we safely assume the Democrats are simply trying to source new voters?

Like the way I write or the things I write about? Follow me on my Facebook page or on X to keep up with the latest writings wherever I may write them.

© 2024 Jim Bauer 

Argument Against Voter ID in Wisconsin Is Silliness

If ever there was a word in the english language that has been overused, and frankly misused in the last few years, it is the word 'disenfranchise.' And it happens to be a word often used when opponents of the voter ID laws in Wisconsin try and make their arguments against the law. "Requiring voter ID," they say, "infringes on the rights of certain people to exercise their Constitutional right to vote in an election."

I say this is a load of hogwash because the way I see it, making that claim could be applied to any number of opportunities we may wish to take part in. For example driving a car, or buying a pack of cigarettes, or a six-pack of beer. In Wisconsin, and I'm certain this is also the case in other states as well, one must have a valid photo ID to receive food stamps, to cash a check, to make a withdrawal from a bank account, and the list goes on.

The bottom line comes down to something very basic for me. Participating in certain things requires us doing the basic things to actually do it.

While it's not along quite the same line, if I want to start a business for example, I have to obtain a license. I may need to find investors or obtain a small business loan to get started. Using the argument of the opponents of the voter ID laws, making me do these basic things may disenfranchise me. Requring me to do these things may make it harder, or impossible to actually start a business.

The simple fact is that if I want to start a business I must do the basic things to do this. Just like if I want to drive a car I must obtain a license. Heck, you need a license to fish or hunt too.

And how hard is it really to obtain some form of legal photo ID I wonder? If one really wants to cast a vote and exercise their right, they should not be looking for a way to play the role of the victim and cry woe-is-me I can't vote. They should be looking for a way to do the basic things they need to do to go to the polls and vote. If they are not willing to that, these people are not disenfranchised. They are creating their own circumstances. The tools are there. The opportunities are there, and the argument against voter ID laws in Wisconsin is just nothing more than silliness and whining.