House passes SAVE Act - up to Senate

They need 7 dems to vote for it I think if all republicans vote for it? I would think that this makes it doa as every dem senator right now thinks that they’re the lead candidate in 2028, and there isn’t one of them who isn’t getting flooded with globalist money right now to defy Trump at every turn.
 
Horatio Alger Jr said:
Is this a simple bill or is there pork in it that people can blame for not voting for it?
Click to expand...
Here’s what Grok says anyway. Looks like it’s pretty clean.
———-

The Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act, based on available information, appears to be a focused bill primarily aimed at requiring documentary proof of U.S. citizenship for voter registration in federal elections. The text of the bill, as outlined in congressional records, sticks to provisions like mandating citizenship verification, establishing processes for states to remove noncitizens from voter rolls, and setting penalties for violations. There’s no clear evidence in the legislative text or analyses of significant unrelated expenditures or “pork barrel” spending—extraneous provisions often used to sway votes or inflate costs.


That said, some critics might still point to procedural or administrative costs as a form of “pork” in a loose sense. The bill requires states to overhaul voter registration systems, which could involve substantial funding for implementation, though no specific dollar amounts are allocated in the bill itself, making it an unfunded mandate. This could be a sticking point for opponents who argue it burdens states without federal support. Others might claim the bill’s scope, like its impact on election officials or potential for voter purges, introduces complexities that distract from its stated goal, though these aren’t pork in the traditional sense of tacked-on projects or earmarks.


On X, there’s chatter questioning whether the bill hides unrelated spending, but no concrete examples have surfaced in those discussions or elsewhere to confirm such claims. Opponents are more likely to criticize the bill’s potential to disenfranchise voters or its administrative feasibility than to point to specific pork as a reason to vote against it. Supporters, meanwhile, frame it as straightforward election security. Without explicit evidence of extraneous provisions, accusations of pork seem speculative at this stage.
 
TJ4 said:
They need 7 dems to vote for it I think if all republicans vote for it? I would think that this makes it doa as every dem senator right now thinks that they’re the lead candidate in 2028, and there isn’t one of them who isn’t getting flooded with globalist money right now to defy Trump at every turn.
Click to expand...
Arggh. That’s right I forgot.
 
safetyfirst2125 said:
Here’s what Grok says anyway. Looks like it’s pretty clean.
———-

The Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act, based on available information, appears to be a focused bill primarily aimed at requiring documentary proof of U.S. citizenship for voter registration in federal elections. The text of the bill, as outlined in congressional records, sticks to provisions like mandating citizenship verification, establishing processes for states to remove noncitizens from voter rolls, and setting penalties for violations. There’s no clear evidence in the legislative text or analyses of significant unrelated expenditures or “pork barrel” spending—extraneous provisions often used to sway votes or inflate costs.


That said, some critics might still point to procedural or administrative costs as a form of “pork” in a loose sense. The bill requires states to overhaul voter registration systems, which could involve substantial funding for implementation, though no specific dollar amounts are allocated in the bill itself, making it an unfunded mandate. This could be a sticking point for opponents who argue it burdens states without federal support. Others might claim the bill’s scope, like its impact on election officials or potential for voter purges, introduces complexities that distract from its stated goal, though these aren’t pork in the traditional sense of tacked-on projects or earmarks.


On X, there’s chatter questioning whether the bill hides unrelated spending, but no concrete examples have surfaced in those discussions or elsewhere to confirm such claims. Opponents are more likely to criticize the bill’s potential to disenfranchise voters or its administrative feasibility than to point to specific pork as a reason to vote against it. Supporters, meanwhile, frame it as straightforward election security. Without explicit evidence of extraneous provisions, accusations of pork seem speculative at this stage.
Click to expand...
 

'Mass surveillance': Conservatives sound alarm over Trump admin's REAL ID rollout (formally George Bush-era Patriot Act overreach)​


Conservatives are speaking out against the Trump administration’s plans to finally enact long-expected REAL ID laws in a bid to crack down on illegal immigration.

"If you think REAL ID is about election integrity, you’re going to be sorely disappointed. Someone has lied to you, or you’re engaged in wishful thinking. Please don’t shoot the messenger," Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., wrote on X earlier this week.

Responding to Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Kristi Noem's video announcing the May 7 REAL ID deadline, the former vice presidential candidate and Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin questioned in a lengthy post: "Or what?? Evidently, existing ID requirements for American citizens just aren’t adequate now, so Big Brother is forcing us through more hoops for the ‘right’ to travel within our own country."

Palin continued: "Other administrations delayed this newfangled, burdensome REAL ID requirement. Are you curious why its implementation is imperative now?? And who came up with this?"

"REAL ID is a 2005 George Bush-era Patriot Act overreach that went completely unenforced until Trump got into office. Let me guess: he’s playing 4D chess and I should just go along with it?" Massie wrote.

Former presidential candidate and ex-House Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, wrote on X, "Homeland Security chief Kristi Noem announced Friday that the notorious PATRIOT Act-era REAL ID scheme would go into effect at the end of the month. REAL ID is one of the greatest threats to Americans' civil liberties in decades."

Kentucky state Rep. TJ Roberts, a Republican, agreed with Paul on social media, writing, "Repeal REAL ID!!"

New Hampshire state Rep. Joe Alexander, a Republican, added on the accusations, calling REAL ID a "violation of the 14th Amendment of the US Constitution," and writing, "the Federal Government should not be mandating ID for its citizens to travel between states. Just say NO."

Cato Institute senior fellow Patrick Eddington told Fox News Digital, "I’m not aware of a single post-9/11 instance of an alleged or actual terrorist being apprehended, much less successfully boarding an airliner, with false ID credentials – which is the entire-stated rationale for REAL ID."

Eddington argued it imposed unconstitutional burdens on people who are seeking to travel by air versus train.

"The REAL ID Act effectively institutes a form of mass surveillance and verification that doesn't discriminate between those who have given reason for suspicion and those who haven’t, which is why it should never have been enacted in the first place."

www.foxnews.com

'Mass surveillance': Conservatives sound alarm over Trump admin's REAL ID rollout

Rep. Thomas Massie and other conservatives are speaking out about REAL ID as its implementation deadline nears.
www.foxnews.com www.foxnews.com
Click to expand...
 
TC McQuade said:

'Mass surveillance': Conservatives sound alarm over Trump admin's REAL ID rollout (formally George Bush-era Patriot Act overreach)​


Conservatives are speaking out against the Trump administration’s plans to finally enact long-expected REAL ID laws in a bid to crack down on illegal immigration.

"If you think REAL ID is about election integrity, you’re going to be sorely disappointed. Someone has lied to you, or you’re engaged in wishful thinking. Please don’t shoot the messenger," Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., wrote on X earlier this week.

Responding to Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Kristi Noem's video announcing the May 7 REAL ID deadline, the former vice presidential candidate and Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin questioned in a lengthy post: "Or what?? Evidently, existing ID requirements for American citizens just aren’t adequate now, so Big Brother is forcing us through more hoops for the ‘right’ to travel within our own country."

Palin continued: "Other administrations delayed this newfangled, burdensome REAL ID requirement. Are you curious why its implementation is imperative now?? And who came up with this?"

"REAL ID is a 2005 George Bush-era Patriot Act overreach that went completely unenforced until Trump got into office. Let me guess: he’s playing 4D chess and I should just go along with it?" Massie wrote.

Former presidential candidate and ex-House Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, wrote on X, "Homeland Security chief Kristi Noem announced Friday that the notorious PATRIOT Act-era REAL ID scheme would go into effect at the end of the month. REAL ID is one of the greatest threats to Americans' civil liberties in decades."

Kentucky state Rep. TJ Roberts, a Republican, agreed with Paul on social media, writing, "Repeal REAL ID!!"

New Hampshire state Rep. Joe Alexander, a Republican, added on the accusations, calling REAL ID a "violation of the 14th Amendment of the US Constitution," and writing, "the Federal Government should not be mandating ID for its citizens to travel between states. Just say NO."

Cato Institute senior fellow Patrick Eddington told Fox News Digital, "I’m not aware of a single post-9/11 instance of an alleged or actual terrorist being apprehended, much less successfully boarding an airliner, with false ID credentials – which is the entire-stated rationale for REAL ID."

Eddington argued it imposed unconstitutional burdens on people who are seeking to travel by air versus train.

"The REAL ID Act effectively institutes a form of mass surveillance and verification that doesn't discriminate between those who have given reason for suspicion and those who haven’t, which is why it should never have been enacted in the first place."
Click to expand...
Wasn't the real ID being pushed to be enacted in May last year?
 
TC McQuade said:

'Mass surveillance': Conservatives sound alarm over Trump admin's REAL ID rollout (formally George Bush-era Patriot Act overreach)​


Conservatives are speaking out against the Trump administration’s plans to finally enact long-expected REAL ID laws in a bid to crack down on illegal immigration.

"If you think REAL ID is about election integrity, you’re going to be sorely disappointed. Someone has lied to you, or you’re engaged in wishful thinking. Please don’t shoot the messenger," Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., wrote on X earlier this week.

Responding to Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Kristi Noem's video announcing the May 7 REAL ID deadline, the former vice presidential candidate and Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin questioned in a lengthy post: "Or what?? Evidently, existing ID requirements for American citizens just aren’t adequate now, so Big Brother is forcing us through more hoops for the ‘right’ to travel within our own country."

Palin continued: "Other administrations delayed this newfangled, burdensome REAL ID requirement. Are you curious why its implementation is imperative now?? And who came up with this?"

"REAL ID is a 2005 George Bush-era Patriot Act overreach that went completely unenforced until Trump got into office. Let me guess: he’s playing 4D chess and I should just go along with it?" Massie wrote.

Former presidential candidate and ex-House Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, wrote on X, "Homeland Security chief Kristi Noem announced Friday that the notorious PATRIOT Act-era REAL ID scheme would go into effect at the end of the month. REAL ID is one of the greatest threats to Americans' civil liberties in decades."

Kentucky state Rep. TJ Roberts, a Republican, agreed with Paul on social media, writing, "Repeal REAL ID!!"

New Hampshire state Rep. Joe Alexander, a Republican, added on the accusations, calling REAL ID a "violation of the 14th Amendment of the US Constitution," and writing, "the Federal Government should not be mandating ID for its citizens to travel between states. Just say NO."

Cato Institute senior fellow Patrick Eddington told Fox News Digital, "I’m not aware of a single post-9/11 instance of an alleged or actual terrorist being apprehended, much less successfully boarding an airliner, with false ID credentials – which is the entire-stated rationale for REAL ID."

Eddington argued it imposed unconstitutional burdens on people who are seeking to travel by air versus train.

"The REAL ID Act effectively institutes a form of mass surveillance and verification that doesn't discriminate between those who have given reason for suspicion and those who haven’t, which is why it should never have been enacted in the first place."
Click to expand...
Having to prove you are who you say you are is low on my list of threats from the gov right now
 
@NHKevin although i am skeptical about enforcement among other things. I think it's trying to catch a horse after it already left the building. I'd rather see more eligibility enforcement instead of this. This still doesn't block a lot of problems like blow ins from the wrong state, etc.
 
drgrant said:
@NHKevin although i am skeptical about enforcement among other things. I think it's trying to catch a horse after it already left the building. I'd rather see more eligibility enforcement instead of this. This still doesn't block a lot of problems like blow ins from the wrong state, etc.
Click to expand...
RealID was never about voting and always about having federally issued papers to travel. I'm in favor of requiring ID to vote. I'm very much against requirements for a federal ID for domestic travel.
 
NHKevin said:
RealID was never about voting and always about having federally issued papers to travel. I'm in favor of requiring ID to vote. I'm very much against requirements for a federal ID for domestic travel.
Click to expand...
I guess I stated my opinion on it bad. I agree with you on the travel, but I dont think what theyre asking for for proof to get an ID is crazy
 

Similar threads

Then White House is hinting at adopting Biden/Harris approach to drum up cash for the beautiful bill🤮
Replies
7
Views
159
Horatio Alger Jr
Horatio Alger Jr
Blockbuster Exposé Ramps Up Stolen Valor Accusations Against Congressman: ‘He Didn’t Save My Life…I Don’t Recall Him Being There’
Replies
4
Views
129
robjax
R
  • Locked
Legality Of Requesting Non Black Service Workers To Come To My House Due To Aggressive Pit Bulls Who Target Black People
2
Replies
32
Views
310
drgrant
drgrant
PURE EVIL: Colorado House Democrats Pass Bill That Allows State to SEIZE Children from Their Parents if They “Misgender”
Replies
4
Views
136
GM-GUY
GM-GUY
Utah Passes Child Safety Law Requiring Apple to Verify User Age
Replies
0
Views
32
Reptile
Reptile
Back
Top Bottom