re: Mike Lee Fires Back After Cornyn Says SAVE America Act ‘Not Gonna Happen’

quote:

---

At this point you’re making Cornyn’s argument for him. If the strategy requires an exhausting, high-risk, all-hands-on-deck procedural marathon that Senate leadership has no intention of pursuing, then “not gonna happen” starts looking less like ignorance and more like realism.

---

you just made Lee’s argument for him

he said if the GOP leadership were truly behind the will of their constituents, then an “exhausting, high-risk, all-hands-on-deck procedural marathon“ would lead to the bill’s passage - but its clear that Coryn/Thune et al are lying when they say they would vote in favor if it weren’t for those gol-darned ol’ Senate procedures

quote:

---

which group do you think would be more likely to make the effort to obtain them: poor urban potential Democrats or poor rural potential Republicans?

---

If I gave an opinion on this, I would just be guessing.

What is certain is that people who live in the larger towns and cities have easier access to primary documentation such as certified birth certificates and passports. First time passport applicants must appear in person to submit their application. Birth certificates must also usually be applied for in person. For a passport, you may have to appear at a large post office, at a federal building, or at some clerk of court offices. For a birth certificate, some clerks of court but mostly at state offices.

The more rural your area, the more work and time it takes to get documents. Also, neither is free.

So which political group would be more likely in the long run? I don't know. But what the statistics already show is that a higher percentage of Democrats have already gone through the trouble. If we are looking short term, like to the mid-term elections, the SAVE Act would likely create an advantage for democrats in a close election.

quote:

---

Are you suggesting that only passports would be allowed for identification? What about “Real ID” driver licenses?

---

Real ID driver's licenses is not documentary proof of citizenship.

quote:

---

People who are legal U.S. residents but not citizens also can obtain a REAL ID. According to the Department of Homeland Security, only five states — Michigan, Minnesota, New York, Vermont and Washington — issue enhanced driver's licenses, which are REAL ID-compliant and prove citizenship as well as identity. Other states, such as Montana, South Dakota, Florida and Iowa have passed or are considering legislation that requires licenses to include citizenship markers.

---

Gotcha. The John McCain approach. So we get burdened with Obamacare and no Save Act? Republicans really suck.

quote:

---

. It is a Bill that will prohibit American citizens from voting.

---

Understood.

How many of those are cancelled out by some states (California) basically encouraging illegals to vote?

That one state may make up that differential all by itself.

Lol

quote:

---

Bitch, drop the act.

---

I love it!!

quote:

---

There’s no evidence of this happening. California law, like the law of every state, prohibits noncitizens from voting in any state or federal election.

---

How does cali verify these things?

quote:

---

You’ve moved the discussion from “this can pass” to “this is theoretically possible.” Those aren’t the same claim. At this point you’re making Cornyn’s argument for him. If the strategy requires an exhausting, high-risk, all-hands-on-deck procedural marathon that Senate leadership has no intention of pursuing, then “not gonna happen” starts looking less like ignorance and more like realism.

---

So, the OP stated that Lee indicated there are options including a true filibuster. I posted that the senate is lazy because they won’t actually push a true filibuster, You did not even know that the true filibuster had a limit on how many times each senator could speak. And I’m the one that moved the discussion?

It is not theoretically possible. It is actually possible, it is just hard and will require the Republican majority to be inconvenienced for a while. 70% of the electorate supports this bill. I can almost guarantee if they push a true filibuster, it’s going to take as much political will from the Democrats to openly filibuster this as it will take Republicans to push the filibuster.

quote:

---

The problem with the SAVE Act right now is that it mandates only certain kinds of ID, which tens of millions of American citizens do not have. It is a Bill that will prohibit American citizens from voting.

---

How do these millions of people have jobs when you need to prove citizenship in order to be employed?

quote:

---

So, the OP stated that Lee indicated there are options including a true filibuster. I posted that the senate is lazy because they won’t actually push a true filibuster, You did not even know that the true filibuster had a limit on how many times each senator could speak. And I’m the one that moved the discussion? It is not theoretically possible. It is actually possible, it is just hard and will require the Republican majority to be inconvenienced for a while. 70% of the electorate supports this bill. I can almost guarantee if they push a true filibuster, it’s going to take as much political will from the Democrats to openly filibuster this as it will take Republicans to push the filibuster.

---

Even if the procedural path exists, Lee’s confidence that it would succeed depends on assumptions about Democratic behavior, republican unity, senate scheduling, and political incentives that haven’t been demonstrated.