From WABE Politics News:
The House scheduled a vote Wednesday evening on Speaker Mike Johnson’s proposal that links the funding of the federal government for the new budget year with a mandate that states […]
Because there are already multiple checks and barriers to entry in order to register to vote.
“What’s the harm in adding one more” you might ask?
Historically speaking, voter fraud happens at extremely low rates, and not nearly often enough to influence national or state level elections. When voter fraud does happen it’s predominantly someone (cough republicans cough) casting a vote for a recently deceased relative, and not an illegal alien voting fraudulently. Barriers to voting have a long and storied history in the US of specifically targeting minorities instead of preserving the power of the people.
This is why it is controversial. It’s targeting a non-issue, distracting from the actual issue, and intended to suppress the votes of vulnerable citizens.
This appears to be referbcing registering to vote, “new voters”. Not to actually vote. Is that wrong?
You already have to register in order to vote. When you register, the state confirms your eligibility to vote. These “proof of citizenship” “tests” that republicans continue to bring up are a very targeted attempt to reduce voter turnout in specific groups of people.
I understand what you’re saying and am in agreement if that’s the case, yet the article solely mentions requiring proof of citizenship across the country when registering. What tests are they trying to add to the equation? If it’s just requiring proof, and everywhere already does that, how is this any different then ensuring some states can’t remove that requirement from their local laws?