I guess I’m lucky that my dad had the foresight to laminate my original birth certificate 43 years ago and it’s been in my possession since I was 17 and I’ve never needed to acquire a duplicate.
When I got my WA driver’s license upgraded to an EDL in 2022 they had some trouble with it because it wouldn’t fit through their scanner, but they were eventually able to process it without cutting it open.
Nothing on that list addresses the problem of name mismatch. Unless you happen to keep your library card and utility bills in your maiden name, or have expired drivers licenses in your maiden name in your filing cabinet, you still have to prove the link between the various versions of your name. Your sister sent a copy of her marriage license; if she’d been married multiple times, she might need multiple marriage certificates and divorce paperwork, all obtained from separate offices with separate fees, requirements, and timeframes.
And lawyers are so inexpensive, and courts work so quickly. ([Sarcasm off])
Why would you want to amend the vital records? You were born as a particular name; changing the name on your birth certificate presents its own set of problems.
Relying on elected officials tends to work better if you’re trying to convince your local government office to mend their ways. In my case, e.g., my local officials in Kansas have no influence on the state in which I was born; meanwhile, officials in that other state have limited interest because I am not their constituent and am not going to be able to vote for them.
Thank you for the link to the Senate bill; I will read that tomorrow.
But they may be able to hook you up with an org that deals with these kinds of issues. Like, for instance, my school periodically has a name change clinic. If the SAVE America Act somehow passes (unlikely), I’m sure a bunch more orgs will pop up to help get people registered, both national and in each state. Because, to be frank, there’s a lot of married women out there whose names don’t match their birth certificate.
You’re right though: most people won’t or can’t pay for a lawyer. Elected officials are not going to be thrilled when 1/5 of their constituents suddenly can’t vote. It’s no accident that the bill exempts states that buy into the SAVE system (turn over their voter rolls to the federal govt).
~Max
Depends on whether it’s the right one-fifth. That’s the foundation of the GOP’s plan.
The other issue to consider, as was already pointed out upthread, is that opposing voter ID is going to potentially cost Democrats politically, given that the Pew research poll last year showed that 83% of Americans support ID. It is not a situation where Democrats face only upside from opposing ID but no downside.
Which is why it’s such a valuable talking point and wedge issue for asshole Republicans who get to pretend they’re talking about election security while actually maliciously tipping the scales.
As I said above, I live in a country where voting is compulsory, but also where the state makes sure the ballot box is freely available to everyone.
That’s how it should be, and in that model, I have no objection whatsoever to mandating voter ID — as long as the rules clearly and unambiguously establish the prerequisites for access. The offices where ID is acquired must be geographically agnostic with mandated long opening hours, so all voters everywhere have equal opportunity to get the necessary ID. The ID must be available to everyone at no cost. If different forms of ID are accepted, these must again be demographically agnostic and must not favor one or another voting bloc. And so on, and so forth.
My objection is not to voter ID itself. My objection is to skewed rules which allow the fucking Republicans to game the system in their favor. Eliminate that skewing and gamification, and go right ahead, mandate voter ID.
But the fucking Republicans will then misrepresent my objection and claim I’m “against voter ID” because eeeeeeeeeeeevil Dumbocrats want illegal aliens to vote! and other dishonest bullshit.
Do not perpetuate said bullshit by pretending the fucking Republicans are arguing in good faith. Do not, because they are not.
I looked into getting a copy of my birth certificate for the real i.d. awhile back. I’m almost 70 and I was born in Louisiana. I’m probably forgetting some of the details but my age meant it might or might not be in the normal office so I would have had to apply and pay for a copy at two different locations. It just felt like too much and I think I hoped I’d die before it became an issue. I’m optimistic like that.
But also, I have been married 3 times, divorced once and widowed once. I changed my name with each marriage and even returned to my maiden name between being widowed and my third marriage. I no longer have any of the paperwork to prove any of that.
I’ve voted under my current name for 30 years. I have no problem with showing my drivers license. I’ve had that for ages too, but that would no longer suffice, from what I understand.
I’m sure my situation is not typical, but there are a million stories out here.
In my life, the only time I’ve ever heard of someone cheating at the voting booth, it has always been a republican. They know they can’t win without cheating.
If what I’ve read is true, you may need a birth certificate AND a driver’s license with the same surname. So just getting your birth certificate won’t be enough. The cheaters are happy to disenfranchise all women since it’s males who vote Orange most strongly.
Perhaps if you wear a MAGA cap when you go to register, the MAGA registrars will let your “improper” documentation slide.
Not just the usual MAGA-ite drunkards and morons. GOP officers and radio hosts have been convicted of, e.g., casting illegal mail-in votes for estranged wife.
While skimming this thread I noticed a few insipid pro-MAGA posts. Please alert me when the thread moves to BBQ Pit so I can respond to those posts.
For what it’s worth, your drivers license and your birth certificate can have different names as long as you have a bridging document, e.g. a marriage certificate or a court order. This is the same documentation married women who have taken their husbands’ last names need in order to apply for a passport. When I was first married and had to get my wife set up with the DoD, I just carried her birth certificate and our marriage certificate together everywhere and we never had a problem.
I’m sure there are people who might have a hard time gathering this documentation, but I speculate that there’s a large overlap with the group of women who have been registered to vote in the same state for decades, don’t intend on moving states, and so don’t really need to dig this stuff up.
Feel free to call them out anytime in the what were you thinking thread eh?
I think it is here:
One concern I have is role of the presidentially appointed Election Assistance Commission in promulgating regulations.
Also in the newer SAVE Act text:
The Election Assistance Commission, as presently staffed, may act responsibly. But once the commissioners are mostly recent Trump appointees, watch out.
I heard that the Act calls for potential jail time for election workers who allow people to vote who don’t have the right IDs. Is that true?
Here is my nightmare. The bill will be filibustered in the senate, but the Republicans will decide that if they can control the national elections, they never have to fear a Democratically-controlled congress, specifically senate ever again and therefore there is no danger in ending the filibuster. Then they can pass laws that say, for example, that the only votes that can count are cast in person on election day between the hours of noon and 3 PM and no county may have more than ten polling places.
No.
The up to five years (so prison, not jail) is for registering people to vote who did not present the right ID.
See:
Maybe the criminal penalties be amended to cover election day voter ID. But for now, there’s no reason for folks here to fear becoming an official at their local polling place, except maybe if your state has same-day registration.
P.S. North Dakota seems not to have voter registration. Are the few Democrats there then all safe?
Thune is adamant that they’re not doing away with the filibuster.
“There aren’t anywhere close to the votes, not even close, to nuking the filibuster,” Thune said at a press conference following a meeting of Senate Republicans on Tuesday. “So that idea is something, although it continues to be put out there. … That doesn’t have a future.”
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., has slammed the bill as “Jim Crow 2.0,” designed to disenfranchise Americans who don’t readily have access to a birth certificate or passport.
“They make it so hard to get any kind of voter ID that more than 20 million legitimate people, mainly poorer people and people of color, will not be able to vote under this law,” Schumer said Sunday on CNN. “We will not let it pass in the Senate. We are fighting it tooth and nail. It’s an outrageous proposal that shows the sort of political bias of the MAGA right.”
Yay Shumer!
Mitch McConnell is refusing to let the bill get a committee vote.
Well shit, where’d that cone from??
McConnell is a solid Republican, but not a MAGA.
Note that even if the Senate passes it- unlikely- it could be unconstitutional-
And for those who will undoubtedly come back and say “SCOTUS is in trumps pocket”-
trumps favorite weapon against “furriners”.
From the article
Last year, McConnell wrote in The Wall Street Journal that such a bill would give a future Democratic president and Congress the ability to “use more sweeping mandates to carry out a complete federal takeover of American elections.”
Essentially paranoia over stuff their own party is already doing.