Honestly, kinda hope they did require a passport to vote.
It'll be great to see what a shitshow it is when 70% of people in Arkansas [1] can't vote. It seems to be pretty evenly split amongst being the administration and their primary opposition although I guess devil might be in the details [2].
The PDF in [1] has an interesting stat. (from the Notes section)
>> Note: According to a survey conducted by the Pew Research Center, 79% of women in opposite-sex marriages have changed their surname to their spouse’s while 5% hyphenated their surname,
meaning that 84% of women who are currently or have been in opposite-sex marriages have changed their legal name and therefore do not posess a birth certificate that could prove their
identity and by extension citizenship status under the SAVE Act.
Am I reading correct that this would disqualify them from voting?
65 million "Estimated number of female citizens whose names do not match their birth certificate (last name change only)"
69 million "Estimated number of female citizens (15 years and older) whose names do not match their birth certificate (last name change or hyphenation)"
Guess they are working on the undermining females part of project 1525 now
For completeness:
>> Additionally, Pew reported that approximately 5% of men who marry also change their surname - nationwide this would account for approximately 4 million men.
It wouldn't disqualify them outright, but they have to bring more documentation to prove their identity. This is one reason my wife didn't change her name when we got married.
It use to be, but sometime in the early 2000's land/sea crossings to Canada and Mexico required a passport for re-entry. I remember reading most Americans that travel outside the US go to Mexico or Canada; changing to require a passport caused a large jump in applications
> A recent Economist/YouGov poll doesn’t show any party gap on this question, as Democrats (41%) and Republicans (38%) are equally likely to hold and not hold valid passports
Sorry, how is a 3% difference "no gap"? Am I misunderstanding those metrics? If a Democrat is 3% more likely to hold a passport, that seems like a potentially huge impact to elections.
It would be worse than the nationwide average. Battleground swing states would swing way right. The Republican voters in the suburbs have passports at a much higher rate than the Democrat voters in the poor neighborhoods.
Devil in the details is literally how you gerrymander. If there are say overwhelming democrat passport holders in say NY then you just lose that one state and win the rest.
That said, I'm just more interested in seeing the sheer number of people being told their voter registration is invalid and if that would backfire as individuals who supporter the administration are kinda overwhelmingly targeted (top of that passport list isn't the south).
It'll be great to see what a shitshow it is when 70% of people in Arkansas [1] can't vote. It seems to be pretty evenly split amongst being the administration and their primary opposition although I guess devil might be in the details [2].
[1]: https://www.americanprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/...
[2]: https://today.yougov.com/travel/articles/35414-only-one-thir...