2aHawaii
General Topics => Political Discussion => Topic started by: Flapp_Jackson on March 26, 2025, 12:18:47 PM
-
President Trump signed an executive order requiring proof of citizenship in order to register to vote in federal elections.
Non-U.S. citizens are already not allowed to vote in federal elections.
But under the order, the national mail voter registration form will require
that applicants provide either a U.S. passport, a REAL ID driver's
license or state-issued card compliant with REAL standards, or a "valid
Federal or State government-issued photo identification."
The order directs states and local election officials to record and verify the
documents proving U.S. citizenship and threatens to withhold federal
election-related funds from states that do not comply.
The directive also takes aim at mail-in voting ‒ a practice Trump has long
criticized ‒ by instructing his attorney general, Pam Bondi, to "take all
necessary steps" to ensure states don't count absentee ballots that arrive
after Election Day.
Trump also ordered Bondi to enter into "information-sharing agreements"
with state election officials to target individuals who have committed
election fraud, registered to vote despite being ineligible, provided false
information on voter registration forms and intimidated or threatened
election officials or voters.
In addition, the order updates federal election standards for voting
systems by requiring all ballots to produce a voter-verifiable paper
record to prevent fraud or mistakes.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2025/03/25/trump-executive-order-voter-id/82657485007/
-
I question whether he can do this with an executive order but it is a step in the right direction. Realistically this is something congress should do.
-
I question whether he can do this with an executive order but it is a step in the right direction. Realistically this is something congress should do.
Why would you question it? Because you know the law doesn't allow it? Or just because you want to oppose anything Trump is doing even when you know you agree with the action on principle?
Seriously. If Congress did most of what they should be doing, we wouldn't need someone like Trump in the WH. Congress is the reason USAID has become a piggy bank for activists and black holes where money just vanishes.
-
Why would you question it? Because you know the law doesn't allow it? Or just because you want to oppose anything Trump is doing even when you know you agree with the action on principle?
Seriously. If Congress did most of what they should be doing, we wouldn't need someone like Trump in the WH. Congress is the reason USAID has become a piggy bank for activists and black holes where money just vanishes.
Because it involves money allocated by congress. A president cannot refuse to spend money that congress has ordered to be spent. This means that, depending on the specific language of the bill that allocated election funds to states, an order to not distribute those funds could be disobeying congress' order for the funds.
Congress has abdicated way too much authority over the years leading to all sorts of problems including tariffs, too much discretionary spending, regulations implemented by agencies that can reach too far, etc etc etc. I suspect we can agree on that point?
-
Because it involves money allocated by congress. A president cannot refuse to spend money that congress has ordered to be spent. This means that, depending on the specific language of the bill that allocated election funds to states, an order to not distribute those funds could be disobeying congress' order for the funds.
Congress has abdicated way too much authority over the years leading to all sorts of problems including tariffs, too much discretionary spending, regulations implemented by agencies that can reach too far, etc etc etc. I suspect we can agree on that point?
There's no absolute duty that the executive branch must spend every dollar Congress allocates. In fact, many of the programs have conditions in order to qualify for the money. So an allocation may only be partially spent if few states qualify.
Get a grip. Remember when Biden threatened Ukraine with stopping a Billion Dollar loan if the prosecutor wasn't fired that day? Didn't hear Congress or the media screaming how that was unconstitutional, did you?
-
20 million dead people still collecting social security and voting
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SrOAY3oQ4oc
-
20 million dead people still collecting social security and voting
it's not been that long ago that Obama was campaigning for his first term as President. His tactics for replacing private health insurance was to overwhelm the system with something like the ACA. Once it's shown the costs are unaffordable and there's no private insurer able to offer affordable policies any longer, the government would step in with single payer healthcare -- i.e. the US version of the Canadian healthcare system.
They used the "overwhelm the system" for law enforcement and BLM riots as well as clogging the immigration system with millions of people claiming refugee status.
I wouldn't be surprised if voting was being treated similarly. Too many illegal votes via mail-in to figure out which are legal, so they have to count them all.
When you depend on a government system to provide services and safety, it's not unreasonable to imagine what happens when more is demanded than can be efficiently and quickly provided.
They still don't have a good handle on the amount of fraud in the COVID recovery give-aways. Talk about a scenario where the system was overwhelmed!
COVID-19 Fraud Enforcement Task Force Releases 2024 Report
To date, the efforts of the task force’s member agencies has led to
criminal charges against more than 3,500 defendants for losses of
over $2 billion, civil enforcement actions resulting in more than 400
civil settlements and judgments of over $100 million, and over
$1.4 billion seized or forfeited.
https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/pr/covid-19-fraud-enforcement-task-force-releases-2024-report
-
Huge increase in migrants who were allowed into the US and many got social security numbers.
Yes the big fish in this plot need to be prosecuted.
https://youtu.be/YxS-iGd0TiQ
-
Huge increase in migrants who were allowed into the US and many got social security numbers.
Yes the big fish in this plot need to be prosecuted.
There have been stories for many years of illegals filing for tax refunds with dozens or even thousands using the same address. Many also use stolen or invalid SS numbers.
IRS directors have said it's not their job to investigate these kinds of tax returns.
Lots more details in this Snopes article -- one of the few they actually got right.
The Internal Revenue Service sent 23,994 tax refunds worth a combined
$46,378,040 to "unauthorized" alien workers who all used the same
address in Atlanta, Ga., in 2011, according to the Treasury Inspector
General for Tax Administration (TIGTA).
That was not the only Atlanta address theoretically occupied by thousands
of "unauthorized" alien workers receiving millions in federal tax refunds in 2011.
In fact, according to a TIGTA audit report published last year, four of the top
ten addresses to which the IRS sent thousands of tax refunds to
"unauthorized" aliens were in Atlanta.
The IRS sent 11,284 refunds worth a combined $2,164,976 to unauthorized
alien workers at a second Atlanta address; 3,608 worth $2,691,448 to a third;
and 2,386 worth $1,232,943 to a fourth.
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/irs-sent-thousands-of-tax-refunds-same-addresses/
-
When I renewed my drivers license, I had to show birth cert and proof of residency like insurance declarations page, water bill, or eletric bill.
I wonder if this would be acceptable as I'm assuming this is the SOP for all hawaii drivers licenses.
-
When I renewed my drivers license, I had to show birth cert and proof of residency like insurance declarations page, water bill, or eletric bill.
I wonder if this would be acceptable as I'm assuming this is the SOP for all hawaii drivers licenses.
If you showed the DMV proof of citizenship and Hawaii residency, you should have a gold star on your license marking it as meeting the Real ID requirements.
Anyone applying for a REAL ID compliant Hawaii State Identification Card
for the first time must present in-person documentary proof of legal name,
date of birth, social security number, legal presence and Hawaii principal
residence address.
https://hidot.hawaii.gov/hawaiistateid/
(https://i.imgur.com/6JaH1Iu.jpeg)
Starting May 7, 2025, travelers flying to or from Hawaii will need to present
a REAL ID-compliant driver’s license or another accepted form of identification
to board their flight.
...
All travelers 18 years and older will need a REAL ID. Travelers under the age
of 18 don’t need a REAL ID to fly domestically, as long as they are accompanied
by an adult. However, unaccompanied minors will need a REAL ID or other
acceptable forms of ID.
...
If you don’t have a REAL ID by the deadline, you can still use other forms of
valid ID such as a U.S. passport or passport card, and military ID.
https://www.aloha-hawaiian.com/blog/essential-real-id-hawaii-travel-requirements-what-you-need-to-know-for-2025/
The implementation date for requiring Real ID to fly as opposed to an older driver's license kept slipping, partly due to COVID.
So, if the date remains May 7th, and you don't travel with a military ID or passport, you'll need a Real ID star on your license to fly to or from US airports.
May 7th is a federal deadline, so all states should be enforcing it by then.
On May 7, 2025, U.S. travelers must be REAL ID compliant to
board domestic flights and access certain federal facilities.
https://www.dhs.gov/real-id
-
I like sampo Tina
-
I like sampo Tina
AI hooks another victim.
:geekdanc:
i suspect Tina may be trans. She has bro eyes. :rofl:
-
An executive order for something that was already required when voting in federal elections?
Am I missing something?
Or did the demorats screw everything up so bad that half the country's leadership doesn't even know this fact?
People should get more involved in what our government is doing.
Always question Authority. Especially when the demorats are in charge.
-
An executive order for something that was already required when voting in federal elections?
Am I missing something?
Or did the demorats screw everything up so bad that half the country's leadership doesn't even know this fact?
People should get more involved in what our government is doing.
Always question Authority. Especially when the demorats are in charge.
Yep. The secret ingredient you missed is that the states, not the feds, setup and run voter registration and polling procedures.
The Constitution says you have to be a citizen and over 18, but it stops short of requiring that states verify the voter meets those requirements.
Many states simply trust that when a person signs a registration form for voting, that's all that's needed. Unless there's evidence or an allegation provided to the elections office for the state, there's no real way to catch liars.
In HI, voters showing up in person at polls have to show ID. But, they accept a signature on a mail-in ballot envelope in order to verify the voter's identity. Only if the signature looks far enough off will they contact the voter to verify that's actually their signature.
it all starts with registration. That's were elections officials should be verifying citizenship and residency before adding anyone to voter roles. One of the worst programs for adding ineligible people to registration roles has been Motor Voter programs where you can ask to be registered when you apply for a drivers license. Many states allow illegals to obtain licenses, so there's a real problem automatically registering people at the DMV.
-
There's no absolute duty that the executive branch must spend every dollar Congress allocates. In fact, many of the programs have conditions in order to qualify for the money. So an allocation may only be partially spent if few states qualify.
Get a grip. Remember when Biden threatened Ukraine with stopping a Billion Dollar loan if the prosecutor wasn't fired that day? Didn't hear Congress or the media screaming how that was unconstitutional, did you?
That depends on the specific language of the bill passed by congress. If the bill said the president can spend $1 billion on a program then the president can decided to spend some of it or even none of it. However if the bill said that the money must be spent on a program then the president does not have the authority to refuse to spend it.
Biden threatening to withhold money from Ukraine and Trump threatening to withhold money from Ukraine would both violate the constitution. Both sides complained about this in case you can't recall.
-
That depends on the specific language of the bill passed by congress. If the bill said the president can spend $1 billion on a program then the president can decided to spend some of it or even none of it. However if the bill said that the money must be spent on a program then the president does not have the authority to refuse to spend it.
Biden threatening to withhold money from Ukraine and Trump threatening to withhold money from Ukraine would both violate the constitution. Both sides complained about this in case you can't recall.
Show me where any of the money Trump is not wasting was mandated in a bill to be spent.
General statements are not proof of anything.
Do your homework, and try again.
-
Show me where any of the money Trump is not wasting was mandated in a bill to be spent.
General statements are not proof of anything.
Do your homework, and try again.
I didn't say it was or wasn't breaking the law, I said it depends on the specific language of the bills passed.
Go read my comments again.
I said "A president cannot refuse to spend money that congress has ordered to be spent." I didn't say given permission to be spent or allocates.
-
I didn't say it was or wasn't breaking the law, I said it depends on the specific language of the bills passed.
Go read my comments again.
I said "A president cannot refuse to spend money that congress has ordered to be spent." I didn't say given permission to be spent or allocates.
"It depends" seems to be your wiggle phrase of late. It drives home the fact you can't seem to post anything definitive other than untrue insults.
-
"It depends" seems to be your wiggle phrase of late. It drives home the fact you can't seem to post anything definitive other than untrue insults.
I said it depends because it depends. Are you going to sit here and tell me it doesn't depend on the text of the law especially after you said "many of the programs have conditions in order to qualify for the money"?
You going to tell me laws don't depend on the text of the law? :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy:
-
"It depends" seems to be your wiggle phrase of late. It drives home the fact you can't seem to post anything definitive other than untrue insults.
He likes to leave room for when hes wrong and wont admit it in a post. But in his mind he justifies to himself.
Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk
-
He likes to leave room for when hes wrong and wont admit it in a post. But in his mind he justifies to himself.
To be right is not just a matter of winning an argument;
it’s really a question of what is true.
-- Terry Eagleton