by Bert Peterson, American Thinker:
In March of this year, voters residing in Huntington Beach, California approved a measure requiring voters to show ID prior to casting a ballot. On September 29, however, California Gov. Gavin Newsom approved legislation — SB 1174 — to outlaw such measures throughout the state. The rationale for the prohibition of such identification of voters is stated in the legislation itself.
TRUTH LIVES on at https://sgtreport.tv/
In Section 1, at (a)(2), it states that such requirement for ID is not necessary because, when registering to vote, California already requires adequate identification — “a driver’s license number, a California identification number, or the last four digits of their social security number.” (Note that California does not require an ID itself — which, in two of the alternatives, would include photos — but only the “number.”)
Later in the section, at (a)(4), California goes on to assert:
“Voter identification laws have historically been used to disenfranchise low-income voters, voters of color, voters with disabilities, and senior voters.”
In passing, we may ask how Newsom and his colleagues know that the supporters of such ID laws had such a nefarious purpose, and not the one they said they had — that is, to ensure the integrity of the election?
Aside from that, aren’t voter registration requirements a necessary part of voter-identification laws in any case? If so, would not then the numbers that California requires for just as easily “disenfranchise low-income workers [etc.]” as they would if the actual ID documents they are supposedly taken from were required under the process, not of registration, but of actually voting?
To put it another way, if persons are required to produce one of three identification numbers for registration, how can requiring them to produce, when voting, the same identification number, but (for the driver’s license or state ID) with a photo — how does that somehow become a nefarious scheme to disenfranchise voters?
One more question: if an identification number is required at registration, but not when voting, then how are election judges supposed to know that the person appearing before them is the same person that registered? If such ID is not going to be required when a person votes, then is the point of requiring it for registration?
(One might also ask why an ID without a photo — a social security number — is also accepted, and also, why only part of it is required?)
Read More @ AmericanThinker.com
