Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

Heritage Foundation on 2020, number of non-citizen voters:
[img width=273.619 height=197]https://i.imgur.com/MY4kInK.png[/img]
If I'm viewing this correctly, there were 16 instances of non-citizens being charged with voter registration or voting between 2020 and 2024, and if my quick review is correct, only four of them actually voted.
https://electionfraud.heritage.org/search
According to the 5th Circuit in that 2016 decision I cited earlier, the Texas voter ID law (that was overturned) would have precluded as many as 600,000 American citizens from voting in TX. Is that number high? Probably. But let's say it was 1% of that: 6,000 American citizens denied the right to vote. That's just in Texas, but let's make that nationwide as a result of many states adopting these laws. That to stop those four people from voting--the 12 more who illegally registered (and were caught without a voter ID law)--don't even figure in. But what if they did? 16 people across the United States prevented from illegally voting. 6,000 citizens stripped of their legal right to vote. Does that make for a better democracy? I don't think so. Apparently many of you do. Cool. As noted, your side has won this argument.
Fearless: why die on the hill of protecting citizens' right to vote? That seems self explanatory.
But I'll indulge y'all a little more. On the cynical side (which is at least partly true) why does the Democratic party die on this hill? Because it thinks most of these people will vote for Democrats--but also, probably more importantly, because it wants to hold the mantle of protecting minority voter rights, which Democrats believe will attract more votes from minority voters, even those not directly impacted.
Why do civil rights organizations die on this hill? Because their stated mission is to protect individual civil rights, and the right to vote is the core right in a democracy.
Believe it or not, some people, regardless of party, believe in protecting individuals' voting rights, regardless of how that may or may not help a particular party. I like to think that describes me.

You keep harping on this lack of evidence of voters fraud but I already addressed this point.

Evidence is inherently hard to find because it is an illegal activity and people engaging in illegal activities tend to avoid leaving records.

However, I did present admissions by corrupt Democratic officials of industrial scale voter fraud in Chicago and Texas in the 1960 Presidential Election.

Your rambling "no credible evidence of significant fraud" was true of this for decades after the 1960 election. It was only after most everyone who would be upset had died that these admissions came out ~50 years after the massive Corrupt Democratic Big City Political Machine fraud occurred.

Assuming the Corrupt Democrats follow that script the admissions of recent Democratic corruption won't be public until the 2070's.

Here is another question:
I have a Constitutional right to keep and bear arms but I have to have a DL to buy a gun.

How is that different?

Why are you willing to accept that?

Sounds noble enough.  I've never heard of the University of Austin.

I 100% favor the voter ID law. I don’t really think it would affect all but the smallest portion of the population. On a good day only 20-30% of eligible voters will vote anyway. 

You’ll never convince me that the way Biden and the democrats handled the border from 2020 to 2024 was anything less than a ploy to get more democratic voters into the country. 

Remember, most of the border crossers are still here and will remain here for decades. I think it’s wise to put measures in place to keep noncitizens from voting.  

I’m still struggling to understand how a few % of the population can’t get legit papers to prove citizenship. Birth certificates and other government docs are readily available. 

To be clear: non-citizens should not be voting in federal elections. I absolutly agree with that.

There is practically no reliable evidence establisthing that non-citizents are voting in federal elections in even the triple digits out of tens of millions of votes cast.

Voter ID is a solution searching for a problem.

Voter ID is mandatory in the EU. "We" want to be like them, yes?


https://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2021/06/04/study-46-out-of-47-european-countries-require-photo-id-to-vote-n2590454

perhaps the percentage of voting fraud is VERY small - not enough to tip even a local election - fine
I'm not a believer in perception is reality.  If reality doesn't match perception, then chance the perception
but, if it's easier to change the perception of elections being at risk to fraud and lack of security by requiring registration and IDs, than convincing the public to change their perception, then ...........
Let's say the new requirement would be a considerable burden to 10% of the public because they are poor or simply have trouble with simple requirements.
Then let's guess that 25% of those people actually care enough to vote.

I understand the principal of protecting citizen's rights, not just the poor.
Is protecting this principal worth the effort?  Especially when that effort might cause your party to lose elections.

The voting thing is easy - make election day a paid holiday.  So the ID thing can fix a problem that doesn't exist, but at the same time doesn't make it hard on anyone to comply with it.
It's one day every 2 years, it won't put anyone out of business.  If it does, you don't have much of a business.

Deal?

I think the 1960 Chicago thing was manufactured votes from "officials", not individual voters voting who shouldn't.  Different kind of fraud.

Have photo ID with reasonable protections for voters who struggle to obtain one, as we do here.