February 17, 2025
It is safe to say that nearly everyone believes that elections at all levels are critically important. After all, that activity chooses the people who serve us by operating our towns, counties, states and nation. And in America, we are blessed with the right and privilege of being able to select those people.
Elections therefore should be thoughtfully and efficiently organized, with some level of convenience, and highly secured by rules that protect the election process and results. That way, the candidates that the voters choose actually win the elections.
It is also safe to say that there is some degree of illegal activity in most every election, although sometimes very small.
With this in mind, in 2025, the House of Representatives passed the Safeguarding American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act. The aim of this legislation is to make elections more secure.
The original SAVE Act would require proof of citizenship to register to vote, but the revised SAVE America Act also increases the security of elections, requiring a government-issued photo ID to vote in federal elections.
Voter ID is hardly controversial. Gallup and Pew Research Center polls, among others, found that more than 80 percent of American citizens support photo ID to vote.
Yet, some oppose the idea of an ID or a photo ID as necessary to vote, saying that this puts some people in a situation where they will not be able to vote. However, why can anyone who is a citizen of the USA, and therefore eligible to vote, not be able to get the required ID with just a little effort?
As to the complaint of having any ID to vote, here are a few things that you need an ID or photo ID for: get a US Passport, get through a TSA checkpoint, apply for government programs, drive a motor vehicle, pick up prescriptions, buy alcohol, buy a gun, open a bank account, rent or buy a house or car, get married, rent a hotel room, and last, but not least: attend the Democrat National Convention.
So, Democrats believe that it is important to show a photo ID to participate in a convention that nominates the party’s candidate for President, but think it is unfair to require the voters who elect the President to show a photo ID.
Other examples of the apparent confused logic: Democrats want ICE agents to show photo IDs when arresting illegal aliens, but oppose photo IDs to vote.
Recently, Georgia Democrat Sen. Jon Ossoff required attendees to present a government-issued photo ID to enter his "Rally for Our Republic," but opposes a photo ID for federal elections.
And, Rep. Michael Cloud, R-Texas, noted on X that House rules require members to insert their identification card before voting on legislation.
“Notable that 213 Democrats just used their congressional photo ID to vote NO on a voter ID bill,” he wrote.
The late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia commented, “The burden of acquiring, possessing, and showing a free photo identification is simply not severe.”
Yes, it is possible, perhaps likely, that some American citizens will have problems under these requirements. No system is perfect. The current system stands as a hallmark of imperfection.
A poll by Newsmax/TIPP shows that Americans view illegal immigration negatively. Overall, Americans think illegal immigration impacts the U.S. negatively by a 50 to 21 percent margin, with 39 percent of Democrats, 58 percent of Republicans and 56 percent of Independents saying it’s a problem.
On the backing of ICE, while 78 percent of Republicans support ICE, only 22 percent of Democrats and 36 percent of Independents do.
It is difficult to understand why so many oppose ICE deporting illegal aliens with criminal charges, or who are just in the country illegally, which also is a crime. It has not always been like this.
Comparing recent Presidents on the subject of deportations and the reactions to that, data from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security show that Bill Clinton deported 12.5 million with no protests/riots; George W. Bush deported 10.3 million with no protests/riots; Barack Obama deported 5.3 million with no protests/riots; and Donald Trump has deported 1.5 million with 350 protests/riots.
Wonder why there is this huge difference in presidents doing the same thing for the same reason? Could political considerations, or personal feelings be involved?
Newsmax magazine published a piece in its February edition regarding federal government salaries. “The average salary in a large majority of federal agencies now exceeds $100,000 annually,” the article says.
Open The Books, the watchdog group that promotes transparency throughout the federal government, reported the agencies and departments with the highest average pay, and listed 12, along with the average annual pay and the number of employees.
Leading the pack is the Commodity Futures Trading Commission with 721 employees, and an average annual pay of $236,006. The largest number of employees is the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation with 6,036 employees, and an average annual pay of $173,627.
And the lowest paid of the group are the Office of Management and Budget, with 811 employees, and the Federal Trade Commission, with 1,302 employee, both of which have an average annual pay of $164,468.
No comments:
Post a Comment