410 Comments
User's avatar
Jessica Jolly's avatar

I think this legislation was a sop for the MAGA contingent. By your own logic, most Mainers have a driver license or state ID for which they provided birth cert or passport and residency. So why, all of a sudden, do we have to pass a law that solves a non-existent issue? Sorry, but this is a nuisance law that distracts from

bigger issues. There are plenty of REAL issues that need addressing, whether MAGA people think so or not.

Expand full comment
Darin Long's avatar

Cities like Portland is already allowing non citizens to vote in local elections. They have for the past few years.

Expand full comment
Jessica Jolly's avatar

But this law applies to Federal elections. Local jurisdictions SHOULD be able to

Determine (through a vote or referendum) who can vote in a local election. There are already safeguards built into Federal elections. And fraudulent voting is a major NON-issue. The instance of

voter fraud is MINISCULE compared to the total number of votes cast. (A Google search will return many reputable sources ALL of which concur that voter fraud is a non-issue). Maybe Jared voted for it b/c he needs to show some support for the “red” legislation that many in his district support. My point is that he doesn’t need “blue wash” his vote. He voted for it b/c he has to be seen to address his constituents’ concerns. But the SAVE act is truly a case of “the emperor has no clothes”—it “solves” a non-existent problem. And given the number of problems we have in our country, it is sad to see time, money and political capital wasted on a law that does nothing meaningful, other than inconvenience legitimate voters.

Expand full comment
GJ Loft ME CA FL IL NE CT MI's avatar

I have emailed Congressman Golden many times asking him if he reads Dr. Heather Cox Richardson's daily newsletter. He has never responded.

Dr. Cox Richardson is one of his most famous constituents with several million followers. She is not a Democrat or a Republican. She defines herself as a Lincoln-Republican and she is one of the leading American history scholars in the US.

Check her out on Substack if you haven't already. Too bad the Congressman won't admit to reading her daily newsletter.

Expand full comment
SClair's avatar

Thank you. I like that piece of information. I find it helpful.

As to this site I think Jared has it so we can blow off steam. Many on here are not even people who vote in the 2nd District from some of the comments. He calls himself a Blue Dog Dem. There are not too many of those in his party. They are silent as the vocal Marxist give the impression that they are the party. I will check out Dr Heather Cox thank you! Army Brat NE, Europe now retired.

Expand full comment
Andrew Haynes's avatar

She is far from middle of the road. I've just read two of her articles and she's leaning pretty heavily left. She's obviously no fan of Trump.

Expand full comment
Vicki Loveridge's avatar

That may be true with today's take on what is left, right and middle. What used to be 'middle' has been propagandized as radical. HCR is however very knowledgeable on the Constitution, rule of law and history of our country. Given that knowledge it is no surprise that she is not a 'fan' of someone that is apparently throwing out the Constitution in favor of autocracy/oligarchy.

Expand full comment
SClair's avatar

now that is interesting. You can be knowledgeable but still be wrong. The teaching institutions do not teach the completeness of the Constitution. And Congress is failing to do its job. They write Laws that need to be in line with the Constitution. Many are NOT. And are in clear violation of out Rights. That said. Then the Bill/law gets pass to the various agencies and some person themself or with some others. That were not elected reinterpret the meaning of this new Bill/law and produces layers of red tape. IF it goes to Court there is another group of people with different mindsets (The Constitution or Revising the Constitution into something totally different). There is no autocracy/oligarchy unless you believe in Marx. What you see is Laws that are actually already in the Constitution being cleared of the red tape. And returned to the Original Intent of the Founders; in most cased. There are some portions that need to be clarified in light of misuse and abuse. It would be wonderful to see people charged with treason for violations of their Oaths of Office. There are many in Congress that clearly hate this Country and do not believe in what the Constitution is or have read it.

Expand full comment
Nancy Mahar's avatar

Richardson cites her sources for her articles. No fake news! I like her views; it is what I believe America is all about and what I grew up with as far as its values, customs, etc. I accept change if there is a good reason for it. NO Gulf of America for me!

Expand full comment
SClair's avatar

I saw that and unsubscribed. I like both sides and try see the point if it is valid or not. Hard to see the point when so much garbage in the way.

Expand full comment
Andrew Haynes's avatar

This is exactly why we need this law. Why would I, a citizen, want a non-citizen to be allowed to vote and make rules benefiting themselves?

Expand full comment
N C J's avatar

This makes me sick. There is no problem to be solved here. I truly believed voting for Jared. Golden would be better than voting for a republican. Now I see it doesn’t make any difference. In the next election, I will just do a write in candidate if the same choices are presented

Expand full comment
Andrew Haynes's avatar

What are you talking about? Let me get this clear - You want people who are not citizens voting in Local, State and Federal elections? If so that makes me sick.

Expand full comment
Richard smith's avatar

Andrew-non citizens cannot vote now. How did you miss this little reality

Expand full comment
Cathy Smith's avatar

It is easy to get a non valid SSI number that is why the SAVE Act. BUT this will NOT do anything. If you do not have a birth certificate (most folks born at home like the Amish do NOT have one) you cannot vote. A lot of illegals do not have a regular birth certificate so they will NOT even ATTEMPT to vote in any coming election that is monitored. SO WHAT DOES THE SAVE ACT DO except penalize American citizens that cannot get their records or do not know how?

Expand full comment
Andrew Haynes's avatar

You're right the way I've seen our voting system work there's little chance to do this but I don't think it's a stretch, given the far left climate here in Southern Maine, that that could change so why not make it into law?

Expand full comment
Jeffrey Campbell's avatar

oh really? are you sure of that or just saying it because someone told you that?

Expand full comment
Kevin J Cox's avatar

Moron. It is already illegal in Federal elections. Who fucking cares about legal, non citizen immigrants voting in local elections.? They live there, too.

Expand full comment
Andrew Haynes's avatar

You're right. I guess our votes count for nothing anyway so we should just anyone vote, no questions asked. Oh boy.

Expand full comment
Doug Baston's avatar

If there is no problem, why do you care? Congress takes pointless, symbolic votes all the time. And why on earth would you throw your vote away on a write-in? That elects a Republican. Most adults don't expect to agree with their representatives 100% of the time. Let it go.

Expand full comment
Richard smith's avatar

They are not allowed to vote now.

Expand full comment
SClair's avatar

You are so right! And that is just what we are seeing in England and other Nations Europe.

Expand full comment
Fred Trasko's avatar

Because it's not a problem in Maine.

Expand full comment
SClair's avatar

Yes North and South Maine are 2 different worlds. But those in the South do not see it. Why some of my neighbors do not travel below Augusta EVER!

Expand full comment
Sue Dalling's avatar

You have that right. I lived in Aroostook county for 50 years. This is the way I describe. Most of the people in the county think different is not good. If you don’t think the way they do there must be something wrong with you. I now live in Southern Maine.

Expand full comment
Kevin J Cox's avatar

So what?

Expand full comment
SClair's avatar

you do not see the point they are different mindset then the South and also the needs of the area are different. I saw that in working on 2 fact finding round tables under Gov Baldacci. One was Healthcare and the other Re-Organizing the School Districts/Consolidation.

Expand full comment
Jim Driscoll's avatar

That's the problem, thank you

Expand full comment
SClair's avatar

Voting is a real issue. If you want a honest election. Otherwise why even vote, if you do not think it is important?

And MAGA is only an distraction used to cover over this issue. Keep the focus on the Voting Rights for American Citizen.

Expand full comment
Philip Mollica's avatar

Non-citizen voting and voter fraud voting doesn't have to happen everywhere and widespread for it to be a problem and affect elections.

As we've seen very clearly, one district's votes can override a whole state. A number of key districts across the country having their votes skewed can make all the difference in elections. This is why the last Administration flooded the cities with immigrants. It is fraud.

Expand full comment
Jessica Jolly's avatar

But voter fraud is INSIGNIFICANT. Yes if voter fraud was even 1% it could affect elections. But it is minute. And being able to vote in a local election does not mean that you try to vote in a federal election. And @Andrew Haynes—you must have an extremely sensitive system if a miniscule amount of voter fraud makes you sick. And why shouldn’t a non-citizen (let’s say someone with a green card) vote in their local elections? I can see an argument for not allowing voting in Federal elections, primarily because this is the long standing tradition. But my real argument is that the SAVE act is a red herring. It does NOT address a salient issue. Again, voter fraud is miniscule. Why are we expending so much energy on something that “fixes” a problem that doesn’t amount to anything statistically significant. Why can’t we put this much energy into (for example), affordable housing? That issue affects MILLIONS of citizens across the country. Why not an act that insists that if a contractor is building McMansions they have to build an equal number of “entry level” homes? I realize it can’t be that simple—which means we have to put in a lot of work into solving this problem. It takes a herculean effort to get something passed in this political climate—why are we burning cycles to fix an issue that is NOT significantly affecting the material lives of any citizens? The bottom line is that voter fraud is not meaningfully significant eliminating the few instances that do occur is a distraction from real problems that are affecting millions of people (citizens included!)

Expand full comment
Philip Mollica's avatar

I disagree with your premise that it's insignificant.

Nice straw-man argument.

If you think election integrity isn't important, you're either disengenuine or being paid.

This has been an intentional operation to flood the cities with immigrants and encourage them to vote democrat.

Nice work if you can get it.

Expand full comment
Jessica Jolly's avatar

Well we can certainly agree to disagree. What are the sources you are using to determine that voter fraud IS significant? I don’t see a way to easily attach links here, but you can certainly do an internet search.

But even more importantly, if SAVE is passed, how will it change your life? Or if you have adult children, how will SAVE enable them to find affordable housing here in Maine (or indeed in many places in the US)? How would the SAVE act help students who are saddled with crippling student loans? Or how about healthcare in Maine? If you have healthcare, how does the SAVE act help bring in more medical professionals, something desperately needed. Even if none of these issues are important to you, I still challenge you to tell me how the SAVE act will help Maine residents? I mean, I guess I can have the “satisfaction” at the polling place that the “possible” fraudsters have been deterred. But as far as I can see, elections are clearly responding to the will of the people. If there was the terrible problem of shipping in immigrants to vote fraudulently in elections, they surely arent doing their job. Many cities DID vote for Trump primarily because of immigrants. If there was a strategy to influence elections through voter fraud, would we have Trump as our president? And I am assuming you are supportive of Trump policies, so the system clearly works.

I stand by what I have said. Voter fraud is a miniscule issue.

Expand full comment
Philip Mollica's avatar

Lots of words and mental gyrations to convince myself and others, and much of what you've said simply isn't true.

Save your breath. I don't agree to disagree.

You seem to have a horse in the race, even though you protest that you just want other issues addressed.

I'm not happy with, nor support either party.

However, it seems to me after watching Jared for some time that he is one of the few congress-people who are not getting paid off.

It takes courage not to simply follow the party line, not to accept AIPAC money and not to caucus with the Democrats.

What I see is someone who is genuine in what they believe, and willing to do what needs to be done, regardless of which "party" endorses it.

I don't always agree with him, but I believe he has integrity, and does what HE believes is the best for his country and his constituents.

It is a no-brainer that people who vote should prove they have the right to vote as citizens.

If you are fighting it so hard, it makes me think that you have ulterior motives that you are not admitting. As many of the commenters here.

I have no party to protect. Can you say the same?

Expand full comment
Cameron Looper's avatar

Rep. Golden absolutely has taken AIPAC money, as their top contributor in 2023-24 bringing in a total of 565,996$, according to opensecrets.org campaign disclosures. On AIPAC's Facebook page they celebrate his nomination on November 6th, 2024. The information is out there, please back up your claims with substantive arguments.

Expand full comment
Cameron Looper's avatar

Rep. Golden absolutely has taken AIPAC money, as their top contributor in 2023-24 bringing in a total of 565,996$, according to opensecrets.org campaign disclosures. On AIPAC's Facebook page they celebrate his nomination on November 6th, 2024. The information is out there, please back up your claims with substantive arguments.

Expand full comment
Jessica Jolly's avatar

Well, I guess I have an ulterior motive—to share my views on a topic that Jared wrote about. I would probably vote for Jared in a re-election, if there is no other moderate candidate and I voted for him in the previous election . I agree—Jared is doing what he believes his constituents (or a significant number of his constituents) want. And he should do that. But he shared his thought process on why he voted for SAVE, and I responded that I think the SAVE act isn’t needed and I shared why I think that. And if he is NOT getting paid off, that’s a good thing—I agree. But that’s not the issue on the table. He posted his vote and his reasoning and that is good. But there are many people who ARE his constituents who don’t like this vote and I am expressing my opinion (as are you). I am not sure how that means I have ulterior motives, but hey, since we will never agree on the underlying facts, I am going to say thanks for sharing your view. You are (obviously) entitled to it, and you can vote as you see fit as will I. The irony is that we may end up voting for the same person. Be well and enjoy the spring!

Expand full comment
Nancy Mahar's avatar

Jessica, I agree with doing something with major issues. This SAVE is insignificant in that it is a minute issue as there has no voter fraud except in trump's mind.. But Congress is looking like it is finally doing something.. Big Whoop!

Expand full comment
Guy Mendenhall's avatar

Thank you for re-enforcing the obvious to those who are “too blind to see”.

CGM

Expand full comment
Wayne Clark's avatar

So you're going to trust red states to do the right thing by women and minorities? How's that worked out so far? This is voter suppression, pure and simple. And you will own the result, along with your MAGA buddies.

Expand full comment
Kitty Broihier, MS, RD, LD's avatar

Exactly. Putting the work-around (that makes it easier for the inconvenienced parties to exercise their voting rights) in the hands of the states is a mistake that most of us can already see will not end well, as evidenced by the many other red-state tactics to keep keep from voting.

Expand full comment
Jeffrey Campbell's avatar

more TDS, go crawl back in your hole.

Expand full comment
Joseph DiMeo's avatar

TDS is real. It’s just not affecting who you think it is ;)

Expand full comment
Lisa Cagney's avatar

WORD!!!

Expand full comment
Joyce Sirota's avatar

This is a complete waste of time and resources. You need to work on saving Medicaid for Mainers who really need your help. The SAVE act is unnecessary and insulting to people with real problems in your district. How about you hold a townhall meeting in Belfast or even Bangor, if you really care about the priorities of your constituents. I double dare you!!

Expand full comment
Sharon Benoit's avatar

Absolutely!

Expand full comment
Richard smith's avatar

I will say, with some knowledge of the finances of Maine’s Hospitals, that if Medicaid is diminished not only will individuals suffer, but every hospital in Northern Maine will close, as will most nursing homes.

Expand full comment
MattTruss's avatar

I love the duality of claiming, "it's easy, Maine already does this, there is no problem," and "this is a huge problem that needs a solution". Thank you so much for "fixing" a problem that didn't exist. I was not born in Maine, I started the process of obtaining my birth certificate a month ago, and they quoted me a three month waiting period. When the government funding is laid to waste by the GOP and President Musk, how long will this waiting period jump to? Four years or so? How convenient.

Expand full comment
Jeffrey Campbell's avatar

oh please Matt! are you really so out of touch that this is all you can come up with?

Expand full comment
MattTruss's avatar

you're right, the GOP has barely any history of making it harder for anyone to vote...oh...wait

Expand full comment
WS Winslow's avatar

Surely you are not this naive or misinformed. This bill was specifically crafted to disenfranchise groups who, unlike yourself, are insufficiently submissive to the MAGA GOP and its mad king. Make no mistake, the game plan you have cribbed from Susan Collins is entirely clear. You want to stay in the game so you play at being a maverick to amass power by being a “deciding” vote, all while selling out Mainers, and all Americans, to further your own interests. Let me be clear: the SAVE Act is a despicable power grab. It is a solution to a problem that does not exist, what your overseers like to call “fake news.” Fraudulent ballots account for .0004% of all ballots cast. The numbers don’t lie. Nor do they twist the facts to fit a career agenda. Grow a spine. Maybe ask Janet Mills how it’s done. Your job is not more important than democracy. No one’s is.

Expand full comment
MattTruss's avatar

the more he talks, the more he proves that, sadly, he is this naive and misinformed

Expand full comment
Raven Wilkins's avatar

I don't think he is naive and misinformed, but he definitely thinks we are.

Expand full comment
MattTruss's avatar

great point

Expand full comment
Jeffrey Campbell's avatar

and you 4 people are just proof that even when the facts are put in front of you you are not intelligent enough to see them, I think you have eaten too many black flies and it's effecting your ability to think normal.

Expand full comment
Rachel Southworth's avatar

Amen!

Expand full comment
Faith dyer's avatar

This bill disenfranchises women who are married and elderly. There is no need to change anything Jared. Just stop the nonsense that the save act is a great bill.

Expand full comment
Jeffrey Campbell's avatar

Like Golden proved to you, you are totally wrong. How many times does reality need to slap you upside your head before you get the facts right?

Expand full comment
Amy Fried's avatar

Nope. Golden proved no such thing. He’s misleading his constituents. Every voting rights expert who has analyzed the bill has concluded it suppresses the vote.

Expand full comment
Deb Simpson's avatar

Fact, provisional ballots get challenged, then the person has to ‘cure’ it, providing they are even aware it happened to their ballot, it’s an extra burden costing time and perhaps money to get those documents. Americans frequently move from State to State, born in one, college in another, married in a third, divorced in yet another- all those States have different rules for getting documents, some require you to go in person…

Expand full comment
Alex Oxthorn's avatar

The SAVE Act is designed to remove the voting rights of married women and anyone who has gone through a name change (Trans people, for one). The stated purpose behind this bill is utter nonsense. It was already illegal for non-citizens to vote. You are a republican pretending to be a Democrat. I intend to vote against you at my earliest opportunity. Maine does not need a politician like you.

Expand full comment
bella's avatar

Same we need to clean house in the Dem party.

Expand full comment
Lisa Cagney's avatar

EXACTLY!!! That's what I was thinking! Like WTH? Is he nuts?

Expand full comment
Lynn Spann Bowditch's avatar

I read your email, and conclude that in other words this law actually does nothing to "strengthen existing federal law that prohibits noncitizens from voting in federal elections, and to clarify that noncitizens are also barred from voting in state and local elections." (1) Just because MOST of your Maine constituents will not be adversely affected by its provisions, Mainers are not the only Americans. You are elected to represent us, but not by helping to disenfranchise other Americans. And your duty is to represent ALL your constituents, INCLUDING those who will be adversely affected by the so-called SAVE Act. (2) Federal and state laws already prohibit non-citizens from voting and effectively discover and punish those vanishingly few who attempt to do so. (3) The only real voter fraud - another vanishingly small amount - is NOT from non-citizens either registering to vote or from voting, but from registered voters intentionally (not by mistake, because that WOULD NOT BE FRAUD) trying to cast a vote for someone else. The whole "voter fraud" issue is culture war nonsense created out of whole cloth by the voter-suppression-positive GOP. AND YOU AND THEY KNOW IT. Shame on you for buying into their attempts to further divide this country and perpetrating them within Maine.

Expand full comment
Jeffrey Campbell's avatar

yawn! your rambling reply is making me sleepy!

Expand full comment
Deborah Duffy's avatar

Your inability to see the problem because it doesn't affect you (or so you think) is making me disappointed. If half a million people (20% will need a ride), show up at the town offices or state capitol, and wait in line (with vehicle registrations, dog licenses, tax bills, etc) to pay to get a copy of their birth certificate (how much is it?), then repeat to "re-register" to vote, it could take a whole day! It's inefficient, costly, and unecessary. And it will impact you.

Second point...If someone is here on a work visa and paying all taxes, why shouldn't they have representation? Remember "No taxation without representation" from the revolution?

Expand full comment
Joseph DiMeo's avatar

Reading is hard.

Expand full comment
John Seksay's avatar

As you own arguments illustrate, this bill was an unnecessary solution to a nonexistent problem. Voting for it doesn't really change anything, nor would voting against it. So can we move on to some things that do make a difference?

Expand full comment
momfish's avatar

Perhaps this is not just about Maine but free and fair elections for all citizens. I understand that Maine has good laws already in place however other states will use this to keep our friends in other areas from voting. If you don't believe that you really do have your head in the sand.

Expand full comment
Jayne Docherty's avatar

More disappointed with you everyday. It has cost me 200 to get proof of my name change for a Real ID because a marriage certificate from Scotland plus passport stamped in 1980 by the US Consular office changing my name plus 45 years of paying all of my Social Security and taxes under my name were deemed inadequate. I had to pay for a new passport. This bill is both unnecessary and designed to make it more difficult for certain groups to vote.

Expand full comment
Amy Fried's avatar

Golden's post here is a combination of dishonesty and gaslighting. First, Golden asks why there is more fuss about the SAVE Act this year. Well, Biden was president then and he supported voting rights and would have vetoed it, while Trump is president now and he supports voter suppression and would sign it. Second, the protocols the states would have to develop are not yet developed and we know that red states would make it it hard to implement -- plus it's an additional cost for all states, an unfunded mandate. Third, he leaves out that people would have to bring these documents to town offices when they register or reregister when they move. Thus there cannot be any public voter registration drives at libraries, etc. And, if your work hours make getting to that office difficult or impossible, too bad. If you have a disability and it's hard to get there, too bad. If the town office is open few hours each week, too bad. Fourth, Golden calls every single voting rights expert and group a scaremonger, which is unfortunately rather typical for him these days. He really should stop insulting others. Fifth, the id required now to register to vote, as he notes, includes the last four digits of one's Social Security number, which many people know by heart and which is rather different from having to supply specific documents one might not have on hand and would have to pay to get.

Expand full comment
Amy Fried's avatar

Also you don't have to show your birth certificate to start receiving your Social Security! That's simply false.

Expand full comment
Larry's avatar

Illegals don't get social security, though they do pay taxes that support the Government...

Expand full comment
Sue Dalling's avatar

Yes illegal immigrants paid 89.8 billion in taxes in 2023. Some years it is a little or less. A study was done and showed illegal immigrants paid more in taxes than it cost the US. This tax money they pay in They Can Not collect. A reporter was asking MAGA people what illegal immigrants paid in taxes. When they were told how much, they could not believe it. They thought they paid nothing.

Expand full comment
bruce glick's avatar

Golden seems to think red states would have convenient registration office hours or would accept affidavits from minorities and women without challenging them. The affected voters would be left with the burden of proof and cost of legal relief. It might take years and (multiple elections) for these cases to play out and who knows how the SC would decide them and if they create new case law that supports suppression (Citizens United anyone). With 50 separate sets of regulations, there would be plenty of opportunities for red states to find the most effective and legally acceptable ways of suppressing votes. Golden has voted to open Pandora's box of this issue, where, as many readers have pointed out, there is absolutely no problem.

Expand full comment
Amy Fried's avatar

Great point -- and of course those other states' laws would still affect people in Maine because they would affect who gets elected and thus which party controls the House.

Expand full comment
April's avatar

Also think about all the people that live in states where natural disasters are more common. They lose proof of citizenship more often than people in other states so do you really think it is easy for them? It is just another way for the GOP to suppress the vote.

Expand full comment
Sue's avatar

If we already require people to show citizenship documents to register to vote, this is redundant and insulting

Expand full comment
Jeffrey Campbell's avatar

no sue! in case you can't comprehend what is being said this law is for all States not just Maine and the majority of voter fraud is happening in large cities outside of Maine.

Expand full comment
Tammi Labrecque's avatar

You gonna reply to literally every comment, bro? Maybe you should get a job.

Expand full comment
Jeffrey Campbell's avatar

I'm not your BRO! I would never have a friend as dumb as you. oh yeah and I have a job, do you?

Expand full comment
Wayne Clark's avatar

What's your job? Schilling for Golden?

Expand full comment
Defend Democracy's avatar

Jeffrey, if you actually understood what Sue said, you’d realize you just proved her point.

If states already have strong registration systems in place — including Maine — then forcing a federal mandate onto all states is redundant at best and unconstitutional at worst. You’re not fixing fraud. You’re layering unnecessary restrictions on states that aren’t asking for them, based on exaggerated fear about “large cities” without evidence.

Federalism used to mean something. Now it’s just an excuse to shove politically motivated policies down everyone’s throat, even when they don’t solve a real problem.

Expand full comment
Jeffrey Campbell's avatar

That is your opinion which I happen to disagree with and so does Congressman Golden by the sounds of it. I read your reply several times and I can't for the life of me see how your response makes any sense at all. I love how you throw the word "unconstitutional" all the time when you can't justify your stance. What I got out of your reply was if Maine's system is fine than it's okay that other states are not. How does that work?

Expand full comment
Defend Democracy's avatar

Jeffrey, you’re right that everyone is entitled to their opinion.

The real problem here isn’t that people disagree. It’s that Congress is rushing through legislation like the SAVE Act instead of working on real problems that actually help people.

There was no real attempt at compromise. Reasonable amendments to protect voters most at risk — like married women who have changed their names — were flatly rejected. The bill was pushed forward without serious bipartisan input, which says a lot about the real priorities behind it.

Every minute spent fighting over a bill that does nothing meaningful for actual voters is a minute stolen from real progress.

Expand full comment
Lisa Cagney's avatar

False narrative, missing information.

Expand full comment
Lisa Graves's avatar

There is no need for this bill!! What are the statistics in Maine of voter fraud? Specifically, what is the incident rate of non-citizens voting? 0?

Expand full comment
Saltoria Mitchell's avatar

It doesn’t apply to only Maine.

Expand full comment
Mary Strout's avatar

Sounds good but isn't it redundant? Non-citizens are already disqualified from voting.

Expand full comment
Maddie Johnson's avatar

And on top of that, non-citizens voting and astronomically small issue that the GOP has blown completely out of proportion!

Expand full comment
momfish's avatar

Much like trans folks in sports

Expand full comment
Very Bannable's avatar

If it really wasn't a significant issue, then why does the Left fight so hard against it? Maybe because both sides realize the importance of taking a stance on the issue? Because of how profoundly offensive the other's opinion is on the stance?

Expand full comment
Honey Bee's avatar

LMAO we're fighting hard against it because the right is trying to disenfranchise millions of voters, you disingenuous sealion.

Expand full comment
Very Bannable's avatar

Just prove who you are before you vote. Thousands, if not more, illegals are in the country posing as someone else. Stealing their identities. This would be a non-issue if we'd be deporting illegals all this time. But instead we've let them get entrenched. Think they're one of us and have our rights. We need, as a nation, to remind ourselves and them that they do not.

Expand full comment
Honey Bee's avatar

LOL ok you hysterical liar.

you have no fucking evidence of that except for the propaganda you've been mainlining. I'ma block you no and suggest all sane, rational folks do the same.

Fucking white nationalist trash.

Expand full comment
Jeffrey Campbell's avatar

haha I guess honeybee can't handle the sting! LoL

Expand full comment
Kevin J Cox's avatar

You are a full of shit maga-moron

Expand full comment
Jeffrey Campbell's avatar

so what does that make you Kevin? a far left moonbat?

Expand full comment
bella's avatar

They want married women to not be able to vote. The GOP is stripping rights away from women. You must be a dude. They've literally said they want women to not be able to vote.

Expand full comment
Sharon Benoit's avatar

And they also want women to have more kids. If you have 6 or more, you will be awarded a medal and some money -- maybe $5,000. Wow a medal. How about we pay for your kids' college education?

Expand full comment
Richard smith's avatar

In answer to your first sentence—to make it truly easy for people of all states of health, disability or age to vote. And there is no fraud in Maines election system now. You must be from away.

Expand full comment
Very Bannable's avatar

If voting's too hard for someone, they probably shouldn't vote. We're talking about BARE MINIMUMS here. If that's too much, well ... maybe you have bigger problems than who gets elected. And maybe we're better off without your input.

I don't believe voting should be effortless; nothing invested means nothing valued. If the smallest obstacle stops you, maybe you're not serious enough to help decide the direction of a nation. Voting should demand at least enough initiative to prove you care — not just about yourself, but about the system you're shaping and honoring your small part in it; like making sure your papers are in order.

Expand full comment
Sharon Benoit's avatar

NO it is just the opposite. Voting ought to be easy. In some countries, it's a holiday. In others, election day is more than one day. We should want voting to be secure and easy.

Expand full comment
Very Bannable's avatar

Security and ease are not the same thing.

I want voting to be secure, not effortless.

Anything valuable in life — money, ownership, citizenship — has protections around it. Voting should too.

If simply proving who you are is considered too high a hurdle, maybe the real problem isn't the system — maybe it's the voters.

Expand full comment
Kevin J Cox's avatar

The legislation itself is a significant issue. It addresses something that doesn't even exist. The main purpose is to take the vote from married woman. After all, how many do you know that still carry current id with the name on their birth certificate?

Expand full comment
Very Bannable's avatar

I work in data (ETL, disambiguation and de-duplication), and the practice of changing your last name is the most annoying thing I deal with next to date formats. This is yet another reason women need to stop doing that dumbass ritual. I’m for it, for yet another reason now. Stop this dumbass name changing bullshit.

Expand full comment
bella's avatar

Go ask Vance if he thinks women should vote! Smh.

Expand full comment
Honey Bee's avatar

It's also objectively not good.

Expand full comment
Sherry Smith's avatar

Old Maine saying: “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it!” There has never been any statistically significant voter fraud. On the other hand, we have seen a long history of attempts at voter suppression over the years which has been opposed by our federal government. This will be the first time that the federal government has added additional burdens to exercising our right to vote.

The last time this passed the house we weren’t in a constitutional crisis! We need to pay attention when our ‘countrymates’ are falling all around us.

Expand full comment