House Rules Democrats Argue Why Proof Of Citizenship Is Bad For Voting

H.R.22 - SAVE Act
This bill requires individuals to provide documentary proof of U.S. citizenship when registering to vote in federal elections.
Specifically, the bill prohibits states from accepting and processing an application to register to vote in a federal election unless the applicant presents documentary proof of U.S. citizenship. The bill specifies what documents are considered acceptable proof of U.S. citizenship, such as identification that complies with the REAL ID Act of 2005 that indicates U.S. citizenship.
Further, the bill (1) prohibits states from registering an individual to vote in a federal election unless, at the time the individual applies to register to vote, the individual provides documentary proof of U.S. citizenship; and (2) requires states to establish an alternative process under which an applicant may submit other evidence to demonstrate U.S. citizenship.
Each state must take affirmative steps on an ongoing basis to ensure that only U.S. citizens are registered to vote, which shall include establishing a program to identify individuals who are not U.S. citizens using information supplied by certain sources.
Additionally, states must remove noncitizens from their official lists of eligible voters.
The bill allows for a private right of action against an election official who registers an applicant to vote in a federal election who fails to present documentary proof of U.S. citizenship.
The bill establishes criminal penalties for certain offenses, including registering an applicant to vote in a federal election who fails to present documentary proof of U.S. citizenship.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/22
_______
All Information (Except Text) for H.R.1526 - NORRA of 2025
To amend title 28, United States Code, to limit the authority of district courts to provide injunctive relief, and for other purposes.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/1526/all-info
_______
S.J.Res.28 - A joint resolution disapproving the rule submitted by the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection relating to "Defining Larger Participants of a Market for General-Use Digital Consumer Payment Applications".
This joint resolution nullifies the final rule issued by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) titled Defining Larger Participants of a Market for General-Use Digital Consumer Payment Applications and published on December 10, 2024. The rule defines larger participants in the general-use digital consumer payment application market (i.e., payment apps) that are subject to CFPB supervisory authority. The rule defines larger participants in this market as nonbanks (1) with an annual volume of at least 50 million transactions, and (2) that are not small business concerns.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/senate-joint-resolution/28
_________
S.J.Res.18 - A joint resolution disapproving the rule submitted by the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection relating to "Overdraft Lending: Very Large Financial Institutions".
This joint resolution nullifies the final rule issued by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau titled Overdraft Lending: Very Large Financial Institutions and published on December 30, 2024. The rule revises provisions regarding charges for insufficient funds in a customer’s bank account (i.e., overdrafts) at very large financial institutions. Under the rule, these institutions must (1) cap overdraft charges at $5; (2) with justification, cap charges at a higher amount; or (3) handle overdrafts as credit and comply with applicable Truth in Lending Act disclosure requirements.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/senate-joint-resolution/18

Follow us on Rumble: https://rumble.com/c/offlabel