Is demanding that U.S. Citizens Confirm they Are Eligible To Vote Truly Racist?

a reply to: Vroomfondel

After 1972 all social security cards were issued by the Baltimore office but the area code on the number reflected your state residence.

Barrack Obama's (original) SSN was issued by the Baltimore office and had the 'area code' of the Baltimore Office. He resided in Hawaii and applied from Hawaii and never resided in Maryland.

The PDF you linked to appears to be out-of-date, but is still reasonably close. The SSA algorithm now uses the first 3 characters of your zip code.

This has nothing to do with ID though - especially voter ID. A Social Security card has NO identification features, all it does is provide evidence of registration with the Social Security Administration.

IN ABSENCE of other PRIMARY forms of identification the SSN can provide a link to other information that can be used to build a 'picture' that can confirm your ID. IT DOES NOT, ON ITS OWN provide any ID. It is only slightly more useful than a library card in that respect.

originally posted by: Rob808
I pointed out a signature was fallible, I don’t need to respond to any call to action on your part.

No, you have pointed out that YOU THINK that a signature is fallible. The signature system may or may not be fallible, but other folk have this idea too, and so far EVERY solution proposed costs billions of dollars to implement.

Now you say you don't want to implement a system that costs billions of dollars - well then what changes DO you want? How can you improve on the signature system - that the USA has used successfully for over 200 years - in a COST EFFECTIVE WAY? I am sure every state in the Union would like to hear your inexpensive solution.

But what is the problem EXACTLY? ==> 3 invalid votes (nationwide) per election cycle? 30 invalid votes (nationwide) in 25 years? Is that really a problem? What is 'cost effective' mean in the context of stopping 3 invalid votes?

You (and the folks you listen to to form your opinions) are inventing a problem where none exists for the sole purpose of invoking doubt in the security of the elections. There are much bigger election fraud issues to address that have much bigger impact. Why don't you work on gerrymandering, voter intimidation, polling station closures, and dark money for instance?