Would Trump's Poll Tax Backfire on Him?

A Yahoo! News report offers what are effectively two descriptions of Donald Trump's effort to rig the mid-term elections in the name of election "integrity."

Here's the second, which sounds a lot like something I could support, and that I'm sure lots of traditional Republicans and non-fanatical (but inattentive) Trump voters would, too:

If Republicans really just wanted voter ID, there is a simple way to get there. Have a bipartisan bill requiring a photo ID to vote -- while allowing the use of state-issued student IDs, and giving Americans who lack an ID a free passport card...

Indeed, I would bet money that lots of people think the above is a fair description of the SAVE Act.

The above follows what the SAVE Act actually is:

The core of the bill, requiring voters to prove their citizenship, is both a massive hurdle and a major poll tax. Under the bill, all registered voters would be required to go to a voting registrar in person to reregister, providing proof of citizenship. For those in 45 states, a Real ID will not suffice; voters would need a passport, passport card, or certified birth certificate (not a copy). For married women who have changed their names, there are many more hoops to jump through, including a marriage certificate and other proof of the legitimacy of their name.

...

[T]he current version of the bill ... requires all states to turn over all voter rolls, containing sensitive information, to the Department of Homeland Security -- something even deep-red Idaho, when asked to volunteer the data, refused. And states would be required to use a voter purge system created by DOGE, relying on Social Security system data that has been shown to be unreliable and biased. This is the same DOGE, by the way, that made off with the most sensitive Social Security information for hundreds of millions and tried to share it with a private company. With an error rate estimated at 14 percent or more, this program would require states to disenfranchise millions of legitimate voters. [bold added]

The article notes that half of Americans don't have passports, and millions of those have no clue where their birth certificates (which are required to obtain a passport) are. Costs for obtaining a passport are $65-$165 and the time the process takes -- which was already high and will require much more time if millions apply so they can vote. And getting a birth certificate also wastes time and up to $100.00.

The story is right to liken this to a poll tax, and given the manner and application of "immigration enforcement," I strongly suspect that this is intended to serve the same purpose.

If this mess passes, I have a prediction: It will backfire. Donald Trump, as a populist, draws lots of support from the poorly-educated, which this measure will obviously affect disproportionately. It may come to MAGA's surprise, but this will stop lots of poor, uneducated, white people in their tracks. College graduates, who skew Democrat, will be better able to afford and navigate the process.

I thought of my late white trash uncle being disenfranchised. Yaron Brook thought of name-changing Republican wives. (Relevant section starts at 0:40:40.)

While a part of me would love the poetic justice of such an outcome, this bill is such a travesty that I still hope it doesn't pass.

-- CAV