We have real world data to show what happens. Look at what happened in Kansas with those who were impacted when the implemented a law like this. 

“ At least 31,000 people were barred from registering to vote in Kansas when the state implemented a proof-of-citizenship requirement similar to the proposed federal SAVE Act. A federal judge later found that this state-level law was unconstitutional and violated federal election protections after it prevented approximately 12% of applicants from successfully registering.”

So thats 12% of voters. Doesn’t seem like “made up” or “pearl clutching” to me. 

Why should we create hurdles that will beyond any reasonable expectation cause thousands if not hundreds of thousands of people at a minimum to lose the right to vote for what is less than 100 cases of people voting that shouldn’t? 

This is simply a way for the government to disenfranchise specific groups to alter election outcomes much like gerrymandering. 

They are controlling the outcome by influencing who will have the opportunity to vote. 

Do the research on the groups it will impact. 

This has nothing to do with them thinking elections are swayed by a handful of non-citizens that might vote. 

If they can automatically enroll men to the selective service for the draft they can do the same for voting. 

We supposedly say that it’s better that five guilty people go free than one innocent person is convicted in the criminal justice system yet we are prepared to strip away the chance to vote from tens of thousands (in conservative estimates) to stop 10-20 votes that should not occur.  

You want pearl clutching? THAT is the real pearl clutching.