Red State Proof of Citizenship next to Suppress Votes.

The way I see, the proof of citizenship movement to vote is the same as the photo ID requirements popping up in all the Republican controlled states.

Sadly, the Constitution does leave voting regulations up to the states, giving Republicans the advantage to put limits in place. Republicans will either make voting a painfully complicated process or make it a more exclusive function of the elite.

The myth of voter fraud is again the culprit. Two states, Kansas and Arizona (with Georgia and Alabama joining in) are trying to include proof of citizenship (ID) on the national voter registration forms.

The intended result will not be a restoration of confidence, but an even deeper suspicion that the system is rigged beyond control. Once ID is instituted, a new wave of excuses will be proposed to go after election fraud. Election fraud is the real threat. “Reform” will bring about a chance to technologically manipulate the system in ways not yet dreamed of. Sure they might get caught, but like malware and hacking, the tools to cheat are endless.

Democrats continue to focus wrongly on the disenfranchisement of minorities, seniors and students, instead of the more accurate effect on all voters, liberal and conservative. 

The target now by Republicans is the 1993 National Voter Registration Act that requires “potential voters in federal elections simply to swear on penalty of perjury, and perhaps deportation, that they are citizens.” They are now seeking proof of citizenship…a birth certificate. And they may win this one:

StarTribune: Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach a Republican, argues that states have the sovereign right to maintain their voter rolls and that the federal voter registration form should be tailored to the requirements of each state. The states contend the availability of a federal form — which requires only that people attest under penalty of perjury that they are citizens — creates a "massive loophole" in enforcing their voter proof-of-citizenship laws.

In June 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that states could not refuse to accept the national voter registration form. But U.S. District Judge Eric Melgren in Kansas in March sided with the states, saying the U.S. Constitution gives states the power to set voter qualifications and Congress has not pre-empted it, even in enacting the voter registration act. 

A really scary concept that may seem wrong on multiple levels, but still makes sense legally.

Fear Mongering the Vote: The following comment is from an elected AG who might actually believe this stuff:

Arizona’s attorney general, Tom Horne, a Republican, sees the dispute over voter certification as a winning issue as he campaigns for re-election. “People are very emotional about illegals voting and diluting their own votes. The federal government has no right to tell us what to do in our state elections,” said Mr. Horne, the embattled attorney general.

The simple argument made by conservatives hides the more complicated real life process to vote:

NY Times: Just how many voters will be frozen out of local and state elections is unclear. For some, the requirements can be cumbersome: Women who married and changed their names, for example, must show not only a birth certificate but also a marriage certificate. An older resident who moved here after decades of voting in another state may have trouble obtaining a birth certificate, or strain to pay the fee to obtain it.  

Republican disregard for the Constitution: The conservative chaos caused by picking and choosing laws Republicans like or don’t like continues:

The states have pledged to maintain dual registries even in the face of further court challenges.