Let’s revisit the ways to prove citizenship under the SAVE Act

The New Neo Posted on by

I see there’s some disagreement in the comments today about how hard it is to prove citizenship under the proposed SAVE Act.

From commenter “Betsybounds”:

This is an interesting read: https://bipartisanpolicy.org/article/five-things-to-know-about-the-save-act/

Among the interesting information it presents, there is this:

“Although at least one of these documents are in theory available to most citizens, not all voters have them readily available. According to recent studies:

… 11% of registered voters do not have access to their birth certificate.”

From commenter “Niketas Choniates”:

I’m sorry, your source is completely lying here. I followed the link in your link which goes to a Substack and it did not say this.

What it said was 89% of people in the survey said they had their birth certificate. It did not say they “do not have access” to their birth certificate or cannot get it. It is very, very easy to get a copy of your birth certificate, and you can get 100 copies if you want.

I did the same as Niketas, just to make sure. While it’s true that the article Betsybounds linked to did say “11% of registered voters do not have access to their birth certificate,” it included a link to this piece as the source of that information. That latter article makes it clear the reference is to people not actually having copies of their birth certificates in their possession, and not to people not having access to birth certificates. The latter group is nothing remotely like 11%.

Some sources I’ve seen use the term “readily available,” which is also misleading. No, the birth certificate might not already be in the person’s nightstand, but the document is ordinarily available with a modicum of effort. Fees are usually minimal, and can sometimes be waived entirely for various forms of financial hardship.

Some people who find it hard to get birth certificates are naturalized citizens who were born in war-torn countries where records have been destroyed, but those people would have naturalization papers and those can be used to prove citizenship.

Plus, most people discussing this issue completely ignore another alternate means of proving citizenship under the law:

Subject to any relevant guidance adopted by the Election Assistance Commission, each State shall establish a process under which an applicant who cannot provide documentary proof of United States citizenship under paragraph (1) may, if the applicant signs an attestation under penalty of perjury that the applicant is a citizen of the United States and eligible to vote in elections for Federal office, submit such other evidence to the appropriate State or local official demonstrating that the applicant is a citizen of the United States and such official shall make a determination as to whether the applicant has sufficiently established United States citizenship for purposes of registering to vote in elections for Federal office in the State.

“(ii) AFFIDAVIT REQUIREMENT.—If a State or local official makes a determination under clause (i) that an applicant has sufficiently established United States citizenship for purposes of registering to vote in elections for Federal office in the State, such determination shall be accompanied by an affidavit developed under clause (iii) signed by the official swearing or affirming the applicant sufficiently established United States citizenship for purposes of registering to vote.

There’s an awful lot of propaganda floating around about this and so many other things. When in doubt, best to go to the source, the original material if possible.

Spanberger gives the SOTU rebuttal

The New Neo Posted on by

Why Spanberger? Maybe because she’s a relatively new face, she’s under eighty years old (actually, she’s forty-six), and she’s a white woman with various college degrees. Thus she represents a very large portion of the Democrat demographic.

Spanberger hammered home the message of “affordability,” which the Democrats apparently think is the way to win. After all, it helped get Spanberger into the Virginia governor’s seat, and it also made Mamdani New York’s mayor. From Spanberger:

She began her remarks by telling Americans that “tonight … we did not hear the truth from our president.”

After claiming that President Donald Trump’s tariff policies were making the price of goods more expensive, she told a whopper: “But here in Virginia,” she said, “I am working with our state legislature to lower costs and make the Commonwealth more affordable.” …

After campaigning on affordability, her administration unveiled a series of tax increase bills within the first 48 hours of her inauguration. And these tax hikes weren’t aimed solely at high-income earners; most targeted ordinary Virginians. The sheer speed and scope of this legislative blitz drew immediate criticism, with detractors branding it a classic bait-and-switch. The sweeping power grab quickly commanded national attention, dominating headlines for weeks. And no one has forgotten.

The bills included the creation of two higher tax brackets of 8% and 10% on people making over $600,000; a 4.3% sales tax on services like Uber rides, DoorDash, and Amazon deliveries; a 3.8% investment tax; an increase in hotel taxes; a new personal property tax on landscaping equipment; a $500 sales tax on firearm suppressors; an 11% sales tax on all firearms and ammunition; and more.

It’s almost as though Democrats consider “affordability” a magic word, an “open sesame” spell that gets them into office, after which they can redistribute wealth to their hearts’ content.

NOTE: In the comments at the link, I found this:

“Her full remarks can be viewed below.”

Thank you. No.

I’d rather listen to Yoko Ono’s greatest hits.

The predictable Democrats at the SOTU

The New Neo Posted on by

Trump knew they wouldn’t be standing or applauding for things that the vast majority of Americans favor, and he used that fact to castigate them. Some Democrats also yelled at him; John Fetterman had warned his fellow Democrats against that sort of thing, but they couldn’t resist:

“I mean, there’s just no dignity if you have paddles, if you are yelling and saying those kinds of things,” Fetterman said. “I mean, you can agree or disagree on things, but if you’re going to show up, just do it with dignity because, you know, really need to respect the office.”

So far, I haven’t been able to find out whether Fetterman actually stood for things like the following. If so, he would have been lonely:

There was more where that came from. As they say: the campaign ads write themselves.

Will it matter, though? Does that sort of thing change any minds?

[ADDENDUM: Here are four picks from the SOTU for campaign ads.]

Avalanches and risk

The New Neo Posted on by

I have long been afraid of avalanches. I don’t ski at all and never have, so my danger from the phenomenon is basically nil. But it’s a primal fear nonetheless, perhaps from movies.

That’s one of the reasons the news of nine people dead in an avalanche while back-country skiing in the Tahoe area filled me with dread and sorrow. Such young, vibrant people, their lives snuffed out in an instant – although such deaths are usually not instantaneous. The news reports didn’t tell us some things I’d like to know, such as whether they were all skiing at once, and where the survivors were positioned that allowed them to live, and why the decision was made to go despite avalanche warnings.

There was also a less-publicized death but no less horrible, of an 11-year-old girl in Utah, killed in another avalanche while back-country skiing with her family, and another in Utah of a father who was snowmobiling with his son. In both cases, family members tried to dig out the victims, but didn’t manage to save their lives. One can imagine the frantic desperate efforts, the terrible feelings of failure and grief and perhaps guilt.

Why do people engage in such activities? That’s not hard to imagine: it is beautiful in the mountains in winter, and ski resort areas can be terribly crowded. For a lover of nature, mountains, and outdoor activities in snow, back-country activities have a huge draw. And we all do plenty of other seemingly risky things, such as driving.

Then I learned that there have been many avalanche-related deaths in the Alps this year, and that although the number is high, the numbers are usually high (or what I would consider high):

Though the recent spike in avalanche deaths in Europe is worrying, it is not exceptional – according to European Avalanche Warning Services, 95 have died so far this season, compared to 70 in the whole of 2024-25 and 87 in 2023-24. The 2020-21 season, when 131 died, and 2017-18, when the figure was 147, seem comparable.

The articles I’ve read on the European deaths haven’t broken down the figures for back-country deaths, but my guess is that almost all are of that type. Here’s a video that goes into how and why avalanches occur, and how ski resorts prevent or at least reduce their occurrence. The second video is about the Alps avalanche deaths:

It seems to me that back-country skiing has increased in recent years, and that is the case (the article is from a year ago]:

Backcountry skiing has surged in popularity since the pandemic, but those wishing to leave the relative safety of busy resorts can find themselves at the mercy of an unforgiving wilderness. If something goes wrong — as it often does, with avalanches a constant threat — skiers do not have a first-aid team nearby, and rescue can take hours.

And yet Ennen, from Park City, Utah, says the peaceful isolation found up remote mountains is preferable by far to being stuck in lengthy lines at resorts, and he is willing to embrace risk for a sense of freedom.

“I love being in the mountains and surrounded by nature,” said Ennen, a 45-year-old cardiac anaesthesiologist. “It’s my time for my brain to relax and to decompress from the real world. When you’re skiing in a resort, you’re in a controlled environment but with an uncontrolled group of people.

“The backcountry is the opposite. You’re with a controlled group of people, your team, but in a very uncontrolled environment.”

It’s a decision an increasing number of people have been making. Advances in avalanche-related equipment, such as beacons, have probably helped give a sense of security- perhaps a false one? The Tahoe skiiers were thus equipped. In terms of relative risk, though, I don’t know what the figures are and I’m not sure there are figures for how many people back-country ski these days.

Writing this post made me think of the last verse of this poem by Emily Dickinson, which goes like this:

This is the Hour of Lead –
Remembered, if outlived,
As Freezing persons, recollect the Snow –
First – Chill – then Stupor – then the letting go –

RIP.

Our men’s and women’s ice hockey teams reflect a larger political divide

The New Neo Posted on by

The US women’s hockey team won gold at the 2026 Olympics. The US men’s hockey team won gold at the 2026 Olympics. Both were invited by Trump to attend the SOTU speech.

And there the resemblance ends. The women declined; the men accepted.

The women said “no” very politely, by the way, taking care not to mention politics:

“We are sincerely grateful for the invitation extended to our gold medal-winning U.S. Women’s Hockey Team and deeply appreciate the recognition of their extraordinary achievement,” USA Hockey told NBC News. “Due to the timing and previously scheduled academic and professional commitments following the Games, the athletes are unable to participate.

“They were honored to be included and are grateful for the acknowledgment.”

And maybe that’s the truth. But it’s hard to believe that every single member had some previous commitment so pressing that they couldn’t make a brief detour for the big occasion. And what of the men?:

“We’re so proud to represent the U.S. and when you get the chance to go to the White House and meet the President, we’re proud to be Americans and that’s so patriotic,” Jack Hughes told The Daily Mail this week. “No matter what your views are, we’re super excited to go to the White House tomorrow and be a part of that.”

Trump invited the men’s team to the State of the Union address during a call with the team shortly after their Sunday win over Canada.

“I don’t know how much we’re allowed to say, but yes, yeah, we’re excited to go,” Quinn Hughes said Tuesday morning on ABC News. “Something you don’t get to do … I don’t know what today is — every Tuesday. But yeah, but, it’s going to be special for us, but I’m glad you mentioned the women’s team again. You know, we’re really happy for them. Obviously, a lot going on on social media surrounding our team and their team. But, you know, the last couple we’ve done a lot of training with them and got to know a lot of those girls really well. We’re extremely happy to come.”

The larger picture is that, whatever the reasons the hockey teams gave and whether the women’s refusal was political, the split does conform to a more widespread divergence between the sexes in the US on politics, especially among the young. This isn’t something that goes way back in history; it’s actually quite recent. There are plenty of articles on that:

[From 2024] Women of all age groups grew more likely to identify as liberal between 1999 and 2021 before drawing back slightly from that position since then. But the steepest increases in liberal ID occurred among women at either end of the age spectrum.

[From 2022] In 2021, 44 percent of young women consider themselves liberal, compared to only one quarter (25 percent) of young men, a nearly 20-point gender gap. A decade earlier, roughly similar numbers of young men (27 percent) and young women (30 percent) identified as liberal.

[From 2025] In an overall poll among all adults, 45% approve of Trump’s job performance and 55% disapprove. When narrowing the range to adults between the ages of 18 and 29, the gap widens, with 34% approving and 64% disapproving. When you break these numbers down between men and women, you find that 45% of young men approve of the Trump presidency, compared to only 24% of young women. That is a 21-point difference.

For other generations, there is still a gap between men and women, but it is nowhere near as large. Among adults older than 65, the difference is 13 points. For those between the ages of 45 and 64, the difference is 9 points, and for those between the ages of 30 and 44, the difference is only 7 points.

There are plenty more articles like that, but you get the idea.

Sports writers are unhappy, not with the reaction of the women’s team but rather the men’s:

The charge against the men’s team seems to be four-fold. First, that, having won the gold, its members declined to address the “tide of fascism in the United States” and instead said gauche hyper-nationalistic things, such as, “This is all about our country right now,” “I love the USA,” “I’m so proud to be American today,” “This is for every American,” “It’s the greatest country in the world,” and “Everyone better be wearing the red, white, and blue for as long as they can.” Second, that during a post-game phone call with a rollicking President Trump, the players didn’t band together on the spot to push back against his supposedly sexist jokes — or apologize later for their complicity. Third, that the team subsequently agreed to go to the White House to celebrate their victory — and, even worse, that it seems excited by that prospect. Fourth, that the FBI director, Kash Patel, went over to Italy to watch the game and then chugged beer with the team in the locker room. Together, the sporting press is keen to inform us, these decisions have “sullied” the USA’s victory and ruined the reputations of its architects for all time.

What nonsense this all is. What narrow, monomaniacal, outlandish, freakish guff. I had a low opinion of sports writers before the last 48 hours, but good grief do I now want to throw the entire corps into a lake. The USA men’s team wins the gold for the first time in 46 years, and the news cycle following that achievement is stocked with fringe, politicized crap.

That’s from Charles C. W. Cooke in National Review, by the way.

[NOTE: On a personal note, among my acquaintances young and old, there’s virtually no political difference between men and women. Almost everyone I know hates Trump. I, of course, am of a demographic that might be expected to join them. But I do not.]

Mexico: the cartels take revenge

The New Neo Posted on by

What a mess:

The deadly violence sparked by the military killing of an infamous cartel leader has now spread widely across Mexico, as American citizens near the border were warned to shelter in place.

At least 20 of Mexico’s 31 states have seen violent clashes in the wake of the death of the country’s most wanted man, Nemesio Oseguera Cervantes, head of the Jalisco New Generation Cartel (CJNG).

Cervantes — better known as “El Mencho” — died in custody Sunday, shortly after Mexican special forces captured him in Tapalpa, Jalisco state.

The notorious drug kingpin was seriously injured in a firefight between military commandos and his bodyguards and died from his injuries en route to Mexico City.

Cartel members responded to his death by declaring war on the Mexican government of socialist Claudia Sheinbaum, shutting down Jalisco’s state capital, Guadalajara — the country’s second-largest city — as they engaged in running gun battles with authorities.

Can we call that an insurrection? I think so.

Apparently, the US provided some intelligence to Mexico that helped the success of the operation.

The cartels are very powerful in Mexico, and well-armed with some weapons that are military-grade, such as rocket launchers.

Ace has a long piece on the subject, in which – among other things – he quotes this:

A Senator from Mexico went on Fox News and exposed it all

* The President of Mexico works for the Cartels
* She was funded by money from the cartels
* It’s not just the President, there are an entire group of Mexico politicians labeled the “arco politicians”
* Mexico is a “Narco state”
* Mexicans are afraid of the alliance between the Mexican government and the cartels
* The Morena (political party) is financed by the cartels, that’s how they get elected
* Once they get elected the deal is for the Mexican government to then protect the cartels
* The President of Mexico Claudia Sheinbaum Pardo doesn’t want this information getting out
* Mexicans and the Politicians who are no paid off by the cartels want Donald Trump to help with the cartels

The Mexico Senator exposing all this says she is now being threatened with prison for speaking out “The President has threatened me to proceed against me with criminal prosecution to get me out of the Senate and get me in jail just because I told you in this space in Fox News”

Here’s the Mexican senator on Fox, about five months ago:

As the newscaster says, Sheinbaum sometimes seems to be working against the cartels and sometimes refuses to do so. There’s also this:

JUST IN: Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum said she doesn’t want to use force against the cartels because it would violate their human rights.

“Returning to the war against the narco is not an option. First, because it is outside the framework of the law.”

But that’s actually not “just in.” In fact, Sheinbaum said that back in November. So, what’s going on now? I can’t say I know, but there’s this:

The political risks are particularly sensitive for Sheinbaum, whose leftist MORENA party’s rise to power in 2018 was in large part fueled by Mexicans’ anger over the drug war that has left tens of thousands of people dead or missing.

Her predecessor, Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador, prioritized alleviating poverty and other root causes of violence through social programs, embracing a slogan of “hugs not bullets.” But critics say that his approach allowed crime groups like the CJNG to entrench their territorial holdings and expand into a dizzying array of industries, from the extortion of avocado producers to complex fuel smuggling schemes.

While Sheinbaum has mostly followed Lopez Obrador’s political map, with the killing of El Mencho she has definitively broken from her predecessor’s security policy, said Jeronimo Mohar, CEO of Aleph, a risk analytics company. …

Still, on Monday, Trump again heaped pressure on Sheinbaum, writing in a social media post: “Mexico must step up their effort on Cartels and Drugs!”

Sheinbaum may have succumbed to US pressure on Cervantes, thinking it could be limited to that and it would get Trump off her back. But now she faces a big decision on how much more cooperation to offer.

The US wins ice hockey gold

The New Neo Posted on by

The win is a big deal, because it’s been 46 years since the US last won – although it’s often been in the running. Back then – 1980 – the contest had Cold War implications, because the Soviet team was a powerhouses. Back then, the players from the US and most other countries were amateurs; the Communist Soviets had ways around that and it was part of the reason for their dominance.

No more. Now everybody seems to be an NHL pro – both Americans and Canadians. For example, we get this about US goalie Connor Hellebuyck:

The Winnipeg Jets star is the reigning NHL MVP and winner of the Vezina Trophy as the league’s best goaltender. He cemented himself as the best netminder in the world with a gold medal game performance for the ages.

He stopped 41 of 42 shots against Canada, 27 of them coming from the slot and 17 of them coming from the inner slot, according to Hockey Stats.

So he plays for Winnipeg ordinarily, but he’s originally from Michigan and played at UMass in college. As far as I know, that’s typical in that it helps to be born in a place that has a long cold winter. There’s also the fact that his older brother played professional ice hockey as well, which happens quite a bit (see the story of Jack Hughes, who made the winning goal in overtime):

Hughes was born in Orlando, Florida and grew up in Toronto, Ontario, before relocating with his family to Michigan for his high school years while playing for the US NTDP. …

Hughes comes from a family of ice hockey athletes. … His older brother, Quinn, was drafted seventh overall in the 2018 NHL entry draft by the Vancouver Canucks. His younger brother, Luke, was drafted fourth overall by the Devils in the 2021 NHL entry draft. Their father, Jim Hughes, is a former ice hockey player and team captain for Providence College, an assistant coach for the Boston Bruins, and the director of player development for the Toronto Maple Leafs. His mother, Ellen Weinberg-Hughes, played ice hockey, lacrosse, and soccer at the University of New Hampshire and, in 2012, was inducted into the University of New Hampshire Athletics Hall of Fame. She also played for the United States women’s national ice hockey team, and won a silver medal at the 1992 World Championship.

His uncle Marty, and his cousin, Teddy Doherty, were also both involved in ice hockey. Marty last played in the British National League for the Dundee Stars, and Teddy last played for the Manchester Monarchs of the ECHL.

Now, that’s a hockey dynasty. And you can also see the interplay of US and Canada (as well as Britain, for the uncles).

I’ve lived in ice hockey country for most of my adult life, but I don’t skate except in the most rudimentary fashion. When my son was little I did what so many of the other parents in the neighborhood did, which was to take him for skating classes at the local rink. Where I live, this generally starts at the age of two or three.

But my son had about as much aptitude for it as his father or I do, which is to say none. He was pretty good at some sports later on, but not skating and certainly not back then. And yet other two- and three-year-olds there were skating rings around him, and I mean that literally. They obviously had begun to skate as soon as they could walk, and they already looked like mini-NHL prospects.

I was just as happy to have my son give it up, which he did by the time he was four. One of the main reasons I was happy was that it’s cold standing or sitting around ringside, when the place is almost empty. Classes usually happened early in the morning on weekends, too. Not really my cup of tea. You have to be dedicated, and those hockey families are very dedicated.

Oh, and you have to be willing to lose a lot of teeth.

[NOTE: There’s also this very sad story of ice hockey-playing brothers. RIP:

John Michael Gaudreau (August 13, 1993 – August 29, 2024) was an American professional ice hockey player. A winger, he played 11 seasons in the National Hockey League (NHL). He played college ice hockey for the Boston College Eagles in NCAA Division I for three seasons beginning in 2011 and was selected in the fourth round, 104th overall, by the Calgary Flames in the 2011 NHL entry draft. Nicknamed “Johnny Hockey”, …

Gaudreau and his brother Matthew were killed by a drunk driver while cycling on August 29, 2024, in Oldmans Township, New Jersey. …

Gaudreau was born on August 13, 1993, in Salem, New Jersey, to Guy Gaudreau, a former soccer player, college hockey player, and high school coach from Beebe Plain, Vermont, and Jane Gaudreau. He had two sisters and a younger brother, Matthew, who played hockey for the Worcester Railers and the Bridgeport Sound Tigers in the ECHL and AHL, respectively. …

On the evening of August 29, 2024, Gaudreau and his brother Matthew were struck and killed by a drunk driver while they were cycling in Oldmans Township, New Jersey. The Gaudreau brothers were cycling at around 8 p.m. and were hit from the rear by a motorist who was attempting to pass other vehicles on a two-lane rural highway. Police responded to the incident at 8:19 p.m.; both brothers were found dead at the scene by the time police arrived.[114] The driver, 44-year-old Sean M. Higgins of Woodstown, was arrested for drunk driving and charged with death by auto, after telling responding officers at the scene that he had consumed “five or six” beers before driving and continued to consume alcohol while operating the car; he failed a breathalyzer test when administered by police, along with failing a field sobriety test. Both Gaudreau brothers were also legally intoxicated at the time of the collision. …

The brothers had traveled to the township to attend their sister Katie’s wedding, which had been scheduled to take place the following day. …

During the 2026 Winter Olympics in Milan and Cortina d’Ampezzo, Italy, the American players also kept a Team USA #13 Gaudreau sweater with them. Johnny and Matthew’s surviving family including Guy, Meredith, Noa and Johnny Jr., also attended games during the tournament. When the United States defeated Canada in overtime to win the gold medal – the first for the men since the “Miracle on Ice” in Lake Placid in 1980 – the players skated Gaudreau’s jersey around the ice and then brought it and also Johnny Jr., who turned two the day of the gold medal game, and Noa out of the stands for the team photo following the medal ceremony.

The tributes are nice. But the deaths are unutterably sad.]

Is it a blizzard or just a snowstorm?

The New Neo Posted on by

I don’t care what they call it, as long as (a) I’ve got food in the fridge, (b) I don’t lose power, and (c) I don’t have to drive anywhere.

So far all three conditions are being met. But it sure is snowing out there, and it sure is windy. The difference between “a blizzard” and just “a big honking snowstorm” seems to be the wind speed, and I think by that measure we’re having a blizzard right now.

This is one of those storms where the New York City area is being hit harder than northern New England. But it’s plenty bad in New England, too, especially southern New England; see this, where I also learn this storm is called “Hernando.” Doesn’t seem to quite fit.

When I look out my window, it’s hard to tell how much snow has fallen, but it’s a lot. And there already was a lot of snow on the ground. But at the moment I’m snug and cozy.

At the moment.