From Border to Ballot Box: Democrats Built Dependent Voting Bloc Using Social Security Numbers

Democratic strategists long ago learned a basic principle of political arithmetic: change the inputs, and you change the outcome. In immigration policy, this maxim has become less about humanitarian concern than electoral engineering. The Biden administration, whether through design or indifference, implemented a set of administrative decisions that expanded the electorate not merely in theory, but in operational practice—and did so in a way that has rendered traditional safeguards nearly impotent. If these decisions were not intended to manufacture a new voting bloc from an influx of migrants, they are curiously congruent with that very effect.

The hinge of this strategy lies in a little-discussed bureaucratic program called Enumeration Beyond Entry (EBE). EBE, a joint initiative of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Social Security Administration (SSA), automatically issues Social Security Numbers (SSNs) to immigrants granted work authorization. At first glance, this may appear an unremarkable administrative convenience. But under the Biden administration, it became the means by which over 4.8 million SSNs were issued to migrants, most of whom entered illegally or under tenuous legal justifications such as parole, asylum claims, or Temporary Protected Status (TPS).

To understand the electoral implications, one must appreciate the near-omnipotent role the SSN plays in American civil life. It is not merely a tax ID. It is a de facto passport to the rights and benefits of citizenship. Possession of an SSN opens doors to employment, housing, state and federal welfare programs, and—critically—voter registration. While the law formally restricts voting in federal elections to U.S. citizens, the systems designed to enforce this are shockingly dependent on good faith.

The primary tool for verifying voter identity in the absence of a driver's license is the SSA's Help America Vote Verification (HAVV) database. All 50 states utilize this system, as required by the Help America Vote Act of 2002. When a voter registers using the last four digits of their SSN, states submit this information to the SSA via their Motor Vehicle Administrations. The HAVV database confirms that the SSN is valid and not associated with a deceased individual. But it does not confirm citizenship. Nor is it designed to. The question of citizenship rests entirely on the honor system: the registrant checks a box affirming that they are a citizen, under penalty of perjury.

The flaw is obvious. If a noncitizen receives an SSN—lawfully, under programs like EBE—and chooses to affirm citizenship on a registration form, the system lacks any built-in mechanism to contradict that claim. In most states, that declaration is accepted at face value. Some, like Texas, add secondary verification by cross-referencing with state-level databases (e.g., the Department of Public Safety). Yet even these methods rely on indirect indicators, such as prior presentations of foreign documents during driver's license issuance. There is no national, real-time verification of citizenship.

The predictable result is that thousands of noncitizens with SSNs have been registered to vote, whether knowingly or inadvertently. And while precise numbers are hard to obtain—by design—the systemic vulnerability is now undeniable. Consider that under Biden's term, millions of migrants were released into the U.S. and granted the right to work. Nearly all of them received SSNs. Most moved frequently, seeking work and shelter. The Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) has identified that many of these individuals, due to this mobility, are not just falling through the cracks of state oversight but are actively exploiting it.

A migrant may apply for housing benefits in Illinois, in New York, and in Pennsylvania—each program verifying eligibility through the same SSN. Since none of these systems are designed to flag multi-state claims or check for duplicate benefits, the result is a quiet form of administrative fraud, enabled by the SSN and invisible to the public. More troubling still, these benefits engender dependency. Once a person is enrolled in three or four such programs, they are no longer merely a resident; they are a client of the state.

It is precisely this clientelism that the Democratic Party has historically used to secure loyalty. From Tammany Hall to the War on Poverty, the formula has been simple: promise security, deliver benefits, and reap electoral returns. What is new under Biden is the mechanism. No longer must party machines operate through back-room patronage. The apparatus of the administrative state—the issuance of SSNs, the eligibility systems for entitlements, the porous voter registration databases—does the work automatically. The migrants themselves, often unaware of the full scope of their actions, are processed through a system that assumes their legitimacy and never looks back.

Critics might object that there is no evidence of coordinated fraud or that such a plan would require conspiratorial levels of orchestration. But this misunderstands the nature of modern governance. Bureaucracies do not need to conspire; they need only to implement. When incentives align—more migrants, more benefits, more registrations, more votes—the outcome is predictable, even inevitable.

Moreover, this policy environment creates a perverse asymmetry: while native-born citizens are hemmed in by identification requirements and bureaucratic delays, a newly arrived migrant may obtain an SSN within weeks, register to vote without real scrutiny, and receive benefits that make relocation from state to state a viable strategy. Each move creates new opportunities to tap into fragmented welfare systems. DOGE analysts report that certain migrant communities have even developed informal knowledge networks—guides, in effect—that circulate information about which states are easiest to extract benefits from, or where voter registration is least supervised.

What does this amount to? A quiet reconfiguration of the electorate. Not through legislation. Not through open debate. But through administrative fiat and systemic opacity. The EBE program, while facially a procedural convenience, has become the keystone of an unacknowledged policy of demographic augmentation. And while some may regard this as a natural evolution of a changing America, it is equally plausible—and far more troubling—to see it as an unauthorized transformation of the body politic.

In a constitutional republic, the franchise is a sacred trust. It is not a benefit to be distributed, like food stamps or subsidized housing. It is a civic duty, tied to allegiance and understanding of the nation’s laws, history, and responsibilities. By collapsing the distinction between legal presence and civic participation, the Biden administration effectively redefined citizenship without consulting the citizenry.

In doing so, they followed an old playbook in a new guise. Create dependency. Issue credentials. Obscure oversight. Reap votes. The American voter, meanwhile, is left to wonder whether elections are determined by citizens or by administrative momentum. The question is not whether fraud occurred. The question is whether the system was designed to notice.

If you don't already please follow @amuse on 𝕏.