File Photo by Carl Glenn Payne/Aurora Sentinel
President Donald Trump and Congressional Republicans continue to push the so-called Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act, or SAVE Act, as a cure for election insecurity.
In reality, it is a costly, disruptive and unnecessary measure that would do next to nothing to protect elections while making it harder for millions of eligible Americans to vote.
The Senate is considering the bill, and that’s where it needs to be stopped. It’s part of a “suite” of bills, others linked to attempts to nationalize elections, which is prohibited by the Constitution.
The premise of the SAVE Act is simple: Require documentary proof of U.S. citizenship for anyone registering to vote.
Its justification is far shakier.
There has never been credible evidence of widespread election fraud by noncitizens. None. Voting by noncitizens in federal elections is already illegal and carries severe penalties, including felony charges and deportation.
When it happens at all, it is exceedingly rare and typically the result of error, not conspiracy.
Michigan offers a clear example. A review last year found 15 apparent cases of noncitizens voting out of more than 5.7 million ballots cast in the 2024 general election. That microscopic fraction only confirms what election officials across the country already know: This is not a systemic problem. It is not remotely close to one.
In Colorado, after months of far-right Republicans alleging election fraud, one case was identified in Castle Rock where a registered Republican woman voted the ballots of her son and dead husband in the 2024 Election. She was convicted last October.
The GOP ruse of election fraud is hardly new. Former GOP Secretary of State Scott Gessler infamously purported an election-fraud ruse, claiming more than 100 “proven” instances of election crimes. Immediately, 41 were identified as registered voters. In Arapahoe County, former DA George Brauchler took the Gessler bait, pursuing fraud cases that were eventually dropped for lack of evidence or intent.
If there is fraud poisoning American elections, it is not at the ballot box. It is the fraud of lying — the years of false claims, distortions and misinformation perpetuated by President Trump and his acolytes.
Those lies have done real damage to public trust. The SAVE Act does nothing to repair that damage. Instead, it codifies suspicion of voters themselves.
Some Republicans argue that the SAVE Act is needed to restore trust to Republicans who have doubts about election integrity.
That’s easy to fix. Stop listening to party leaders and their provable lies and disinformation and change false messages from social media feeds to real, accurate, vetted news from trusted journalists.
Under the bill, states would be required to reject voter registration applications unless applicants present specific documents proving citizenship, such as a U.S. passport, a birth certificate paired with a government-issued photo ID, or a narrow category of IDs listing birthplace or citizenship. In theory, that sounds straightforward. In practice, it is a bureaucratic mess.
Roughly half of American adults do not have a passport. Millions do not have ready access to their birth certificates. Married women are particularly affected. As many as 69 million women nationwide have birth certificates that do not match their current legal names.
Fixing that mismatch can require time, money and multiple documents — a burden that falls hardest on working families. These are U.S. Citizens guaranteed the right to vote, which is the very foundation of our nation.
The bill would also hit rural voters especially hard. Those who mail in a federal voter registration form would be required to present their proof of citizenship in person at a local election office. In many rural counties, that office may be hours away. For people without reliable transportation, flexible work schedules or child care, that requirement alone is enough to stop a registration cold.
Minority voters would face disproportionate obstacles as well. Citizens of color are significantly more likely than white citizens to lack documents such as passports or certified birth certificates, or to face difficulties obtaining them.
Veterans and military families, who often re-register as they move, would be forced to produce paperwork again and again. Families displaced by natural disasters would be expected to replace lost documents before they can participate in elections.
And all of this would take effect immediately, not just for new voters but for existing voters who move, change their name or otherwise need to update their registration. The idea that this has “no impact” on currently registered voters does not survive contact with reality.
If you don’t want to listen to the sage advice of the state and national League of Women Voters, take the advice of former Arapahoe County Clerk and Republican Matt Crane, who has for years headed the association of Colorado county clerks.
“I think that for some people who don’t know and all they hear are those false narratives coming from the president and some of the grifters who have really seized on the opportunity to scare people for votes and money, I think, well, we have concerns and why wouldn’t we want proof of citizenship? Why don’t we want these things?” Crane said in a Feb. 5 interview with Colorado Public Radio’s Colorado Matters Host Ryan Warner. “You will see voter suppression happening, and there are some people who I firmly believe think the only way they can win elections is if that happens, which is disgusting. People fought and died for this right, Ryan. So the fact that we have people who are trying to undermine our elections like this and suppress voter turnout is completely un-American.”
For election administrators, the SAVE Act would be a nightmare. County clerks would be tasked with verifying documents, managing in-person submissions, and navigating vague requirements that could vary from state to state. Online and automatic voter registration systems — among the most effective tools for maintaining accurate voter rolls — could be crippled or shut down entirely. The cost to states and counties would be enormous, with no meaningful return.
And what would the payoff be? Not increased election security. Not restored public confidence.
The only noticeable effect would be fewer eligible voters successfully registered, more confusion at polling places, and more Americans turned away from the ballot box.
That is not safeguarding democracy. It is undermining it.
This editorial sounds a lot like the same claim they made about illegals not being on the welfare roles because “it is illegal.” We now know this fraud by illegals is indeed widespread. Turns out, “Blue run” states aren’t particularly concerned with U.S. law when it comes to using illegals to maintain future political power. They have been preventing government officials from inspecting their voter roles by running to the courts claiming violation of privacy and then, at the same time, claiming lack of evidence. Once these rulings are overturned on appeal, I suspect there will be all the evidence we need.
Kirk – the quintessential magat. He is the voter that trump loves. He “suspects there will be all the evidence we need once…” Once again, no proof, just the lies continually coming from this POtuS.
Some individuals post to sway others using reasoned arguement – others post simply as an emotional release.
As usual, you make claims without evidence.
Please identify specific cases where voter rolls (not “roles”) were denied by local governments. I’ve lived in a number of states, and I have never heard of anyone being denied access to voter rolls.
“As usual, you make claims without evidence.”
Hilarious, because this entire editorial is full of claims without evidence.
Every time I read about another “emergency” the GOP under Trump identifies, I watch and listen. This “election fraud” emergency has been Trump’s schtick since he was shamed by his utter loss to Joe Biden. That’s right, he was a proven LOSER. Pretty soon you will see the GOP cooking up some phony scheme to rig something they accused democrats of, like the SAVE act. Save what??? Our elections have been determined to be the safest ever – over and over in court – because Donnie and his merry band of losers presented their “information” or lack of information in court and it was thrown out or quickly or decided against them quickly. Giulani sacrificed his dignity and law license to support Trump! But NOOOO, we have to get this act crammed down our throat, immediately sending voting officials and voters scrambling for information or verifying it. It’s simply another solution in search of a problem, and like most problems Trump identifies, it’s entirely made up! When I hear Republicans talk about Trump’s legacy, I want to barf. His legacy is what it always was – he is one of the world’s best con men!
” Millions do not have ready access to their birth certificates. Married women are particularly affected. As many as 69 million women nationwide have birth certificates that do not match their current legal names.”
Fake excuses. Birth certificates are easy to request from the county of birth. Married women have copies of their marriage license, and if they don’t, they can also get a copy from the county where they were married. Acting like this is a problem is the fakest form of framing that Perry could offer up.
“Fixing that mismatch can require time, money and multiple documents — a burden that falls hardest on working families.”
Speaking as someone from a working class family on both sides, no, it’s not a burden. Working families understand how to request simple documents like these.
“Minority voters would face disproportionate obstacles as well. Citizens of color are significantly more likely than white citizens to lack documents such as passports or certified birth certificates, or to face difficulties obtaining them.”
Also a lie. Non-white citizens obtain those documents the same way white people do, every day of the year.
“County clerks would be tasked with verifying documents, managing in-person submissions, and navigating vague requirements that could vary from state to state. ”
Oh no, you mean bureaucrats might have to actually do something they’re supposed to be doing already when someone applies to vote? What exactly is “vague” about the requirements?
“Online and automatic voter registration systems — among the most effective tools for maintaining accurate voter rolls — could be crippled or shut down entirely. The cost to states and counties would be enormous, with no meaningful return.”
Are these systems not verifying voter eligibility?
“The only noticeable effect would be fewer eligible voters successfully registered, more confusion at polling places, and more Americans turned away from the ballot box.”
Assertion without evidence.
“That is not safeguarding democracy. It is undermining it.”
Since we know that you and your team believes that “democracy” is a euphemism for “only Democrats are allowed to hold political power,” we certainly understand why you’re opposed to it and are offering up this false dilemma as a defense.
The Sentinel gets one thing right: it is already illegal for noncitizens to vote in federal elections, with felony penalties and even deportation on the table. But that actually proves the case for the SAVE Act, not against it. When the Bipartisan Policy Center reviewed the Heritage database, it identified at least 77 documented instances of noncitizens successfully casting ballots between 1999 and 2023, and that is only from a sample of prosecuted or proven cases, not a full audit of the system. Federal and state authorities continue to bring new cases, like the Canadian national indicted in North Carolina for illegally registering and voting in multiple federal elections over two decades, demonstrating that these violations do occur and can persist undetected for years. Texas officials likewise report more than 6,500 potential noncitizens removed from voter rolls in recent years, with nearly 2,000 of them having voting histories and cases referred to the Attorney General for possible prosecution. Calling this “zero” or “nonexistent” fraud is a political talking point, not an empirical statement.
The editorial leans heavily on “no evidence” while ignoring how often states and advocacy groups fight to block serious citizenship checks, then point to the lack of findings as proof that nothing is wrong. Kansas, for example, was allowed to look only at narrow slices of data, and courts there still confirmed that dozens of noncitizens had in fact successfully registered, while also acknowledging that administrative problems and limited access to records could explain why more were not detected. Texas’s experience shows the same pattern from the other side: once officials tightened list maintenance and actually cross‑checked for ineligible registrants, they removed over one million ineligible voters in three years, including thousands of suspected noncitizens, and opened criminal investigations into illegal voting. When states are barred in court from robustly comparing voter rolls to immigration, death, and residency data, they will of course “find” very little; you cannot catch what you are not allowed to look for. The SAVE Act is about giving election officials clear national standards and tools to verify citizenship up front, so we are not relying on luck, whistleblowers, or the occasional prosecution to protect the weight of every legal citizen’s vote