Poli Alert Politics & Civics
Related Articles
The House is set to vote Wednesday on the SAVE America Act, legislation that would impose strict new requirements for registering to vote and casting ballots in federal elections, a move Democrats warn would disenfranchise millions of eligible voters.
The bill would require Americans to provide documentary proof of citizenship — such as a passport or birth certificate — to register to vote in federal elections. It would also mandate photo identification for voting itself, another long-standing Republican priority.
Republicans describe the measure as a common-sense safeguard against noncitizens voting in U.S. elections, even though such cases are exceedingly rare.
“Common-sense legislation to just ensure that American citizens decide American elections — it really is that simple,” House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., said Tuesday.
Public opinion and partisan divide
Johnson pointed to polling showing broad public support for voter identification requirements. An October 2024 Gallup poll found that 83% of Americans favor requiring proof of citizenship for first-time voter registration, while an August Pew Research Center poll found the same share support requiring government-issued photo ID to vote.
Democrats counter that the bill’s real-world effects would be far more restrictive than its supporters acknowledge.
“If you’re one of the 50% of Americans who doesn’t have a passport, or if you’re one of the tens of millions of Americans who can’t quickly access your birth certificate, the SAVE Act could, in effect, take away your right to vote,” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said Monday, calling the legislation “extreme.”
Trump pushes measure as election test
President Donald Trump has urged Republicans to pass the legislation, arguing that without it “we won’t have a country any longer.” Trump has repeatedly insisted that voters must show both identification and proof of citizenship, and has gone further by calling for an end to mail-in voting, with limited exceptions.
Johnson expressed confidence that the bill would pass the House.
“Despite the vehement and incoherent and frankly ridiculous opposition from Democrats, Republicans will continue to stand with the overwhelming majority of Americans who want secure elections,” he said.
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., accused Republicans of embracing voter suppression as a political strategy.
“That’s what the so-called SAVE Act is all about,” Jeffries said Monday. “And this version is worse than the last version.”
Jeffries predicted the bill would stall in the Senate, even if it narrowly clears the House.
“If it squeaks by the House, it’s dead on arrival in the Senate,” he said.
Senate obstacles loom
Earlier versions of the SAVE America Act have passed the House twice with support from a small number of Democrats. But Senate passage remains unlikely due to the 60-vote threshold required to advance most legislation.
Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., has faced pressure from conservatives to bring the bill to the floor using a “talking filibuster,” a procedural maneuver that could bypass the 60-vote requirement but would consume valuable floor time and allow Democrats to offer unlimited amendments.
Senate Republicans discussed possible paths forward at their conference lunch Tuesday. Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, who has championed the talking filibuster approach, said the idea received a positive reception.
Others were more skeptical.
“It’s been a good discussion,” said Sen. Mike Rounds, R-S.D., who described the maneuver as “very unworkable,” though he said Republicans remain interested in forcing Democrats to take a public vote on the issue.
To overcome a filibuster, Republicans would need at least seven Democratic votes — and at least one Republican, Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, has already come out against the bill.
Murkowski warned that imposing new federal election requirements so close to the midterms could undermine election administration.
“Election Day is fast approaching,” she wrote on X. “Imposing new federal requirements now, when states are deep into their preparations, would negatively impact election integrity by forcing election officials to scramble to adhere to new policies.”
Thune said Senate Republicans are engaged in a “very robust conversation” about how to proceed.
“How we get to that vote remains to be seen,” he said.
