Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act

What is this bill?

• HR 22, sponsored by Chip Roy (R-TX-21)

• S 128, sponsored by Mike Lee (R-UT)

Chip also authored the anti-ICC Illegitimate Court Counteraction Act, aka, HR 23.

This bill is an amendment to the National Voter Registration Act of 1993. The purpose of the NVRA was to create an easier system for people to register to vote. Voter registration was to be offered as a service along with getting/renewing your driver’s license or applying for public assistance (i.e. SNAP, WIC, SSDI). It also allowed people to register by mail, required states to use a federal form to register voters, and banned states from removing voters from their rolls unless they meet specific federal criteria.

Grading on the curve of Clinton-signed bills, this one is one of the best of his administration. Just a net positive for everyone involved with whole generations now used to how easy it is to hop online and update your registration. So, what is the problem?

According to Chip Roy, the problem is non-citizens using the easy system to fraudulently vote. Just to cover this right at the top, this opinion of Roy’s is a full tilt conspiracy theory. The Brennan Center for Justice looked into the claims of non-citizen voting in 2017 and found that out of 23.5 million votes cast in the 2016 election the number of suspected non-citizen votes accounted for 0.0001% of votes submitted. That’s 2,350 votes. As for finding actual instances of this happening, NPR looked deeper in 2024 and tracked down two cases where 7 people had been indicted. They noted that these cases are particular slam dunks due to the clear paper trail created when anyone registers to vote. So, it does happen, but its very rare & extremely easy to prosecute.

But hey, no reason to let reality hold up a brand new bill to stop something that is statistically not happening.

The main crux of this new bill would be to get rid of the simplified process of registering to vote by requiring more documentation, such as a passport, a REAL ID, or a notarized birth certificate.

The first group most in danger from this law is anyone that has legally changed their name since since birth. The problem is that the birth certificate will not line up with the name the federal government has, so it can’t be accepted as evidence of citizenship. This effects the 80% of women who changed their name after marriage, but also affects trans people across the board. If someone who changed their name has an enhanced driver’s license/REAL ID, they may be fine, but trans people in particular face a huge hurdle due to the government’s hard line on using basic identifying documentation to ignore trans existence. Congressman Roy has said that the bill orders states to have a system in place to remedy these issues, but the text of the act offers no advice for how to do it or any federal guideline to make these systems unified across states. Also, the bill doesn’t offer any federal funding to create said new system. So, congrats state employees! Nothing like more work and no extra money to do it.

The second group of people targeted by this bill are simply people who don’t have said documentation. According to the Brennan Center’s 2024 survey, 25 million people don’t have any citizenship documents readily available or at all. The Center noted that the loss of documentation is most typically due to them being “lost, destroyed, or stolen.” Roy states that the bill addresses this, but once again, it’s a vague “new state system” with no guidance or funding.

The third group that would face harm from this would be disabled people. Because, and I should have mentioned this earlier, the act makes it illegal for states to register people by mail or online. This would mean that people who have difficulty walking, driving, standing, and/or maintaining energy would be expected to spend a whole week of spoons for something that used to take five minutes in their own home. But, again, Roy promises the bill covers this and you bet again its vague demands of guidelines and no cash to do it.

Why is this bill fascist?

The top goal of early fascism is to consolidate power as quickly as possible. Since fascism does not hold majority support amongst the public, they are always one free and fair election away from their plans being dashed (see 2020). By reducing the number of eligible voters (especially those more likely to vote for their opposition), the greater chance they have to secure power permanently. And if they also get to revoke the right to vote from women, trans people, disabled people, the poor, and Hispanic people, then all the better.

Which Dems voted for it?

• House (4 Dems)

  • Ed Case (HI-1)

  • Henry Cuellar (TX-28)

  • Jared Golden (ME-2)

  • Marie Glusenkamp Perez (WA-3)

Did it pass?

• Passed the House on 4/10/25 by a vote of 220-208