The Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act, or SAVE Act, deserves the gold medal of Washingtonian acronyms. Sponsored by U.S. Republican Rep. Chip Roy (TX-21), the SAVE Act will do what it promises: SAVE America … or at least give us a fighting chance for the future.
That is, if Congress can actually pass the thing. While the GOP-led House has proved no obstacle to moving SAVE forward, the Senate remains a challenge, with time ticking down on Congress’s deadline to send the bill to President Trump for signature or walk into yet another election where non-citizens are casting ballots. This state of affairs is somewhat incredible when you consider that SAVE does, in fact, have backing from figures like moderate Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME), who sometimes acts as a block on top conservative agenda items. Ironically, in the case of SAVE, it’s other senators who seem to be standing in the way nonsensically.
It’s insane we aren’t abiding by the provisions of SAVE already. The bill requires individuals to provide documentary proof of U.S. citizenship when registering to vote in federal elections, establishes criminal penalties for non-citizen voting, and requires states to remove noncitizens from their official voter lists. 176 countries worldwide already require this kind of proof of identity and eligibility to vote. Maybe this is why even Collins is a “yes”; SAVE is that rare bit of true common sense emanating from Washington, D.C.
But another reason to support the bill might be self-preservation. In many of the 21st century’s closest, knife-edge races, moderate Republicans in blue states have lost by a literal handful of votes. Close elections where the Republican candidate might well have won had there been voter security include:
Recommended
- Rob Simmons v Joe Courtney (Connecticut, 2006, 90 votes)
- Dino Rossi v Christine Gregoire (Washington state, 2004, 129 votes)
- John Duarte v Adam Gray (California, 2024, 187 votes)
- Norm Coleman v Al Franken (Minnesota, 2008, 312 votes)
Maybe Collins knows something that other, more comfortably situated Republican senators (cough, cough Lindsey Graham of South Carolina) have failed to spot: The GOP Senate majority slims noticeably with Collins gone. And every ineligible voter who casts a ballot for Graham Platner or Janet Mills makes that outcome more attainable for so-called progressives.
For this reason, let alone simple good governance, passing SAVE before November is priority No. 1. (Passing it 100 years ago would have been pretty good too.) But Congress is running out of time, and proving too credulous of Democratic talking points.
Foremost among these is that SAVE must be stopped because it would “federalize” American elections. This convenient bit of sophistry ignores the fact that Democrats started the election-federalizing ball rolling with their very own HR1, the erroneously named “For The People Act,” straight out of the gate following the 2020 election result.
Other fan favorites are that it will bar married women who change their last names from voting (hardly likely, since this would, if anything, penalize Republican women who are far more likely to get married and to change their names than their “progressive,” single, cat lady counterparts) or that it will replicate Reconstruction Era practices like poll taxes. This kind of incendiary rhetoric should be rejected outright by the GOP.
So too should Republicans reject efforts to turn SAVE into a Christmas tree, or backburner it in favor of legislation spending more money. This will make it impossible to pass.
Some of DHS is already funded to a good degree because it got $165 billion in last year’s “One Big Beautiful Bill.” Official USA spending data shows roughly $73.5 billion unobligated in ICE Operations and Support, about $47.6 billion for Customs and Border Patrol and about $22 billion for the Coast Guard in FY2026 Q1 alone. Meanwhile, Reuters reports the reconciliation push now under discussion would exceed $50 billion over three years just for ICE and Border Patrol, making this not a marginal add-on but a major new spending commitment.
Even some Republicans are signaling discomfort with the fiscal case: Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.) wants any new ICE and Border Patrol funding offset with cuts elsewhere in federal spending, which seems perfectly reasonable given our budget situation.
DHS funding could be addressed later in the year, even after the election. By contrast, if SAVE isn’t passed soon, its provisions simply won’t apply in time for the election. The possibility that SAVE might be allowed to wither on the vine is even more ludicrous when you consider that more than 80 percent of Americans support requiring voter ID, according to Pew Research. Notably, 71 percent of those showing support were Democrats and 95 percent were Republicans. Even CNN started holding Democrats to account for objecting to voter ID!
But Republicans will be to blame if they can’t get SAVE done, given a still-favorable legislative environment and all these other winds at the bill’s back. It is, put bluntly, one more insurance policy to hedge against Democratic gains in the midterms—and guard against that Joe Biden quip about Democrats having the “most extensive voter fraud organization in history” becoming a reality. It’s time to get on with saving SAVE.
Editor’s Note: Republicans are fighting for election integrity by requiring proper identification to vote.
Help us continue to report why Democrats oppose such obvious measures by joining Townhall VIP and using promo code FIGHT to receive 60% off your membership.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member