Four Democrats broke ranks with their party to support the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act, a measure requiring proof of citizenship for voter registration despite fierce opposition from Democratic leadership.
At a Glance
- The House passed the SAVE Act with a 220-208 vote, with four Democrats joining Republicans in support
- The bill requires proof of citizenship to register to vote in federal elections using documents like passports or REAL ID-compliant identification
- Democratic Representatives Ed Case, Jared Golden, Henry Cuellar, and Marie Gluesenkamp Perez broke party lines to support the measure
- Critics argue the bill could disenfranchise eligible voters, particularly women who changed surnames after marriage
- Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer has vowed to block the legislation in the Senate
Bipartisan Support in a Divided House
The House of Representatives passed the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act with a 220-208 vote, requiring proof of citizenship for Americans registering to vote in federal elections. The legislation received support from all present Republicans and four Democratic representatives who crossed party lines: Jared Golden of Maine, Marie Gluesenkamp Perez of Washington, Henry Cuellar of Texas, and Ed Case of Hawaii. Their decisions represent a rare break from partisan voting patterns on election-related legislation in today’s polarized political climate.
The SAVE Act would mandate that voters present citizenship documentation when registering, including a U.S. passport, military ID, or REAL ID-compliant identification indicating citizenship status. Alternative acceptable documents include government-issued identification presented with a birth certificate or hospital record. The bill also requires states to remove undocumented immigrants from voter rolls and allows citizens to sue election officials who fail to comply with proof-of-citizenship requirements.
Democrats Defend Their Decision
Representative Jared Golden of Maine defended his vote in a statement after receiving criticism from Democrats. “There are a lot of misleading claims out there about the SAVE Act. Let me set the record straight: I voted for the SAVE Act for the simple reason that American elections are for Americans. Requiring proof of citizenship to register to vote is common sense,” said Golden. His position reflects the sentiment among the four Democrats who supported the bill despite significant pressure from party leadership to oppose it.
“In order to preserve this republic, we must uphold what it means to be able to vote in a U.S. election. I am grateful that my colleagues answered the call and passed the SAVE Act, as this serves as a critical first step to ensure that we maintain election integrity throughout our country.” Roy said in a statement.
The legislation has sparked intense debate about the balance between election security and voter access. Supporters emphasize that non-citizens voting in federal elections is already illegal and that the SAVE Act merely provides a verification mechanism to enforce existing law. Critics, however, warn that the documentation requirements could create unnecessary barriers for eligible voters, particularly those who have undergone name changes or have limited access to the required documents.
Concerns About Voter Disenfranchisement
The SAVE Act faces substantial opposition from voting rights groups and most Democratic lawmakers. Critics argue that the legislation could disproportionately impact women who have changed their surnames after marriage, military members, and people of color. The American Civil Liberties Union claims the bill could threaten the voting rights of up to 69 million women with name changes. Republicans blocked an amendment to study the bill’s impact on married women, further fueling Democratic concerns.
“My Republican colleagues crafted and passed one of the most damaging voter suppression bills in modern history. There’s no doubt that women, military members, and people of color will be disproportionately impacted. The fight to stop this bill — to protect Americans’ sacred right to vote — is not over. I will do everything in my power to ensure every eligible American has access to the ballot box.” Rep. Joe Morelle, D-N.Y.
Republican Representative Chip Roy of Texas, who introduced the bill, dismissed concerns about married women being disenfranchised, stating: “We have mechanisms giving the state fairly significant deference to make determinations as to how to structure the situation where an individual does have a name change. The process is specifically contemplated in this legislation.” The bill’s supporters argue that updating voter registration after a name change is similar to updating other personal records and should not pose an unreasonable burden.
Senate Prospects Uncertain
Despite passing the House, the SAVE Act faces an uncertain future in the Senate, where it would require Democratic support to overcome the 60-vote threshold needed to advance legislation. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer has already declared his opposition, stating: “Let me be clear, under my Leadership Senate Democrats will make sure this power grab does not pass the Senate.” Senate Republicans, led by Mike Lee of Utah, have introduced a companion bill with 20 Republican co-sponsors, but without Democratic support, the measure is unlikely to advance.
The SAVE Act previously passed the House in 2024 but failed in the Senate. Some conservative voices have suggested that Republicans should consider including the SAVE Act in a budget reconciliation bill to bypass a Senate filibuster. For now, the four Democrats who broke ranks to support the measure continue to face both praise from election integrity advocates and criticism from voting rights groups, highlighting the deeply divisive nature of election policy in today’s political landscape.
