Marshall Helmberger

In the discussion over the intent of the various iterations of the SAVE Act currently making the rounds in Washington, D.C., it is important to remember one key point: This isn’t about preventing voter fraud, or about whether voters should have to show a photo ID. It’s about setting the ground rules to disadvantage demographic groups that tend to favor Democrats while doing so under false pretense.
This entire debate, and the billions of dollars that local governments and voters would be forced to spend to meet the requirements of any of the current legislation, is predicated on a problem that has been proven time and again does not exist. Groups ranging from the liberal Brennan Center on Justice to the conservative Heritage Foundation have undertaken in-depth examinations of voter rolls and have reached identical conclusions. Voter fraud is astonishingly rare.
The Heritage Foundation, for example, sampled a vast amount of records across the country encompassing decades and found fewer than 1,500 cases where people committed some form of voter fraud, which usually did not result in actual votes. That’s less than 0.000075 percent of the votes cast during the period of study. And the Heritage Foundation was able to find these rare instances of voter fraud by combing through criminal convictions. That’s right, the checks on the system already in place were able to find these needles in the haystack and take action to prosecute them.
And virtually none of this relative handful of cases cited by Heritage involved voting by non-citizens or voter impersonation, the two types of voter fraud the SAVE Act would purportedly address. This is no different than passing a law under the guise of protecting our elections from votes by extraterrestrials. This bill addresses no actual problem and would force American citizens every year to collectively spend tens or hundreds of millions of dollars and considerable effort simply to exercise their right to vote.
You don’t have to look very far to see that the various versions of the SAVE Act have at least one thing in common — they all target groups that tend to vote Democratic. The bills currently under consideration would prohibit the use of student IDs, for example, even those issued by state colleges and universities, for either registering to vote or voting. Republicans know that college students aren’t their best demographic, so making it nearly impossible for these students to vote would be extremely helpful to their partisan cause.
While many of these students would likely have driver’s licenses, you won’t be able to register to vote with most driver’s licenses, even Real IDs. Most college students don’t typically pack their birth certificates or passports, which they would need to register to vote where they attend school. And even if they could register, they would still need a state-issued photo ID with their school address. That would normally be their school ID, but the Republicans are making sure that won’t suffice.
The SAVE Act also targets Native American voters, traditionally a strong Democratic voter group, by limiting the types of tribal IDs that can serve as evidence of citizenship. While the tribal IDs issued by the Bois Forte Band would appear to be compliant, other bands in Minnesota, like the White Earth and Red Lake bands, don’t traditionally have street addresses, making them ineligible for registering or voting purposes depending on which version of the bills ultimately might pass in Congress. Native Americans are also less likely to have birth certificates or passports than other Americans.
These bills also erect significant roadblocks for many women that would not affect male voters to the same degree. Depending on the version of the SAVE Act that might ultimately be approved, that could impact their ability to register or even their ability to vote even if currently registered.
Keep in mind, every time someone moves, they would need to register to vote based on their new address. While that’s a relatively simple process now, at least in states like Minnesota, it will be more cumbersome if the SAVE Act is enacted. For anyone to register or re-register, it will require a birth certificate (which many Americans lack or can’t find) or a U.S. passport, which about half of Americans lack. Your driver’s license won’t suffice, unless it’s an enhanced driver’s license. Your Real ID won’t meet the provisions of the law.
While this would present a challenge for many of us, it presents a bigger challenge for married women who take their husbands’ last names or who hyphenate their names. These women would have to present a birth certificate or U.S. passport as well as a marriage certificate that would show why her name doesn’t match her birth certificate. While there are no doubt many people who maintain these records in an orderly manner, many do not. For those women who don’t, they would be required to pay to obtain a copy of their marriage license from the county in which they married, as well as a copy of their birth certificate from the county in which they were born. And as for women who have been married more than once, possibly in other states, or who have changed their names again after divorces, it’s pretty easy to understand that running down all this paperwork could present a real challenge and considerable expense. Anyone who suggests otherwise isn’t telling the truth.
Given the current gender gap in American elections, in which women are consistently anywhere from 10-15 percentage points more supportive of Democrats than men, it’s easy to see why Republicans are so keen on the language in the SAVE Act. It should be renamed as the SAVE Republicans Act, because that’s what this is really about.
Let’s face it. Republicans can see the handwriting on the wall. Recent special elections in states across the country have proven to be bloodbaths for Republican candidates, even in districts that voted overwhelmingly Republican in 2024. Republicans clearly hope that by instituting a complicated new law, which would provide no additional funding for implementation, and which would take effect immediately, the 2026 mid-term elections will be thrown into chaos, possibly allowing them to salvage through lawsuits or nefarious congressional action a Republican majority in Congress they can’t win fairly at the ballot box.