What You Need to Know About the SAVE Act

Yer boy Hank here is gonna lead with the most important point. Do what you need to do right now...right now...to locate your birth certificate and/or your passport if you have one. Okay, now that I've said that, let's move on. The SAVE Act is the Republican legislation that has already passed the House of Representatives that would require heightened proof of citizenship in order to register to vote. The use of a birth certificate or passport, with your name matching your legal ID (a Dept of Motor Vehicles-issued driver's license, state ID, or Real ID), is what they are saying is required to register, and many US citizens do not have that proper documentation. This is why LGBTQ+ and married folks, especially married women, are so at risk of losing their ability to vote.

A recent article in The Advocate highlights many of the worries and dangers of the new pending legislation for millions of Americans. About 21 million Americans do not have readily available access to their birth certificates. They're filed away at a parent's house, lost through time, or damaged. Acquiring a new one requires time, further documentation, and money. And roughly half of Americans do not own a current passport. Access to these documents is especially difficult for poor people, BIPOC, and LGBTQ+ citizens.

The argument presented for the legislation is to ensure that only US citizens are eligible to vote, and to “protect election integrity,” according to Speaker of the House Mike Johnson. Which, on the surface, makes sense until you consider that voter fraud, especially voting by non-citizens, is exceptionally rare. According to the American Immigration Council, a review of Heritage Foundation data found just 68 proven cases of noncitizens voting in U.S. elections over more than 40 years, out of more than one billion votes cast in that period. That translates to an incidence below 0.0001 percent. The Heritage Foundation, by the way, is a conservative think tank credited with the creation and rollout of Project 2025. So, according to the data done by the conservative group pushing for such legislation, the reasoning for the legislation is entirely specious.

“One of the main points that we have to consider is that a lot of people do not have ready access to documents that may align with their current name and gender identities,” (Allen Morris, director of policy for the National LGBTQ Task Force) said. “When you are a trans or nonbinary person who has gone through so many life changes, and now you can’t even vote because someone is making it illegal for you to not only exist, but to be able to show up in how you identify, that’s one of our main problems.” (Christopher Wiggins writing for The Advocate.)

Currently, one is registered with merely a statement that they are a citizen, with the threat of purgery hanging over their head if they are lying, and then they present a photo ID, such as a driver's license or state ID, when they show up to vote. This would change all that. Court filings, fees, and sometimes a judge's ruling are just some of the hoops one must go through to have changes made to such documentation. So married people, especially women, trans folks, or any LGBT person who changed their name after marriage, have this challenging dog and pony show to run through in order to register. Additionally, last April, an amendment to the legislation was introduced to protect married women from being unduly penalized. Republicans voted it down.

And the risks aren't just for the potential voter. Local election boards and workers could also be at risk. As Wiggins states in his article, "The Brennan Center notes that the bill would also create new legal risks for election officials, who could face penalties for registering voters without the required documentation, creating incentives to reject registrations and discouraging proactive voter assistance. The result, the group warns, would be confusion, delays, and lower participation, not greater trust in elections."

“When you look at the statistics, when you look at the history, when you look at where we are, elections have worked,” (Morris) said. “There hasn’t been this outbreak of voter fraud. No one has ever illegally voted in an election with significant numbers. It’s just never occurred, regardless of what the occupant of the White House is saying.”

Wiggins writes that the bill is now headed to the Senate, where it needs bipartisan support. Let's hope that it's too weak to get over "procedural hurdles."

Until then, you may want to proactively acquire that documentation and do what you need to do to make changes, just in case.

Questions? Comments? Email us at [email protected]
Follow us on Twitter and Instagram.