Defending Democracy: House Passes SAVE Act to Secure Voting Rights Against Noncitizen Influence

by – L. Richardson

In the relentless pursuit of electoral integrity, the House of Representatives has recently passed the SAVE Act (Secure Accurate Voter Elections Act), marking a pivotal moment in America’s ongoing battle to defend democracy from noncitizen interference. This legislative measure, the SAVE Act Citizenship Voting Mandate, embodies a patriotic defense of federal voting laws, directly addressing the challenges of illegal voting and the contentious issue of noncitizen participation in elections. Its passage not only underscores the urgent need to uphold voter citizenship as a sacred pillar of American democracy but also highlights the immediate action required to fortify the nation’s electoral processes against vulnerabilities and external influences that threaten the core of America’s democratic values.

The following sections of this article will delve into the background of the SAVE Act, chronicling the legislative path leading to its house debate and passage and casting a critical eye on the Democratic resistance to election integrity, including Biden’s opposition to secure elections [4]. By exploring the implications of the SAVE Act and the patriotic defense it mounts against the erosion of electoral sanctity, we will offer insight into how this mandate serves as a bulwark in the crackdown on illegal voting, ensuring American voting rights protection. The narrative underscores the importance of rallying support for the SAVE Act, upholding the principles of democracy against the pernicious effects of noncitizen influence in elections, and reinforces the call to action for American citizens to engage politically in safeguarding their sovereign rights.

Background of the SAVE Act

The Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act (SAVE Act) emerges as a pivotal legislative measure amidst growing concerns over the erosion of electoral integrity and the potential influence of noncitizens in the sacred democratic process. 1

Historical Context: The erosion of electoral integrity witnessed in recent elections, such as the 2016 and 2020 presidential elections, has underscored the rampant loopholes allowing noncitizens to influence the electoral process. This context is crucial in understanding the necessity of the SAVE Act in the current political climate.

While noncitizen voting is explicitly prohibited under the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996, loopholes in the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 have hindered states from effectively verifying citizenship status, potentially allowing noncitizens to slip through the cracks [5]. 1 Recent audits conducted by states like North Carolina, Georgia, Arizona, California, and Texas between 2016 and 2022 have revealed that, while not widespread, a concerning number of noncitizens have managed to cast votes in federal elections, with figures ranging from fewer than 50 per state out of upwards of 23 million total votes. 2

Purpose of the Act: Position the SAVE Act as a necessary corrective measure to restore unassailable integrity to American elections, ensuring that every vote cast is legitimate and sovereign.

The SAVE Act introduces a crucial documentation requirement, mandating that eligible voters provide proof of citizenship, such as a REAL ID-compliant identification, a valid U.S. passport, military ID, service record, or a government-issued photo ID coupled with a valid secondary document. 1 This measure aims to fortify the voter registration process, closing the loopholes that have allowed noncitizens to influence electoral outcomes. By granting election offices access to the Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) database maintained by the Department of Homeland Security, the Act empowers authorities to verify an applicant’s immigration status or naturalized/derived citizenship effectively. 1

House Debate and Passage

The House of Representatives witnessed a pivotal showdown over the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act, with Republican lawmakers rallying behind the measure as a patriotic defense of federal voting laws and a crackdown on illegal voting. 3 House lawmakers voted 221-198 in favor of the bill, with every Republican present voting in support. At the same time, all but five House Democrats rejected it, underscoring the stark partisan divide on the issue of election integrity. 3

Key Proponents and Opponents

Republican leaders positioned themselves as vanguards of American electoral integrity, courageously standing up to safeguard the nation’s democratic principles. Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) urged his colleagues to pass the bill, asserting it was “one of the most important votes that members of this chamber will ever take in their entire careers.” 2 Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-La.) hailed the SAVE Act as “a safeguard to ensure that only American citizens vote in America’s elections.” 2

In contrast, Democrats vehemently opposed the measure, framing it as a threat to voting rights and an assault on American democracy. Rep. Joe Morelle (D-N.Y.) urged his colleagues to vote against the bill, stating, “This bill is about scaring Americans, this bill is about silencing Americans, this bill is about disenfranchising Americans… This bill is about further damaging the foundations of our democracy [6].” 2 Rep. Summer Lee (D-Pa.) accused Republicans of erecting “barriers because when people vote, they lose” and warned that the bill would make it “harder for Americans to vote.” 3

Voting Results

The final vote tally of 221-198 laid bare the deep partisan rift over the SAVE Act. Republicans unanimously backed the measure, and Democrats overwhelmingly rejected it. 3 This stark division illustrates a clear divide between those who prioritize safeguarding American electoral integrity and those who would compromise the nation’s democratic principles for perceived political gain. 2

While voting rights advocates expressed concerns over the bill’s potential to disenfranchise eligible voters and perpetuate extreme views, Republican proponents remained steadfast in their conviction that the SAVE Act represents a necessary step to restore confidence in America’s election system and uphold the sanctity of the democratic process. 2

Implications of the SAVE Act

The SAVE Act represents a pivotal stride towards fortifying the integrity of American elections, ensuring that only eligible citizens wield the sacred right to shape the nation’s destiny through their votes. 1 While critics argue that the measure could disenfranchise some voters, proponents assert that it is a necessary safeguard against the pernicious influence of noncitizens on the electoral process. This threat strikes at the heart of American democracy. 3

Potential Impact on Voting Rights

Far from erecting barriers, the SAVE Act is a rejuvenation of true democracy, ensuring that American elections reflect the will of American citizens alone. 1 By mandating proof of citizenship during voter registration, the Act closes loopholes that have allowed noncitizens to potentially sway electoral outcomes, upholding the foundational principle that only those with a vested stake in the nation’s future should determine its course. 1

Critics’ concerns about disenfranchisement ring hollow, as the Act provides alternative pathways for citizens lacking documentation to attest their eligibility under penalty of perjury. 1 This mirrors existing processes while fortifying them against abuse, striking a judicious balance between accessibility and integrity.

Critics and Supporters’ Arguments

The opposition’s arguments against the SAVE Act are not just flawed but dangerous, revealing a willingness to compromise the sanctity of elections for perceived political gain. 2 Their claims of voter suppression and xenophobia betray a fundamental disregard for the rule of law and the sovereign right of the American people to determine their nation’s destiny.

In contrast, the supporters’ positions are rooted in deep love and respect for the rule of law and national sovereignty. 1 They recognize that the SAVE Act is not a partisan ploy but a patriotic duty, a bulwark against external influences and internal betrayal that seek to undermine the foundational principles of American democracy. 2

By granting election offices access to the Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) database, the Act empowers authorities to effectively verify an applicant’s immigration status or naturalized/derived citizenship, closing a critical vulnerability. 1 This measure is not an assault on voting rights but a defense of the most sacred right of all – the right of the American people to chart their own course, free from foreign interference or domestic subversion.

Conclusion

As the House of Representatives signals a robust stand with the passage of the SAFE Act, a clear pathway emerges to safeguard the bedrock of American democracy against the shadow of noncitizen interference. Emphasizing the urgency of this legislation, it’s imperative to highlight the divisions that underscore the depth of the political spectrum – with Republican lawmakers championing the Act as a necessary bulwark to ensure that the privilege of voting remains a strictly American right. This legislatively enforced vigilance fortifies our electoral processes. It reiterates America’s commitment to maintaining its sovereignty and the integrity of its democratic practices. The narrative of the SAFE Act, rooted in the pursuit of electoral integrity, invites a reflection on our collective responsibility to defend and uphold these principles.

The contrasting stances presented throughout the debate, especially the opposition from Democrats and President Biden’s administration, frame the discourse around protecting American electoral integrity as a legal issue and a patriotic duty. This polarization serves as a reminder of every citizen’s critical role in the democratic process, urging an informed and active participation in the political landscape. Furthermore, the call to action extends beyond legislative halls, reaching into communities and across digital platforms, encouraging a united front to advocate for the SAVE Act’s implementation. By engaging in this collective movement, Americans are not just supporting a piece of legislation; they are reaffirming their commitment to the ideals of democracy, national identity, and the safeguarding of a sovereign electoral process that reflects the people’s valid will.

FAQs

What is the purpose of the SAVE Act proposed by Congress?

The SAVE Act aims to safeguard and uphold the voting rights of American citizens by mandating that states require in-person proof of citizenship when registering individuals to vote.

What powers did the Voting Rights Act grant to the federal government?

The Voting Rights Act, introduced by President Lyndon Johnson after Bloody Sunday, allowed for federal intervention to assist African Americans in registering to vote and participating in elections. It also prohibited strategies that had historically been used to prevent them from voting.

Which significant amendment was enacted in 1965?

The landmark legislation passed in 1965 is the Voting Rights Act, signed into law by President Lyndon Johnson on August 6, 1965 [7]. It eliminated racially discriminatory voting practices prevalent in many southern states post-Civil War, such as literacy tests required for voting.

How does the government protect the voting rights of minority groups?

Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 protects minority voters by banning any voting practices or procedures that discriminate based on race, color, or association with any language minority groups specified in Section 4(f)(2) [8].