Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

A bipartisan take on the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act

Members of Congress speaking outside the Capitol

Speaker Mike Johnson (right) and Rep. Chip Roy conduct a news conference at the Capitol to introduce the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act on May 8.

Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images

Lempert is an intern with the Bipartisan Policy Center ’s Democracy Program. Orey is director of the Elections Project at BPC. Weil is executive director of BPC’s Democracy Program.

The House of Representatives recently passed the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act. Introduced by Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas), the SAVE Act requires individuals to provide documentary proof of citizenship when they register to vote. The bill has not advanced through the Senate.

Both parties agree that voter registration should permit all eligible citizens — and only eligible citizens — to register and vote. Although instances of noncitizen registration and voting are rare, the SAVE Act’s goal of ensuring that only citizens can register to vote is important. But there are easier, more cost-effective ways to improve voter registration that don’t create new barriers for eligible voters.

Here’s what you need to know about requiring proof of citizenship to register to vote.


Citizenship is already a requirement to vote, but it is not always the easiest thing to prove

The SAVE Act amends the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 by introducing a requirement for individuals to provide proof of U.S. citizenship when registering to vote in federal elections. Eligible documents include a REAL ID-compliant identification indicating U.S. citizenship; a valid U.S. passport, military ID and service record; a government-issued photo ID showing U.S. birthplace; or a government-issued photo ID that does not indicate birthplace or citizenship and a valid secondary document.

The SAVE Act introduces a documentation requirement for a law that has existed for decades: The Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 explicitly prohibits noncitizens from voting in federal elections. The NVRA requires states to use a common voter registration form, which includes an attestation under penalty of perjury that the applicant is a U.S. citizen. Illegal registration and voting attempts by noncitizens are routinely investigated and prosecuted by the appropriate state authorities, and there is no evidence that attempts at voting by noncitizens have been significant enough to impact any election’s outcome.

Arizona began requiring proof of citizenship to vote in 2004. After the Supreme Court ruled in 2013 that the additional documentation requirements violated the Voting Rights Act, the state created a “federal-only list” that permitted otherwise eligible voters who could not provide proof of citizenship to vote in federal elections.

Arizona’s federal-only list provides insight into how a national documentation requirement might impact voters in practice. Analysis conducted by Votebeat found that rather than noncitizens, college students and individuals experiencing homelessness — both transient populations that are more likely to lack identifying documentation — were disproportionately represented on the federal-only list. This echoes research by the Brennan Center for Justice, VoteRiders, the University of Maryland Center for Civic Democracy and Engagement and Public Wise, which found that “more than 9 percent of American citizens of voting age, or 21.3 million people, don’t have proof of citizenship readily available.”

The SAVE Act does include an alternative process for those without citizen documentation. It requires that states establish a process under which citizens who cannot provide documentary proof may submit other documentation and sign an attestation under penalty of perjury that the applicant is a citizen of the United States and eligible to vote in elections for federal office. This mimics the voter registration process that already exists, but with added administrative requirements for election officials.

The SAVE Act needs more time and resources to be implemented well

The SAVE Act requires significant changes to each step of the voter registration process: how voters register, how their identities are verified and how list maintenance is performed on an ongoing basis. These changes would be costly and time consuming, taking months — if not years — to achieve.

Despite the administrative difficulty of implementation, the SAVE Act prioritizes expediency over precision. The act becomes effective on the date of enactment, giving states no time to adjust processes. It also requires that the U.S. Election Assistance Commission offer implementation guidance to states within just 10 days of enactment.

BPC recommends that policymakers avoid making major changes in an election year, given the likelihood that they result in administrative errors and create confusion for voters. Making matters worse, the SAVE Act is an unfunded mandate, with no funding offered to states to assist with implementation costs.

There are better ways — like REAL ID and data sharing — to improve voter list accuracy

Rather than require documentary proof of citizenship, citizenship checks could be improved through adoption of REAL ID standards and improved data sharing between state departments of motor vehicles and state election offices.

The REAL ID Act of 2005 set standards for state-issued driver’s licenses and identification cards. While noncitizens with lawful residence are eligible for a REAL ID license or ID, all applicants are required to provide documentation confirming either lawful residence or U.S. citizenship. If state departments of motor vehicles share information about the types of information applicants submit with the state election office, then the state election office can reasonably determine whether someone is a citizen and seek additional information when eligibility is unclear.

In Colorado, the state department of motor vehicles shares daily updates with the state election office, enabling them to continuously evaluate the eligibility of prospective voters.

The federal government should expand state access to federal eligibility data

Election officials from BPC’s Task Force on Elections report that, at present, getting access to federal citizenship data is difficult, costly and burdensome. The SAVE Act grants election offices access to the federal citizenship data that they have long struggled to obtain.

It specifically grants access to the Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements database maintained by the Department of Homeland Security, which is a “fast, secure, and reliable online service that allows federal, state, and local benefit-granting agencies to verify a benefit applicant’s immigration status or naturalized/derived citizenship.”

The bill requires that federal departments and agencies respond to state election official requests for eligibility information within 24 hours and prohibits the federal body from charging a fee. State election officials are also permitted to batch requests for eligibility information, enabling them to check multiple individuals at once. Permitting election officials to submit batch requests without charge simplifies and streamlines list maintenance, improving the accuracy of voter lists.

State legislatures are taking action on citizenship and list maintenance

The SAVE Act is unlikely to become law before the presidential election, but states are taking action on this issue. Nine states have enacted legislation in the past year and a half to solidify citizenship verification for voting and voter registration. Some states opted to take a voter-based approach, mandating individuals to provide proof of citizenship upon registration or allowing provisional ballots for citizens without proof. Other states improved data collaboration with state resources and federal databases like Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements. Florida and Indiana chose to cross-reference with the DMV, Kentucky, North Carolina and Oklahoma began to use jury duty exclusion lists, and Tennessee utilizes its Department of Safety and Homeland Security data.

Both Democrats and Republicans want voter registration processes that allow all eligible citizens — and only eligible citizens — to vote. While citizenship is a requirement to vote, there are more effective ways to ensure the voter rolls include only eligible Americans and place the burden of proof on the state and federal government — not their citizens.

A version of this writing was first published by the Bipartisan Policy Center. Read the original article.


Read More

The Supreme Court’s Voting Rights Decision Could Reshape Local Government Across Texas

A landmark Supreme Court ruling on the Voting Rights Act could reshape Latino and Black political representation in Texas. Guillermo Ramos and other leaders warn the decision may weaken protections against discriminatory election systems in school boards and city councils.

The Supreme Court’s Voting Rights Decision Could Reshape Local Government Across Texas

Guillermo Ramos remembers seeing few elected leaders who looked like him while he was growing up in the 1980s in Farmers Branch, a fast-growing affluent suburb northwest of Dallas.

Over the years, Latino representation continued to lag, he said. In 2015, after he had become a lawyer, he decided to do something about it.

Keep ReadingShow less
Republican, Democratic and independent checkboxes, with the third one checked

Analysis of California’s open primary system, political reform, and voter empowerment amid gubernatorial tensions and calls to restore party control.

zimmytws/Getty Images

California Schemin’

Both before and after Eric Swalwell’s resignation, the California Gubernatorial race has partisan insiders screaming that California’s innovative, voter-friendly, open primary system should be scrapped. Why? Seven Democrats and two Republicans are running. If all the Democrats stay in the race, and none surges, there is a statistical possibility that the two Republicans advance to the general election.

The attacks are pure opportunism, from people who oppose open primaries, period. Never mind that seven million independent voters have been enfranchised and elections are much more competitive, according to these critics, the fact that the Gubernatorial race might feature two Republicans is absolute proof that the old system needs to be restored.

Keep ReadingShow less
Official ballots with a chain and lock over them, and the USA flag behind them.

The impact of election fraud claims and voting laws on democracy in the United States. Daniel O. Jamison examines voter suppression concerns, mail-in ballot policies, and the broader political struggle over election integrity.

Getty Images, JJ Gouin

If It Ain’t Broke, Don’t Fix It

For nearly ten years, claims that our elections are riddled with fraud have threatened the foundation of our democratic republic.

It is alleged that Democrats have flooded the country with illegal immigrants who then illegally vote for Democrats. Purportedly to protect the country from this, Republicans seek legislation that would, among other provisions, restrict vote-by-mail, require potentially expensive and onerous proof of citizenship to register to vote, and require potentially expensive photo identification to vote.

Keep ReadingShow less
The Fahey Q&A with Elizabeth Rasmussen

An in-depth interview with Elizabeth Rasmussen of Better Boundaries on Utah’s redistricting battle, Proposition 4, and the fight to protect ballot initiatives, fair maps, and democratic accountability.

The Fahey Q&A with Elizabeth Rasmussen

Since organizing the Voters Not Politicians 2018 ballot initiative that put citizens in charge of drawing Michigan's legislative maps, Fahey has been the founding executive director of The People, which is forming statewide networks to promote government accountability. She regularly interviews colleagues in the world of democracy reform for The Fulcrum.

Elizabeth Rasmussen is the Executive Director for Better Boundaries, a Utah-based organization fighting for fair maps, defending the citizen initiative process, preserving checks and balances, and building a better future. Currently making headlines in the state, Better Boundaries is working to protect Proposition 4, and with it, the rights of Utah voters.

Keep ReadingShow less