Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

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.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

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

"Voter Here" sign outside of a polling location.

"Voter Here" sign outside of a polling location.

Getty Images, Grace Cary

Stopping the Descent Toward Banana Republic Elections

President Trump’s election-related executive order begins by pointing out practices in Canada, Sweden, Brazil, and elsewhere that outperform the U.S. But it is Trump’s order itself that really demonstrates how far we’ve fallen behind. In none of the countries mentioned, or any other major democracy in the world, would the head of government change election rules by decree, as Trump has tried to do.

Trump is the leader of a political party that will fight for control of Congress in 2026, an election sure to be close, and important to his presidency. The leader of one side in such a competition has no business unilaterally changing its rules—that’s why executive decrees changing elections only happen in tinpot dictatorships, not democracies.

Keep ReadingShow less
"Vote" pin.
Getty Images, William Whitehurst

Most Americans’ Votes Don’t Matter in Deciding Elections

New research from the Unite America Institute confirms a stark reality: Most ballots cast in American elections don’t matter in deciding the outcome. In 2024, just 14% of eligible voters cast a meaningful vote that actually influenced the outcome of a U.S. House race. For state house races, on average across all 50 states, just 13% cast meaningful votes.

“Too many Americans have no real say in their democracy,” said Unite America Executive Director Nick Troiano. “Every voter deserves a ballot that not only counts, but that truly matters. We should demand better than ‘elections in name only.’”

Keep ReadingShow less
Hand Placing Ballot in Box With American Flag
Getty Images, monkeybusinessimages

We Can Fix This: Our Politics Really Can Work – These Stories Show How

As American politics polarizes ever further, voters across the political spectrum agree that our current system is not delivering for the American people. Eighty-five percent of Americans feel most elected officials don’t care what people like them think. Eighty-eight percent of them say our political system is broken.

Whether it’s the quality and safety of their kids’ schools, housing affordability and rising homelessness, scarce and pricey healthcare, or any number of other issues that touch Americans’ everyday lives, the lived experience of polarization comes from such problems—and elected officials’ failure to address them.

Keep ReadingShow less
Why America’s Elections Will Never Be the Same After Trump
text
Photo by Dan Dennis on Unsplash

Why America’s Elections Will Never Be the Same After Trump

Donald Trump wasted no time when he returned to the White House. Within hours, he signed over 200 executive orders, rapidly dismantling years of policy and consolidating control with the stroke of a pen. But the frenzy of reversals was only the surface. Beneath it lies a deeper, more troubling transformation: presidential elections have become all-or-nothing battles, where the victor rewrites the rules of government and the loser’s agenda is annihilated.

And it’s not just the orders. Trump’s second term has unleashed sweeping deportations, the purging of federal agencies, and a direct assault on the professional civil service. With the revival of Schedule F, regulatory rollbacks, and the targeting of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion programs, the federal bureaucracy is being rigged to serve partisan ideology. Backing him is a GOP-led Congress, too cowardly—or too complicit—to assert its constitutional authority.

Keep ReadingShow less