Latest news with #SAVEAct
Yahoo
a day ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Wyden aims to bring Oregon's voting model nationwide with Vote at Home Act
PORTLAND, Ore. (KOIN) – Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR) reintroduced a bill on Friday that could change the way Americans vote across the United States. Initially introduced by Wyden in 2017, the Vote at Home Act would give eligible voters the option to vote by mail (including via drop-off site), provide pre-paid envelopes to return ballots and would automatically register citizens to vote at DMVs. Under the bill, voters who live in states with in-person, same-day voter registration would still have the option to vote at a polling station. Oregon man who set sail with his cat arrives to cheers in Hawaii The Vote at Home Act would also send ballots in the mail weeks ahead of Election Day, while providing funding for the United States Postal Service to cover costs associated with mailing ballots to and from voters. 'With Trump taking over the Oval Office, far-right legislators across our country are more emboldened to make voting more difficult for millions of Americans,' Wyden said in a press release Friday. 'Taking off work to vote in person – often waiting in long lines for hours – isn't an option for so many voters. Voting is a fundamental constitutional right. It should be easy, and bringing the Oregon Way of vote-at-home nationwide will guarantee that every eligible voter can make their voices heard.' Wyden noted the reintroduction of his bill follows passage of the Republican-led Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act, which would require voters to prove citizenship when registering to vote. Close Thanks for signing up! Watch for us in your inbox. Subscribe Now The SAVE Act was introduced in January by Congressman Chip Roy (R-TX) who says the legislation is necessary to protect against ineligible voters from participating in U.S. elections. 'American elections belong to American citizens, and the public's confidence in those elections is the cornerstone of our republic,' Roy previously said. 'We in Congress have a duty to our fellow citizens to provide that confidence and put concrete enforcement in place to ensure that our elections and our sovereignty cannot be hijacked and influenced by foreign nationals who have no business voting in this country.' Some state officials, including have raised concerns about the SAVE Act. DON'T MISS: How would the SAVE Act impact PNW voters? Proof of citizenship explained This also includes 17 Democratic state attorneys general — including Oregon Attorney General Dan Rayfield — who sent a letter in early April to Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) and Democratic House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY), urging them to oppose the bill. 'This law just makes it harder for people to vote,' Attorney General Rayfield said. 'We can protect the integrity of our elections while still making sure that every legitimate voter has an equal opportunity to cast their ballot without obstacles or discrimination.' In their letter, the attorneys general said cases of non-citizen voting in the U.S. are 'extremely rare,' pointing to several studies and an audit of Georgia's voting rolls by the Secretary of State's office, which found 20 non-citizens registered to vote out of 8.2 million residents and nine of the 20 non-citizens had a record of voting, as reported by the Associated Press. Portland infrastructure at risk due to gradual sinking, study says According to the attorneys general, the bill would also require expensive documentation, such as passports or birth certificates to match voters' current names – which could be difficult for some, including married women, whose legal name no longer matches the name on their birth certificate. 'Over 21 million voting-age citizens do not have ready access to a passport, birth record, or naturalization record,' the coalition wrote. 'And 80% of married women would not have a valid birth certificate under the SAVE Act because those women chose to adopt their partner's last name.' The bill also mandates in-person presentation of the citizenship documents, which effectively eliminates online voter registration systems, which is available in 42 states, the attorneys general argue, noting this could also disenfranchise active-duty service members who cannot return to their local election offices. Alice returns from Wonderland: African crane back at Washington zoo after two-day escape Wyden is joined by several Democratic colleagues backing the bill, including Sens. Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Maria Cantwell (D-WA), Cory Booker (D-NJ) and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass). 'Voting by mail has worked in Oregon for years. It's quick and secure—helping folks in red, blue, and purple states safely make their voices heard in our elections,' Sen. Jeff Merkley said. 'This shouldn't be a partisan issue. Expanding vote by mail nationwide is a secure way to ensure all eligible voters can exercise this constitutional right.' 'Oregon was the first state to enact full vote by mail in 1995, an effort led by both Democratic and Republican Secretaries of State,' said Oregon Congresswoman Val Hoyle, (D-04), who introduced the House companion of the Vote at Home Act earlier this year. 'We have seen the positive impact that mail in voting has had in Oregon – not only does it improve access for eligible voters, but every ballot has a paper copy making it the most secure form of voting. Voting is a Constitutionally protected right and I'll fight to make sure every eligible voter can make their voice heard. I am proud to introduce legislation with Senator Wyden that does exactly that.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Los Angeles Times
6 days ago
- Politics
- Los Angeles Times
LA Times Today: Take it from California's election czar, the SAVE Act is a sham
For much of America's history, the right to vote was reserved for a select few. African Americans, women and other minorities were unable to cast ballots. Last month, the House of Representatives passed the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility – or SAVE Act. California Secretary of State Shirley Weber wrote an opinion piece for the L.A. Times calling the bill 'Jim Crow 2.0.'
Yahoo
6 days ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
SAVE Act protesters in Willmar, Minnesota, say law would restrict voting access
May 22---- Demonstrators gathered under rainy skies to rally in favor of voting rights Wednesday in Willmar. In lieu of a planned march on First Street, about 50 demonstrators who came to Rice Park in their coats and rain ponchos instead occupied the picnic shelter at the park for approximately one hour Wednesday evening. Karen Kraemer, president of the Willmar Area League of Women Voters, said in her opening statement: "We work very hard to be non-partisan, but we are not neutral," characterizing the as a dangerous step toward voter suppression. The SAVE Act is sponsored by Rep. Chip Roy, a Texas Republican. The bill would require people to provide documentary proof of their U.S. citizenship, such as a birth certificate or U.S. passport, in order to vote in federal elections. The bill passed in the U.S. House in March on a mostly party-line vote and has since been sent to the U.S. Senate. Republicans, including Trump, have campaigned on and continue to press the idea that there is widespread voting by non-citizens, falsely claiming that it could unfairly swing elections despite the fact that multiple studies, including one at Minnesota's University of St. Thomas, have shown Voting rights advocates say the legislation seeks to fix a "non-issue," as it is already illegal for non-citizens to vote and doing so could result in criminal charges and possible deportation. Critics of the SAVE Act also say the bill as written would disenfranchise millions of legitimate American voters, ultimately leading to fewer people being able to vote in the same elections. Minnesota Secretary of State Steve Simon told a Senate Rules Committee spotlight hearing on May 14 that the legislation "poses one of the greatest threats to the freedom to vote in our lifetime," according to his prepared remarks. He said it would keep millions of eligible Americans from the polls. Kraemer referenced information shared by Secretary Simon and Deirdre Schiefling, a national political advocacy director with the American Civil Liberties Union, who spoke in a May 20 co-hosted by the Minnesota League of Women Voters, ACLU of Minnesota and others. For example, Kraemer stated that had the SAVE Act been in place last year, she would have had trouble helping her 96-year-old mother register to vote. Kraemer said she had to help her mother move from a house to an apartment in 2024. Though all states in the U.S. had their own method of keeping birth records since about 1919, there was no standardized version of these records until the 1930s, according to a 2012 published in the "Journal of Perinatology." Kraemer's mother was born in 1928. Even if Kraemer could have obtained a birth certificate for her mother, it may not have met the standard set by the SAVE Act. Kraemer also stated that, due to her mother's age, both her driver's license and passport are expired and would not have been sufficient to allow her to register if the provisions of the SAVE Act were in force. "The real issue is that 90 million people did not vote in the last election," Kraemer said. "And 72 million people are eligible to vote but are not registered. Our goal should be to get people registered to vote, that's always been the goal of the League of Women Voters." One protester, Dr. Kathy Nelson-Hund, felt compelled to speak among the demonstrators, urging them to reach out to young people and get them involved stating, "They are our future. They need to know what is happening before it is too late," she said. A family medicine physician who practiced in Willmar until her recent retirement, Nelson-Hund told the West Central Tribune that while she was at Wednesday's rally she thought about the discrimination she faced early in her career being one of few women practicing medicine at the time. "My medical opinions were questioned a lot by my colleagues just because I was a woman," she said. Nelson-Hund said she remembers when married women would still need permission from their husbands to open credit card accounts. She thinks the SAVE Act could very well be another hoop that young women will have to jump through in order to secure their right to vote. "They just don't know how frightening that can be," she said.
USA Today
21-05-2025
- Politics
- USA Today
Here's why married women are concerned about the SAVE Act
Here's why married women are concerned about the SAVE Act Show Caption Hide Caption SAVE Act would make voting harder for spouses who changed names The SAVE Act aims to keep non-citizens from voting, but also could make it more difficult for married people to cast their vote. The GOP-led House of Representatives has passed a voting bill that opponents have said could disenfranchise millions of voters, including tens of millions of married women. The Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act, first introduced last year by Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, is presented by Republican proponents as necessary legislation to safeguard elections and prevent noncitizens from voting, which is already illegal and exceedingly rare. It passed the Republican House in 2024 but was never taken up for a vote in the closely divided Senate. Roy reintroduced the bill in January and, though it passed the House on April 10, it will again face an uphill battle in the Senate, where seven Democrats would also need to support the measure. Supporters of the bill call it a security measure, but voting advocates have argued it would make it significantly more difficult for tens of millions of eligible Americans to register and carry out their constitutional right to vote. There has been specific buzz around how it could affect about 83% of women who change their last name when they marry. Here's what to know about the SAVE Act and how it could affect American voters. What is the SAVE Act? The SAVE Act would require that anyone registering to vote or changing their registration appear in person at an election office with original or certified documents proving not only identity but also citizenship status. For most Americans, that would mean showing a passport or birth certificate. That also means the most popular form of photo ID, a state-issued driver's license, would no longer be adequate on its own. Driver's licenses, military IDs and tribal identification documents would need to be accompanied by a birth certificate or record of naturalization that matches the name on them to be valid. Here's how it would affect American voters Registering to vote or updating your voter registration information could become much more difficult for tens of millions of Americans under the SAVE Act. Most people have to update their voter registration multiple times throughout their lives. Moving into a new home or apartment, changing party affiliation or updating a name, for example, all would now require that Americans go in-person to an election office with original or certified documentation of identity and citizenship status to make any changes or register at all. This bill could end voter registration drives, severely limit or eliminate online voter registration (used by 8 million Americans in the 2022 election cycle), limit or end automatic voter registration and eliminate the ability to send in a voter registration application by mail (used by 3 million people in 2022). People in rural areas, and those with disabilities or without reliable access to transportation, would find it more difficult to appear in person at an election office. These challenges are compounded by the fact that more than 21 million American citizens do not have their passports or birth certificates readily available, according to the Brennan Center for Justice. These voter security laws are already in place Proponents of the bill, such as House Speaker Mike Johnson, have argued it is necessary for election integrity, despite data indicating the alleged illegal voting at the heart of the bill is rare. "Democrats say it's already illegal to vote as a (non-)citizen, but that doesn't mean that you don't need further enforcement," Johnson told reporters. "We don't rely on the integrity of teenagers trying to purchase a six-pack at the liquor store, right? We require them to provide ID to prove they're old enough to make that purchase." Opponents say it is nothing short of voter suppression. 'It's just an undue burden for nothing because there isn't a problem with noncitizens voting,'' Helen Butler, executive director of the nonpartisan Georgia Coalition for the People's Agenda, told USA TODAY. 'I think it's all in trying to turn back the clock just so that people aren't able to vote when they're eligible to vote." Ample laws are already in place to prevent unqualified people from casting their votes, advocates say. Such measures include a requirement for election officials to verify eligibility and citizenship data via the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, the Social Security Administration, death data, and U.S. Postal Service change-of-address data, as reported by the Center for American Progress. Federal law also requires that anyone registering to vote provide either their government-issued driver's license number or the last four digits of their Social Security number to establish voting eligibility. Married women are concerned about the SAVE Act The SAVE Act requires that the name on your valid passport or photo ID matches the name on your birth certificate or naturalization card. However, it does not include proof of name change or a marriage certificate as acceptable documents to prove identity, meaning the roughly 69 million American women who take their partner's last name after marriage would not have a birth certificate that reflects their current, legal name. This concern is compounded by the fact that about half of U.S. citizens, or 146 million Americans, do not have a valid passport, according to State Department data. Comparing that number to the 153 million Americans who voted in the 2024 presidential election gives some scope to just how many citizens could have their voting access disrupted. If a voter changed their name after marriage and did not have a current passport, for example, they could be prevented from practicing their constitutional right to vote. The bill does include a provision ordering states to allow registrants to provide 'additional documentation' to prove their citizenship when discrepancies arise, but it does not specify what types of documents states could accept. Celina Stewart, CEO of the League of Women Voters of the United States, told USA TODAY she was concerned states wouldn't be able to work out which additional documents they would accept until after elections this year and potentially, next year. The bill's ambiguous language is a concern to voting rights advocates, she said, especially because a provision within it would subject election workers to possible jail time if they accidentally registered a voter who fails to present the outlined documentation of citizenship. Roy rejected accusations that the bill could hinder married women, calling it 'absurd armchair speculation.' He said in a statement that the legislation provided 'myriad ways for people to prove citizenship and explicitly directs States to establish a process for individuals to register to vote if there are discrepancies.' His office has not responded to questions about whether Republicans planned to amend the bill.
USA Today
21-05-2025
- Politics
- USA Today
How the GOP's SAVE Act includes 'poison pills' for some voters
How the GOP's SAVE Act includes 'poison pills' for some voters The push by House Republicans and the Trump administration to require voters to show proof of citizenship could imperil Native American votes. Show Caption Hide Caption SAVE Act would make voting harder for spouses who changed names The SAVE Act aims to keep non-citizens from voting, but also could make it more difficult for married people to cast their vote. WASHINGTON ‒ Senate Democrats and voting rights advocates are pushing to defeat a GOP election bill they said could disenfranchise Native American voters. Republicans led passage of the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE Act) in the House, but Democrats and advocates have slammed the bill, which among other things would require voters to show proof of citizenship in person for federal elections. The requirement could be difficult for people in rural areas or on reservations because they sometimes have to travel hours to register in person, advocates said. Married women who took their husband's name have also raised concerns about the requirement that the name on their birth certificate match their current identification. The new bill, advocates said, is also expected to be particularly challenging for Native Americans who rely on tribal cards for identification ‒ which typically don't include place of birth, as the new law requires. 'The SAVE Act is really a disastrous bill, and unfortunately it contains many poison pills," said Jacqueline De León, senior staff attorney at the Native American Rights Fund. 'As it's currently designed, it would radically disenfranchise Native American voters across the country." Republicans argue the measure is necessary to protect the integrity of elections and to make sure only citizens vote. 'In order to preserve this republic, we must uphold what it means to be able to vote in a U.S. election," Texas Rep. Chip Roy, the GOP sponsor of the bill, said in a statement. The bill faces an uphill battle in the Senate where Democrats vow to fight it. Republicans in the Senate have a 53 to 47 majority so at least seven Democrats would have to join Republicans to pass the bill and overcome the chamber's 60-vote threshold. Barriers to voting Advocates noted that noncitizens are already not allowed to vote in federal elections. There is no evidence that that is happening in significant numbers, according to the Migration Policy Institute. Voting rights advocates said requirements in the SAVE Act would create more hurdles for people living in rural communities and on reservations who sometimes have to travel hundreds of miles to register in person. 'It's sort of an amplified dynamic of the rural voter experience and challenges to have to present in person your citizenship documents to register vote," said Sen. Alex Padilla, of California whose state he said is home to more federally recognized tribes than any other. "If you live down the street from the county courthouse, that's one thing," he said. "But if you're literally a couple of hours from the county seat with limited transportation options, it can pose a significant challenge.' De León said long trips to registrar offices are particularly problematic in Alaska where many Native communities inhabit remote locations. Some require a plane to get to them, she said. 'The fact that Native Americans aren't receiving fair access to register to county seats and to elections offices is in and of itself a problem," De León said. 'But then to require the administration to be placed at those offices means that Native Americans are now doubly disenfranchised." Among the identifications allowed under the bill are passports and tribal IDs that include the place of birth. But advocates argue many Native Americans don't have a passport and can't afford the $130 cost to get one. De León said she doesn't know of any tribal ID that includes the place of birth. 'It's sort of disingenuous to say that tribal IDs are accepted," she said. Eliza Sweren-Becker, senior counsel in the Democracy Program at the Brennan Center for Justice, called it "a red herring," saying most Native voters don't have a tribal ID that would satisfy the bill requirements. 'The bill would harm all American voters," she said. "It would especially burden voters of color and it would especially burden Native voters." Many Native American elders also lack birth certificates, De León said. 'The SAVE Act preys upon the structural deficiencies in Native American communities and makes it difficult and at times impossible for them to comply," she said. GOP wants citizenship proof Roy praised the House for passing the Republican legislation by a vote of 220 to 208, "despite the ridiculous attacks and purposeful misinformation spread about the bill." Lawmakers voted April 10 mostly along party line with four Democrats supporting the bill. In addition to proof of citizenship, the bill also would require states to remove anyone identified as a noncitizen from voter rolls. Supporters have argued that ID requirements have not stopped people from registering to vote. They point to Georgia where state election officials adopted sweeping election reforms, including requiring a photo ID to vote absentee by mail, after the 2020 election. Voting rights advocates had said the state law could disenfranchise many voters of color. 'Turnout and registration numbers show that not only were these provisions not discriminatory, but they had record registration and turnout in Georgia," said Hans von Spakovsky, a senior legal fellow at the conservative Heritage Foundation. More: Voters in Georgia are already lining up at the polls In March, President Donald Trump signed an executive order also calling for proof of citizenship in federal elections. The order was part of Trump's continued false claim that he lost the 2020 presidential in part because of voter fraud. "This country is so sick because of the fake elections and the bad elections, and we're going to straighten it out one way or the other," Trump said before signing the order. Advocates warn that Trump's order and the SAVE Act will discourage voting, particularly among people of color. "The executive order and the SAVE Act are really two sides of the same coin and again reflect this emerging threat that the federal government is getting into the voter suppression business, which is alarming and a dangerous sign for our democracy,' Sweren-Becker said. Contributing: Riley Beggin, Trevor Hughes Follow Deborah Berry on X at @dberrygannett and on Bluesky at @
