The SAVE act is a Republican attempt of suppress the vote. Those states that don't require ID when you vote have no voter fraud. Republicans lie, don't you know!
David, my home state of NH (100% blue federal representation, red state house and governor) has implemented Voter ID, despite the fact that only a small handful of votes have been shown to be fraudulent over the past several cycles, and most of those acts committed by, you guessed it, Republicans.
Worse than that, the act most likely stemmed from The Revenge of Trump. Not conviced by the results of the 60+ court cases of alleged voter fraud in 2020 that stripped him of the presidency, he and his ilk are pushing an act for which there is clearly no need. It must be defeated.
After reviewing many analysts comments i think the SAVE act is a trojan horse. The vote outcome if it passes in future elections doesn't seem to overwhelming benefit one party.
I think the purpose of the SAVE act is to bust the filibuster so that with just a 51/50 vote trumps senate can pass insanely unpopular legislation in the future instead of 60/40 vote. You can just imagine the horrific legislation Trump would try to pass...
Maybe Dr. what we need it's a new Constitution since the current one failed to prevent a corrupt dictator take over the country, apparently always within the current laws and procedures.
What Karen and Jen miss is that laws are only followed if the citizenry comply. If the citizenry are corrupt then chaos follows.
Here is how bad things are in america with corrupt morally bankrupt americans: I posted in yesterdays wall street journal in the comments section about the Save act which had hundreds of reader comments with some comments getting likes 100 times, except mine which got zero likes! My comment:
"Donald Trumps 2020 absentee ballot vote was a faudulent act which should be prosecuted since he was not a resident of florida (maralago was always a club not residence since purchase) at the time and did not live in Florida more than half a year as required to vote in that state.
Have fun with your denials .
That nobody on this comments board has even suggested impeachment means you want other people to follow laws and not you! You really think america will function well without law abiding citizens?"
So the elite and financial elite in the comments section of the wall street journal did not like my comment about impeaching trump and could care less about his voting fraud. That explains why america is such a mess now and why the Epstein files case is really a metaphor for americans not in the ruling class: rules for thee and not for me.
We need to work hard , vote and keep voting and stay vigilant to get our democracy back as at least 20% of americans are at least morally bankrupt and complicit in this mess.
Agree. But my point was those that should know better, are in power, have bought off many in congress with campaign donations, already have more money then they will ever need ... apparently that is not enough and they are perfectly happy if we are second tier citizens or slaves or worse!
That does clarify things. This is why we need not only campaign finance reform, but also to remove the lobbyists who serve their corporate masters who pay for favorable legislation.
We are all prophets and need to lead by example. Those with greater good fortune comes the responsibility to contribute more per your blessings! This is a team effort! Let go team!
That would be the equivalent of throwing the baby out with the bathwater. There are definitely updates, corrections, and strengthenings that are needed, and that is what ammendments are for. The base of the document is still sound.
I volunteered as a poll worker in a small town several elections, we didn't ever see non citizens attempting to vote. Kudos to Utah's Lt. Governor Henderson who conducted a study to verify it is NOT a problem but was never consulted by Utah Senator Mike Lee who sponsored it
Same for me, PJ. I've worked as a depict voter registrar here in NH, which has implemented Voter ID laws. (And, the number of people who were attempting to re-register (due to in-state moves) and who found out that a Real ID was not sufficient to prove citizenship was surprising.)
One thing Republicans are pretty good at: Naming their bills in an attempt to confuse the public. Gee, like the "SAVE" act, an attempt to save their sorry behinds.
A surgical blade in the hands of a competent surgeon can perform miracles. In the hands of a street thug, it can cause enormous harm. It's not the tool's fault who wields it. Reshape and sharpen the blade but carefully craft its use.
I wasn't talking about the SAVE Act but the "nuclear option" for passing it. The supermajority (1917 Jim Crowe era minority blocking rights) procedure is the surgical blade. At the moment, that is the only thing protecting us from tRump decides everything and Congressional Republicans just rubber stamp it all. Let's see how they deal with his extortion attempt (pass it or I veto everything).
In whose hands the sharp blade ends up SC, depends upon the voters, and seems to me that we failed horrendously. By paying the consequences of our mistakes, I hope we learned the lesson and don't forget during the next election cycle. If we have one at all.
The inaccuracy of the naming of the Republican supported legislation is another ‘con job’, on the American people. Starting with the ‘Big Beautiful Bill’ and now w/the ‘Save Act’. Neither of which supports a democracy. This is especially important at this juncture as more, and more Americans are waking up and realizing they have been duped!
Many of us are already wise to the 'reverse naming' of legislation and aren't buying the lies. We hope that many more will come to the same realization and vote accordingly.
Texas can already legally be split into five states—that provision was built into their admission to the US back in the early 1800’s. Unfortunately, both sides can play at this game, as we saw during the recent redistricting wars.
In my opinion, any tool at the Democrats disposal to defeat the SAVE Act is justified, including the filibuster. That might be a short-sighted point of view, but as a woman who took her husband's last name when she married, I am one of those who would be required to submit additional paperwork to continue to be able to vote. I certainly didn't anticipate when I got married back in 1967 that taking my husband's name would ever be a stumbling block to voting.
I got divorced in 1999, and one of the things I threw out in a subsequent paper purge was the marriage license. Because I couldn't think of any possible reason I would ever need it again. ID paranoia didn't exist yet.
I was really lucky though. At the time of the divorce I hadn't decided whether to revert my name. So my attorney included in the decree a provision stating that I can do so at any time with no further legal action required. And it gives the name. I used the decree as proof for TSA PreCheck years ago and then again last year when I decided to get a passport because I object to Real ID on general principles and a passport is much more useful. But I was able to afford it, and that's not the case for so many people.
I found this post confusing and worrisome. The filibuster is exactly a way to oppose this SAVE Act if it can muster a majority. This is my first push back on what I believe to be your position.
I agree. I have been an admirer of Jennifer’s for some time, but I have grown weary of her lecturing Democrats. They are supposed to oppose the SAVE Act but somehow tie themselves in knots to handle the filibuster just right according to Jennifer’s standards. As a former Senate staffer of 9 years I think that the stupidest thing the Dems could do is signal their intention to get rid of the filibuster when they win the majority. That is an open invitation for the GOP to go ahead and pull the trigger to get the SAVE Act through. We need to deal with the filibuster when we actually have to power to do away with it. Right now let’s focus on the job at hand - defeating the SAVE Act.
Thanks for your comment: I would just say that this situation is evidence that the filibuster can be of value to either side of the aisle and pluralist democracies need to protect intense minorities - as we will be if Republican try to get a voter suppression bill passed.
I couldn’t agree more. The filibuster cuts both ways. When we do get the majority, the decision to eliminate it will require careful consideration. It may need to go, but eliminating it is not without risk.
I think her point is that *now* we will probably need the filibuster to defeat this bill but using a filibuster should not be the way we conduct business in Congress.
I had the same reaction. It feels like another manifestation of when they go low, we go high. And that just ain't it anymore (assuming it ever was in the first place).
Throw in here that Jared Bernstein, in a post to the Contrarian, came out in favor of abolishing the filibuster. As I understood his position, just get rid of it. He argued that it's undemocratic and most to blame for gridlock in Congress. He said do not preserve the filibuster as Jen seems to suggest to be used strategically by Democrats. In a back and forth, Bernstein said the harms from the filibuster were far worse than the risks of the opposing party passing legislation by simple majority rule.
I've always like Jared Bernstein and trusted that his extensive experience brought him to the right answer on the filibuster. Past expiration date.
Democracy is not just about majority rule. Filibusters have been used to support policies I would not support, but that is not the litmus test of democratic institutions and processes
In the strange, hate-filled world of Donald J Trump, he has a special meaning for the world "WE". You might think that our fake POTUS means "my fellow Americans". Nope. You'd be wrong. When he says "WE" it's limited to his supporters or allies or corrupt collaborators. He NEVER means "We the People". His WE is referring to those who will become richer because of higher oil prices while 95% of Americans will become poorer. The "WE" of "SO MUCH WINNING" from tariffs are the Trump family and the upper 5% of taxpayers, NOT the People and so it goes into a war with Iran. WE the PEOPLE must do whatever it takes to save ourselves and the nation
"Certainly, Democrats should deplore the specifics of the SAVE Act, highlight Republicans’ desperation to cling to power at all costs..."
As previously mentioned in the article, the SAVE Act would do just as much (and maybe more) to disenfranchise Republican voters, but the Magapublican Senate is short-sighted and may not see this as a problem. They should.
The filibuster has had a long-standing tradition and must be dealt with, though there is far more need to put an end to the SAVE Act immediately. Original birth certificates for many are inaccurate. For anyone who changed their name for any reason in life, the current name does not reflect the given name on the certificate, plus the difficulties of abtaining one aren't to be overlooked either. If the government is to require a document to vote, it must provide it free of charge.
The SAVE act is a Republican attempt of suppress the vote. Those states that don't require ID when you vote have no voter fraud. Republicans lie, don't you know!
David, my home state of NH (100% blue federal representation, red state house and governor) has implemented Voter ID, despite the fact that only a small handful of votes have been shown to be fraudulent over the past several cycles, and most of those acts committed by, you guessed it, Republicans.
They onleycry foul when they lose never, when they win. Odd, is it not?
States may run their elections, but they still should comply with the Constitution. Have any state courts gotten involved in this yet?
Worse than that, the act most likely stemmed from The Revenge of Trump. Not conviced by the results of the 60+ court cases of alleged voter fraud in 2020 that stripped him of the presidency, he and his ilk are pushing an act for which there is clearly no need. It must be defeated.
I like the term 'Revenge of Trump' and particularly the shortened version: ROT.
After reviewing many analysts comments i think the SAVE act is a trojan horse. The vote outcome if it passes in future elections doesn't seem to overwhelming benefit one party.
I think the purpose of the SAVE act is to bust the filibuster so that with just a 51/50 vote trumps senate can pass insanely unpopular legislation in the future instead of 60/40 vote. You can just imagine the horrific legislation Trump would try to pass...
All a nice set-up for Trump to claim every election in every state that he doesn't like was stolen.
If we ever get to the point where there is another Constitutional Convention, the number of reforms needed will be staggering.
Be careful what you wish for. Opening everything up may not provide the results some of us wish to see.
That would be true, especially in the current political climate.
Maybe Dr. what we need it's a new Constitution since the current one failed to prevent a corrupt dictator take over the country, apparently always within the current laws and procedures.
Exactly.
What Karen and Jen miss is that laws are only followed if the citizenry comply. If the citizenry are corrupt then chaos follows.
Here is how bad things are in america with corrupt morally bankrupt americans: I posted in yesterdays wall street journal in the comments section about the Save act which had hundreds of reader comments with some comments getting likes 100 times, except mine which got zero likes! My comment:
"Donald Trumps 2020 absentee ballot vote was a faudulent act which should be prosecuted since he was not a resident of florida (maralago was always a club not residence since purchase) at the time and did not live in Florida more than half a year as required to vote in that state.
Have fun with your denials .
That nobody on this comments board has even suggested impeachment means you want other people to follow laws and not you! You really think america will function well without law abiding citizens?"
So the elite and financial elite in the comments section of the wall street journal did not like my comment about impeaching trump and could care less about his voting fraud. That explains why america is such a mess now and why the Epstein files case is really a metaphor for americans not in the ruling class: rules for thee and not for me.
We need to work hard , vote and keep voting and stay vigilant to get our democracy back as at least 20% of americans are at least morally bankrupt and complicit in this mess.
Voting is the ONE sacred power we Americans must hold onto and protect at all costs.
You have my like and vote!
A majority of Americans don't read the WSJ, especially the financial files comments.
A wider poll would and have gotten different results, both in matters of impeachement and in a halt to the war in Iran.
Agree. But my point was those that should know better, are in power, have bought off many in congress with campaign donations, already have more money then they will ever need ... apparently that is not enough and they are perfectly happy if we are second tier citizens or slaves or worse!
That does clarify things. This is why we need not only campaign finance reform, but also to remove the lobbyists who serve their corporate masters who pay for favorable legislation.
Al least today, so far, you had 7 likes!!!!. And it's only noon ET.
Keep your fingers crossed 🤞 😉
Getting the truth out and calling out liars is also needed.
My experience on jury duty is if americans have the truth and know the law they will usually make good decisions.
pmpmpm: "A prophet is without honor..." etc.
We are all prophets and need to lead by example. Those with greater good fortune comes the responsibility to contribute more per your blessings! This is a team effort! Let go team!
That would be the equivalent of throwing the baby out with the bathwater. There are definitely updates, corrections, and strengthenings that are needed, and that is what ammendments are for. The base of the document is still sound.
Whatever Steve but something should be radically done to prevent another collective suicide by our society's short term memory. ASAP.
An addition to the point that "no criminal or convicted person can be president" would help.
Congress will not go for it - too many of them are beholden to special interests. But there is another way:
https://conventionofstates.com/
I volunteered as a poll worker in a small town several elections, we didn't ever see non citizens attempting to vote. Kudos to Utah's Lt. Governor Henderson who conducted a study to verify it is NOT a problem but was never consulted by Utah Senator Mike Lee who sponsored it
Same for me, PJ. I've worked as a depict voter registrar here in NH, which has implemented Voter ID laws. (And, the number of people who were attempting to re-register (due to in-state moves) and who found out that a Real ID was not sufficient to prove citizenship was surprising.)
One thing Republicans are pretty good at: Naming their bills in an attempt to confuse the public. Gee, like the "SAVE" act, an attempt to save their sorry behinds.
Exactly right Mary. 👌
The SAVE Act is about voter suppression. Pure and simple. The Jim Crow laws of the Republican Party.
A surgical blade in the hands of a competent surgeon can perform miracles. In the hands of a street thug, it can cause enormous harm. It's not the tool's fault who wields it. Reshape and sharpen the blade but carefully craft its use.
The SAVE act is more a meat-axe being weilded by crazy folk than a surgical blade.
I wasn't talking about the SAVE Act but the "nuclear option" for passing it. The supermajority (1917 Jim Crowe era minority blocking rights) procedure is the surgical blade. At the moment, that is the only thing protecting us from tRump decides everything and Congressional Republicans just rubber stamp it all. Let's see how they deal with his extortion attempt (pass it or I veto everything).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filibuster_in_the_United_States_Senate
No problem. You were concentrating on a larger aspect of the whole issue. I was more looking at the individuals intent upon passing this atrocity,
In whose hands the sharp blade ends up SC, depends upon the voters, and seems to me that we failed horrendously. By paying the consequences of our mistakes, I hope we learned the lesson and don't forget during the next election cycle. If we have one at all.
The inaccuracy of the naming of the Republican supported legislation is another ‘con job’, on the American people. Starting with the ‘Big Beautiful Bill’ and now w/the ‘Save Act’. Neither of which supports a democracy. This is especially important at this juncture as more, and more Americans are waking up and realizing they have been duped!
I hope that most of those duped bother to vote in this coming (maybe) midterm election. Thanks for your comment Kathleen 👍
Many of us are already wise to the 'reverse naming' of legislation and aren't buying the lies. We hope that many more will come to the same realization and vote accordingly.
In a more just world, we would restore proportional representation by letting D.C. and Puerto Rico become states.
Would also love to recombine the Dakotas and split California into two states.
Why do not split California into four states? Even by doing so, each new state would have more population than many "red" states.
Texas can already legally be split into five states—that provision was built into their admission to the US back in the early 1800’s. Unfortunately, both sides can play at this game, as we saw during the recent redistricting wars.
Thank you for this strong and convincing essay, urgently needed!
In my opinion, any tool at the Democrats disposal to defeat the SAVE Act is justified, including the filibuster. That might be a short-sighted point of view, but as a woman who took her husband's last name when she married, I am one of those who would be required to submit additional paperwork to continue to be able to vote. I certainly didn't anticipate when I got married back in 1967 that taking my husband's name would ever be a stumbling block to voting.
I got divorced in 1999, and one of the things I threw out in a subsequent paper purge was the marriage license. Because I couldn't think of any possible reason I would ever need it again. ID paranoia didn't exist yet.
I was really lucky though. At the time of the divorce I hadn't decided whether to revert my name. So my attorney included in the decree a provision stating that I can do so at any time with no further legal action required. And it gives the name. I used the decree as proof for TSA PreCheck years ago and then again last year when I decided to get a passport because I object to Real ID on general principles and a passport is much more useful. But I was able to afford it, and that's not the case for so many people.
Those of us who were adopted and took the new family's name are in the same boat.
@Sandy
Taking a husband may become a stumbling block for women if MAGA Republicans have their way.
Clear explanation on how the filibuster works. We aren't in "Mr Smith Goes to Washington" era anymore.
For about half of the population, decency it's a thing from the past, if they have a concept of it al all . Thanks for your comment noreenk. 👍
I found this post confusing and worrisome. The filibuster is exactly a way to oppose this SAVE Act if it can muster a majority. This is my first push back on what I believe to be your position.
I agree. I have been an admirer of Jennifer’s for some time, but I have grown weary of her lecturing Democrats. They are supposed to oppose the SAVE Act but somehow tie themselves in knots to handle the filibuster just right according to Jennifer’s standards. As a former Senate staffer of 9 years I think that the stupidest thing the Dems could do is signal their intention to get rid of the filibuster when they win the majority. That is an open invitation for the GOP to go ahead and pull the trigger to get the SAVE Act through. We need to deal with the filibuster when we actually have to power to do away with it. Right now let’s focus on the job at hand - defeating the SAVE Act.
Thanks for your comment: I would just say that this situation is evidence that the filibuster can be of value to either side of the aisle and pluralist democracies need to protect intense minorities - as we will be if Republican try to get a voter suppression bill passed.
I couldn’t agree more. The filibuster cuts both ways. When we do get the majority, the decision to eliminate it will require careful consideration. It may need to go, but eliminating it is not without risk.
I think her point is that *now* we will probably need the filibuster to defeat this bill but using a filibuster should not be the way we conduct business in Congress.
I had the same reaction. It feels like another manifestation of when they go low, we go high. And that just ain't it anymore (assuming it ever was in the first place).
Throw in here that Jared Bernstein, in a post to the Contrarian, came out in favor of abolishing the filibuster. As I understood his position, just get rid of it. He argued that it's undemocratic and most to blame for gridlock in Congress. He said do not preserve the filibuster as Jen seems to suggest to be used strategically by Democrats. In a back and forth, Bernstein said the harms from the filibuster were far worse than the risks of the opposing party passing legislation by simple majority rule.
I've always like Jared Bernstein and trusted that his extensive experience brought him to the right answer on the filibuster. Past expiration date.
Democracy is not just about majority rule. Filibusters have been used to support policies I would not support, but that is not the litmus test of democratic institutions and processes
I note that not too long ago, Kansas tried a similar "voter ID" law - it did not go well AT ALL, and was eventually thrown out.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2026/03/19/kansas-version-trumps-save-act-chaos-lawsuits/89193256007/
I would ask the senators from Kansas why they think this time will be different.
In the strange, hate-filled world of Donald J Trump, he has a special meaning for the world "WE". You might think that our fake POTUS means "my fellow Americans". Nope. You'd be wrong. When he says "WE" it's limited to his supporters or allies or corrupt collaborators. He NEVER means "We the People". His WE is referring to those who will become richer because of higher oil prices while 95% of Americans will become poorer. The "WE" of "SO MUCH WINNING" from tariffs are the Trump family and the upper 5% of taxpayers, NOT the People and so it goes into a war with Iran. WE the PEOPLE must do whatever it takes to save ourselves and the nation
"Certainly, Democrats should deplore the specifics of the SAVE Act, highlight Republicans’ desperation to cling to power at all costs..."
As previously mentioned in the article, the SAVE Act would do just as much (and maybe more) to disenfranchise Republican voters, but the Magapublican Senate is short-sighted and may not see this as a problem. They should.
The filibuster has had a long-standing tradition and must be dealt with, though there is far more need to put an end to the SAVE Act immediately. Original birth certificates for many are inaccurate. For anyone who changed their name for any reason in life, the current name does not reflect the given name on the certificate, plus the difficulties of abtaining one aren't to be overlooked either. If the government is to require a document to vote, it must provide it free of charge.