BREAKING: After Four Republicans Join Democrats to Kill SAVE America Act, Senator Mike Lee Proposes Easier Path Forward
The Senate’s attempt to pass the SAVE America Act hit a wall Thursday night — and it wasn’t just Democrats doing the blocking.
Four Republicans — Murkowski, McConnell, Tillis, and Collins — joined Democrats to kill the Graham Amendment during the vote-a-rama. The measure needed 60 votes and fell short, showing that even if Republicans nuked the filibuster, they still wouldn’t have the votes to get it done the traditional way.
But Senator Mike Lee isn’t giving up. He’s taking a smarter approach.
Lee announced he’s offering the House-passed version of the SAVE America Act as an amendment on the Senate floor during tonight’s vote-a-rama. This version only needs 51 votes to pass because it’s being moved through the reconciliation process, which bypasses the filibuster.
The SAVE America Act is straightforward. It requires documentary proof of U.S. citizenship to register to vote in federal elections and mandates photo ID to actually cast a ballot. The goal is simple: stop noncitizens from voting. Noncitizen voting is already illegal, but this bill closes the loopholes and forces states to actually verify citizenship.
The House already passed its version back in February. Lee is now bringing that same bill to the Senate floor in a way that gives Republicans a realistic shot at passing it with just their own votes.
This is the kind of creative legislating we need more of. Instead of letting four RINOs and the Democrats kill election integrity efforts, Lee is finding a procedural path that puts the pressure back on Republicans to do the right thing.
The American people want secure elections. They want proof that only citizens are voting. Mike Lee is giving the Senate another chance to deliver exactly that.
We’ll be watching tonight’s vote closely. This one matters.
—
Mark Van der Veen offers some of the most analytical and insightful writings on politics. He regularly opines on the motives and political calculations of politicians and candidates, and whether or not their strategy will work. Van der Veen offers a contrast to many on this list by sticking mainly to a fact-based style of writing that is generally combative with opposing ideologies.
