[Congressional Record Volume 170, Number 150 (Wednesday, September 25, 2024)]
[Senate]
[Pages S6398-S6403]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
Unanimous Consent Request--H.R. 8281
Mr. LEE. Mr. President, the Democrats' talking points against the
SAVE
[[Page S6399]]
Act are being proven wrong day after day after day.
We heard them say repeatedly: Noncitizens, including illegal aliens,
don't vote because they can't vote. That is to say, they don't vote
because they are not allowed to vote because Federal law prohibits
noncitizens from voting in U.S. elections. But they do. They have. And
existing laws make it, unfortunately, far too easy for them to do so.
In fact, Oregon officials, to cite just one example, admitted just
recently an error of the State's automatic voter enrollment problem.
And they acknowledged that it was much more significant an error than
they previously thought, having registered 1,259 possible noncitizens
just since 2021 alone. Some of the mistakenly enrolled noncitizens,
thereafter, went on to cast a ballot, according to Oregon's secretary
of state.
This enrollment error in Oregon was first unearthed earlier this
month with officials admitting to wrongly registering around 300 voters
through an Oregon DMV program that registers legal citizens when they
obtain a driver's license or a State ID. But this week, the DMV and the
secretary of state's office said a complete review showed 1,259 people
who didn't provide proof of U.S. citizenship were added to Oregon's
voter rolls, a number four times the previously acknowledged and
reported figure.
Unfortunately, Oregon is not unique in this regard. There are other
States that have acknowledged problems--a long list of them--including
States like Texas and Virginia, each clearing thousands of noncitizens
from their existing voter registration rolls.
Yet Democrats say this isn't happening. They continue to dismiss the
need for the SAVE Act, citing an existing law under which noncitizens
are, in fact, already barred from voting in Federal elections, as well
they should be. They are barred; but the fact that they are barred
doesn't mean that a combination of circumstances based on existing law
makes it far, far too easy for noncitizens to vote. As I said a moment
ago, they do, even though they are prohibited from doing it; and in
many circumstances, they have.
But we are seeing it happen in realtime.
This is our final chance to address this issue before what I think
most of us would acknowledge is going to be one of the most
consequential elections of our lifetimes. If Democrats truly believe,
as most Americans do, that voting in U.S. elections should be reserved
for American citizens, then they must agree to pass the SAVE Act.
This is not too heavy a lift. This is something that just makes it
possible for us to enforce existing law--existing law that, to my
knowledge, nobody in this Chamber or the other legislative Chamber down
the hall has suggested we change. That is all this does. That is all
the SAVE Act is about.
This is, in fact, the last chance to prove that they care about
election integrity in order for it to matter in enough time that it can
make a difference between now and the November general election. After
all, since the Biden-Harris inauguration, over 10 million undocumented
immigrants entered the United States illegally. This figure--just that
figure of 10 million who came into the country illegally in the last
3\1/2\ years alone--that figure exceeds the population of most of our
States--36, in fact. A supermajority of all of our States have
populations smaller than the population of illegal immigrants that have
come through unlawfully under the Biden-Harris watch.
With millions of unauthorized people on U.S. soil--a total of 30
million noncitizens living in the United States--the potential for
election fraud through ineligible voting is not a hypothetical risk.
This means the foundational principles that underpinned our republic--
or any republic, for that matter--are under attack. It is under attack
because President Biden, Secretary Mayorkas, and ``Border Czar'' Vice
President Kamala Harris refuse to enforce the law.
With the influx of illegal aliens under this administration, if even
a fraction--let's just say, 1 in 100--were to vote, this could
translate into hundreds of thousands of votes. Depending on where they
are located and concentrated, this could be far more than enough to
sway many of our most tightly-contested elections and alter their
outcomes, especially in the case of the Presidential election.
So make no mistake: This matters. It has consequences. And what we do
or choose not to do will make a difference.
This is concerning considering a recent study. And in that study, we
found that noncitizens have ample openings and significant
opportunities, repeatedly, to vote unlawfully. This study found that
anywhere from 10 to 27 percent of noncitizens in the U.S. are, in fact,
today registered to vote. And anywhere from 5 percent to 13 percent of
noncitizens in the United States currently do vote in Presidential
elections.
So, no, don't tell me this doesn't happen. Don't tell me it is
already unlawful so we don't need to do anything about it. We know that
existing law, while it prohibits noncitizen voting in Federal
elections, existing law makes it far too easy to do. And that is what
we want to do in America with our elections. We want to make it easy to
vote; hard to cheat. The last thing we want to do is make it easy to
vote for those who will cheat--who do cheat by virtue of their voting
because they are not entitled to do it.
It is what it means to be a citizen in a republic. It is what it
means to be a country and to have a vote. You are stealing other
people's votes. You are diluting their votes. You are, in fact,
disenfranchising legitimate votes when you participate unlawfully,
fraudulently, feloniously, but in a way that current law makes far too
possible.
Across the Nation, instances abound where States have inadvertently,
apparently, facilitated this crisis. Who knows to what degree of
inadvertence this was, but it is always referred to as an inadvertent
error. And unless or until we can prove otherwise, we have to deal with
it.
But regardless of the degree of awareness and intentionality that
went into it, these things did, in fact, happen, everything from
unsolicited voter registration forms being mailed directly to the
addresses of noncitizens and driver's licenses being issued without
adequate checks, relying merely on the honesty of illegal aliens as
they complete forms. All of these practices have opened up the
floodgates to voter fraud.
Now, there is no law in place telling the States, as they process
voter registration forms under the 1993 National Voter Registration
Act, or NVRA--this is the so-called Motor Voter law. It is a law that
allows people, when they apply for a driver's license, to
simultaneously register to vote in Federal elections simply by checking
a box and signing their name. Nothing in the NVRA or in any other
current provision of Federal law tells the States exactly how or what
they must do in order to verify the citizenship of voters who plan to
participate in Federal elections.
Regrettably, a few years ago, the Supreme Court of the United States
interpreted the NVRA, based on the fact that it doesn't instruct the
States on how to verify citizenship, as somehow precluding, prohibiting
the States from asking for proof of identification verifying
citizenship at the time someone registers to vote under the NVRA in a
Federal election.
This really was wrong, in my opinion. It was a majority opinion of
the Supreme Court, and I believe they got it wrong. It is the Court's
ruling, nonetheless, and it stands. It was issued over the strong
dissent of Justice Alito, who pointed out the reasons why it shouldn't
have been interpreted that way, but that ruling stands nonetheless, and
the States have to abide by that order.
So, to be clear, under the law as it now stands, somebody going into
a State and applying for a driver's license--as you are allowed to do,
by the way, as a noncitizen, in all 50 States. You can apply for a
driver's license in all 50 States and the District of Columbia. If you
check the box on the attached NVRA form saying you want to register to
vote and then sign your name saying ``Yeah, I am eligible to do this,''
that is it. The State isn't even allowed to ask you for any kind of
identification. That is the end of the matter. A mere check of a box
and a signature is all it takes, with little to no risk of being
caught. In fact, noncitizens are being encouraged to vote
[[Page S6400]]
and not warned of the consequences of doing so.
The fact that the Supreme Court wrongly interpreted Federal law to
ban States from requiring proof of citizenship when registering voters
via Federal forms makes it all the more urgent and important for us to
do this. This signals loudly and clearly that this is how you get
around this thing. We have to fill this gap.
An increasing number of localities permit noncitizens to vote in
local elections. Now, that is their decision. I think it is a terrible
decision on their part, but it is a decision over which we as Congress,
we as the lawmaking branch of the U.S. Government, have no control. But
what we do have control over is who may vote in Federal elections. That
part is our business.
Prominent Democrats have openly discussed these tactics as beneficial
to their agenda--``these tactics'' meaning deliberately bringing about
the registration to vote in Federal elections by noncitizens and
participating in Federal elections and casting ballots unlawfully as
noncitizens.
Only months ago, every Senate Democrat voted to count illegal aliens
in the census to help them shore up more seats in Congress and more
votes in the electoral college. This cannot continue.
It is one thing to do that in the context of the decennial
apportionment count--the part of the census that is used to distribute
seats in Congress and in the House of Representatives and in the
electoral college; it is quite another thing to let them actually vote.
No sane republic would or should do that--certainly not this Republic.
The American people agree overwhelmingly on this. If you are an
American citizen, you can vote in Federal elections; if you are not,
you can't, and you shouldn't be able to.
It is our responsibility, it is our imperative to close these gates--
these gates that have been left wide open as a result of a combination
of circumstances, including the NVRA, the wrong interpretation of it by
the Supreme Court a few years ago, and then the 10 million-plus illegal
aliens coming in in the last 3\1/2\ years alone and the total of 30
million-plus noncitizens living in the United States today, coupled
with the fact that it has never been easier to apply for a driver's
license in all 50 States and the District of Columbia even if you are a
noncitizen.
My bill, called the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act, or the
SAVE Act, would be a vital step in securing the electoral process,
ensuring that every vote cast must be legitimate, that every vote cast
must be cast by a U.S. citizen, and that every voter be duly and
lawfully registered.
The SAVE Act amends the National Voter Registration Act so that
States can ensure that only U.S. citizens may participate in Federal
elections. The SAVE Act requires States to obtain concrete documentary
proof of citizenship at the time of voter registration. It specifies
that acceptable documentation must be provided, and it explains what
kind of documentation. It also requires States to establish alternative
verification processes for those rare cases where standard documents
might be unavailable.
In that respect, the SAVE Act is far easier to comply with than other
examples we can identify under existing Federal law where Americans
routinely can be and are required to produce proof of citizenship in
order to do a certain thing.
The most common of these instances of Federal law requiring proof of
citizenship involve the submission of the form known as the I-9. If you
are not familiar with that, I can guarantee, if you are a U.S. citizen
and you have ever had a job, you filled one out.
The I-9 is the form that you have to present whenever you start new
employment. If you are starting as an employee, you have to fill out
the I-9. Attached to the I-9 has to be proof of citizenship. Typically,
it is most easily satisfied if you have a U.S. passport. If you don't
have a U.S. passport, you have to show a U.S. birth certificate and
then, I think, a couple of forms, a government-issued photo ID, to
prove that you are the person identified on that birth certificate, and
then you are good.
The SAVE Act is even more flexible than that. That is not too onerous
by itself, but recognizing that the right to vote is at stake and that
some people might not have or might have lost some of these documents,
it provides myriad other avenues by which they may prove their
citizenship. This is not too onerous.
It also requires the States that set up these verification processes
to make sure that they can get this done. It provides incredibly
expansive ways to prove citizenship, and if you don't have any
documented proof, you can do it.
This will in no way make it hard for any U.S. citizens to vote, not
even the poorest or the least fastidious about recordkeeping among us.
Every one of them will be able to vote if they are U.S. citizens.
Indeed, it will prevent their votes from being canceled by foreign
actors trying to bring about what really amounts to foreign
interference with U.S. elections, which is something we all claim to
care about and be opposed to aggressively.
Furthermore, the SAVE Act compels States to proactively remove
noncitizens from voter rolls and introduces severe Federal penalties
for those individuals who knowingly register noncitizens to vote.
The bill echoes the sentiments of the American people themselves,
from coast to coast, from north to southeast to west. It transcends
political affiliations and speaks directly to the core of what makes
our country great: fair, free, and secure elections.
There is a lot that divides us here, that sets Democrats against
Republicans and that can result in us disagreeing on the basis of a
genuine disagreement among our voters, among our constituents.
Republicans and Democrats, voters and Senators alike, often just
disagree depending on our political alignment. But in this particular
instance, it is the Senators who are opposed to each other, not
reflected in the way the American people feel. Among the American
people, this is like an 80-percent issue. Like 80 percent of Americans
believe that we should be doing this. In fact, they feel like it is
absolutely crazy to not do it.
This is about transcending those political affiliations and going
back to what is so important about being a U.S. citizen and casting our
vote. Your vote doesn't mean much if it can be canceled out by somebody
else who is not entitled to be here.
There is not a corporation in America that would allow
nonshareholders to participate in a shareholder election. They wouldn't
let a nonshareholder vote if the whole point of the vote was to let
shareholders vote.
If I were to wander into the Senate Democratic caucus as they are
holding their leadership elections or any other important deliberation
where they have to vote, they wouldn't in a million years let me vote
in there because I am not a Senate Democrat.
When I arrived in the U.S. Senate, each of the three times I have
been sworn in as a U.S. Senator, I had to produce documentary proof
that I had, in fact, been elected in Utah. I had to produce an election
certificate issued by the chief election official in the State of Utah,
the Lieutenant Governor, who indicated that I won my elections--first
in 2010, then in 2016, then in 2022. Without being able to prove that I
was entitled to be here and to cast a vote here, I would never have
been allowed to vote, nor should I be. It is no less true with U.S.
elections. We cannot let those who are not entitled under the law to do
it because they are not citizens, to vote in our elections.
This is about protecting our elections from foreign interference--
something my Democratic colleagues claim to care immensely about. Every
day that we delay, the foundation of our electoral processes erodes a
little more. We can't wait for this administration to enforce the law.
This bill will make it harder to cheat in elections and ensure the
integrity of every single ballot that gets cast. There is really no
valid argument against it, so heretofore people opposed to it have just
been throwing out red herrings like ``It is already illegal,'' which,
for reasons I explained a minute ago, means nothing if there is no way
to enforce the law, and existing law makes it far too easy to cheat
without getting caught or, alternatively, just ignoring it altogether.
But there is no valid argument against this bill. That is why you don't
hear any valid argument against this bill--it doesn't exist.
The only reason to oppose this bill would be if you need or are
counting on
[[Page S6401]]
illegal votes to win elections, if you want to rely on them--perhaps in
the first instance or as backup; I don't know. But there is no valid,
legitimate reason to oppose it.
By passing the SAVE Act, we would send a clear message that in the
United States, voting is not just a privilege of citizenship but also a
protected and cherished right, one that we need to protect.
As debates about election integrity rage, the SAVE Act stands out by
guaranteeing that only American citizens will have a say in our
elections. American elections must be decided by Americans, by American
citizens. Without that, without them, we have no right to be here. We
have no right to pass laws on behalf of the people without those people
being citizens. So we have to make sure that those people determining
who is here, who is in the Chamber down the hall, and who sits in the
White House, are, in fact, U.S. citizens.
I acknowledge the presence of my friend and colleague, the
distinguished Senator from Kansas.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Ms. Baldwin). The Senator from Kansas.
Mr. MARSHALL. Madam President, I sure am honored to be here on the
Senate floor fighting to defend our democratic process with my friend
and colleague from the great State of Utah.
Free, safe, secure, and fair elections are integral to the survival
of our Republic. Without election integrity, the voice of American
citizens--the foundation of our Republic--is at risk of being silenced.
Unfortunately, millions of Americans have lost confidence in the
security of our elections. They question whether their vote truly
matters or if their vote is being diluted by noncitizens. We must
ensure that the outcome of our elections is determined by our own
citizens, uninfluenced by illegal ballots. The heart of our democracy
depends upon this.
Ensuring that only U.S. citizens vote in our elections isn't just
necessary, it is common sense. I am proud to support the SAVE Act,
which will protect our elections by requiring proof of citizenship to
register to vote and an ID at the time of voting.
This shouldn't be a divisive issue. Nearly 80 percent of Americans--
Democrats, Republicans, Independents--all agree on this simple
requirement--80 percent.
Now, again, this is common sense. You need an ID to drive. You need
an ID to board a plane. You need an ID to get a fishing license. But
voting is a sacred right with an even higher value than those other
examples. Voting should demand the same standard. Protecting this right
isn't controversial. It is common sense.
Right now, due to the crisis of our open southern border, at least 11
million illegal immigrants are in the United States today. That number
alone could replace the population of 36 States, almost 4 times the
population of Kansas. Imagine what that could do to our electoral
process if left unchecked.
You know, friends back home--I just did a telephone townhall. They
asked me the same question: Why do my colleagues across the aisle
refuse to support a policy that 80 percent of Americans agree upon;
that would make our elections freer, safer, more secure?
Well, let me tell you why. It is because they spent years courting
illegal immigrants, ushering them into our country, ushering in over 12
million, hoping to tip the scales in key States. But we cannot let them
highjack our elections.
Now, look, noncitizen voting is real. This isn't hypothetical. In
Texas, Virginia, and Oregon, noncitizens have been found on the voting
rosters. Additionally, California, Maryland, Vermont, and Washington,
DC, already allow noncitizens to vote in local elections.
This is an immediate threat to the future of our democracy, and it
demands action. This is a nonpartisan American issue. It is about
protecting our country. Just as we reject foreign interference in our
elections, we must reject noncitizen voting with equal seriousness.
And this is why Congress must act, and they can act today. This has
already been passed in the House. We could pass this today. The
President could sign it tomorrow, and away we go.
With the SAVE Act, we can restore faith in our elections. We are only
40 days away from the most consequential election in our lifetime. Time
is running out. Our Republic depends on it. So let's act.
I would like to yield the floor back to my colleague from Utah.
Mr. LEE. I recognize the presence of my friend and colleague the
senior Senator from Tennessee.
Mrs. BLACKBURN. I thank my colleague from Utah.
Madam President, thank you for the time and recognition.
I want to say thank you to him for bringing this issue forward.
As I am out and about in Tennessee, I hear a lot about this. People
are concerned about what would happen if those who are illegally in the
country get a vote, if they exercise the rights of citizenship, because
so many people in Tennessee talk about that, in America, there is
nothing more fundamental than guarding our God-given freedoms,
approaching the ballot boxes as equal citizens for fair and open
elections.
And they are quite disturbed because, for the last more than 3 years,
what they have seen is that the Biden-Harris administration has waged a
war on this sacred institution by working overtime to make illegal
immigration legal.
Now, you have heard reference to the numbers of illegal aliens--and,
by the way, that is the statutory term that is used--and about the
numbers that have come into this country. We know it is north of 10
million illegal aliens. The Senator from Kansas referenced this. And
the size is larger--the number, the population number--larger than 36
of our States, and the impact that that can have.
And as my colleague from Utah pointed out, when someone comes here
illegally, and they go into a State like Minnesota that gives those
that are illegally in the country a driver's license, and then that
individual goes to another State, through the motor voter law, they can
check that box, and they can register to vote. They can get that
driver's license. They can register to vote. And we know that this has
occurred, and we have seen it occur in voter rolls all across this
country--from Massachusetts to Arizona and everywhere in between.
Now, recently, the State of Virginia went through their voter rolls,
and they discovered that they had more than 6,000 that were on their
voter rolls who had entered the country illegally.
And this becomes such a problem when you look at the number of States
that do not require voter ID when they vote. We have got 14 States
across this country where you do not have to show an ID when you go to
vote at the polls. You show up, and you vote.
Now, one thing is clear. While it is against the law for illegal
aliens to vote in Federal elections, many States and jurisdictions lack
the proper safeguards to enforce this law. It is already illegal. It is
already illegal. But they broke the law coming into the country
illegally. They have broken the law by checking that box and
registering to vote.
And the risk is higher than ever because of what has transpired at
the open border, but the SAVE Act, which the gentleman from Utah has
brought to the floor today, would solve this problem because it would
require proof of U.S. citizenship to vote in an election, and you would
have to provide that proof in person.
I will tell you, there are many people that are surprised that we
don't require that proof--that you prove that you are who you say you
are.
The SAVE Act also has provisions to restore our election integrity.
It would require States to establish a program to remove those that are
illegally in the country from the voter rolls, and it would also allow
citizens to sue election officials who fail to uphold requirements for
proof of citizenship.
Now, the House did pass this in July, and it had been sitting over
here for the last couple of months. And so I would ask my Democratic
colleagues: What in this bill do you oppose? What do you oppose? Why is
it that you would want to open the door to allow individuals that have
illegally entered the country to actually vote in a Federal election?
Do you want to encourage them to vote in our elections?
This is why we need to protect the integrity of each citizen, each
person--one person, one vote.
[[Page S6402]]
Now, my colleague from North Carolina has also come to the floor, and
I want to say a word about his Promoting Free and Fair Elections Act,
which would also be helpful. His bill, which I support, would block
President Biden's Executive order that forces--not allows, but
commands--it forces Federal Agencies to work with outside partisan
groups to mobilize voters.
And guess what. The taxpayers got to pay for this. Talk about wanting
to federalize elections. Talk about the Federal Government wanting to
throw their weight. This is it.
And, of course, the Executive order excludes any information about
how the Biden-Harris administration would go about approving or
selecting groups.
So I commend my colleague from North Carolina for the Promoting Free
and Fair Elections Act. I commend my colleague from Utah for the SAVE
Act.
I yield the floor to my colleague from Utah.
Mr. LEE. Madam President, as if in legislative session, I ask
unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate
consideration of Calendar No. 439, H.R. 8281, the SAVE Act; further,
that the bill be considered read a third time and passed, and that the
motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
The Senator from California.
Mr. PADILLA. Madam President, reserving the right to object, today
marks the third time that I have come down to the floor to object to
this bill--not the first time, not the second time, three times.
Madam President, in this particular case, the third time is not the
charm. But I grant my colleague one thing. He says that things have
changed since the last time he tried to bring this bill up for a vote
or approval on unanimous consent.
What has changed, you might ask? Well, this bill actually failed to
pass the Republican-controlled House of Representatives just last week.
Republicans attached this bill to a must-pass government funding bill,
and they still couldn't find the votes, not even with the votes that
they have on their side of the aisle.
So it does beg the question: What the heck are we doing here?
This is not a serious attempt to protect our elections. The only
thing that this bill does--and the discussion of it does--is stoking
fear that our elections may not be secure, and it creates mistrust in
the outcome of elections.
So I feel compelled to take a moment to, once again, reassure all
Americans that are listening today: There is no credible evidence of
massive voter fraud or a massive number of noncitizens voting in our
elections--no evidence, none. Let me be clear: no evidence, none.
In fact, it is already illegal for noncitizens to vote in Federal
elections, no matter what State they live in.
In some of the conversation from some of the Senators, over the last
several minutes, there has been reference to what the Federal
Government may be doing to federalize elections. I will make specific
reference to the motor voter law that was approved by Congress on a
bipartisan basis; that, yes, directs States to do what they can to
encourage civic participation and to utilize their department of motor
vehicles to engage eligible voters. Since they are already interfacing
with government, let's take that moment of their time--as they are
already sharing name, address, date of birth, other personal
information--and in addition to applying for a driver's license or a
State ID, if they are eligible, to register them to vote in the process
or update their registration.
And, yes, there are States in the country that do allow a noncitizen
or undocumented immigrant, even, to obtain a driver's license. But I
can tell you, as a former chief elections officer for the State of
California--not just on behalf of California but of my colleagues
across the country that I have worked with--protocols are in place. If
you are a noncitizen applying for a special type of driver's license or
an undocumented immigrant applying for a special type of driver's
license, you go through one process. If you are a citizen, you go
through another that includes that opportunity to register to vote.
Let me come back to the bottom line here again: no evidence of
massive voter fraud--no evidence the last time this bill came up, no
evidence today. And I doubt there will be any evidence between now and
November 5--or even after November 5--because of the integrity of
elections administration in the country.
Now, I have to speak to the timing. We stand here today, 41 days
before this November's election. The election is already happening. For
those who are familiar, ballots have already been mailed out to members
of the military and other overseas voters.
In many States, the vote-by-mail ballot process has already begun. In
some States, early voting is beginning. The election is happening.
But again, I sense the real motive for bringing this bill up today is
an attempt to continue to inject fear and uncertainty in the minds of
voters at a time where, frankly, we need calm; we need understanding;
we need truth.
So, as I have in the previous objections, I will extend my invitation
again today: Let's work together in a thoughtful, responsible,
bipartisan manner to ensure more eligible Americans can easily register
to vote, stay registered to vote, and cast their ballots. But until I
am taken up on that offer, I object.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
The senior Senator from Utah.
Mr. LEE. Madam President, my distinguished friend and colleague the
Senator from California makes an impassioned plea that we not pass this
bill. I appreciate his thoughtfulness and care and consideration that
he routinely gives to matters pending before the Senate. I wish I could
say that always translates into accurate statements.
Today, it didn't. He made several statements that are just not
accurate. First and foremost, he suggested--not just suggested, he said
that this bill--the SAVE Act, which I am trying to pass right here,
right now--failed to pass in the House of Representatives; that even in
the Republican-controlled House of Representatives it couldn't get the
votes to pass.
That is not true. It is 100 percent false. In fact, this has passed
the House of Representatives. It passed the House of Representatives
not only with the Republicans voting for it but they picked up five
Democrats along the way. So they passed it. They passed it with a
bipartisan vote.
Now, he may be referring to the fact that there was another vote--
another vote cast last week in which they attached the SAVE Act to a
spending bill. It was the spending bill that caused the combined
measure to fail. But, in fact, the SAVE Act has been passed by the
House of Representatives.
It was passed with a bipartisan vote because even these Democrats,
who joined with all the Republicans over in the House of
Representatives, acknowledged that this is a problem. The problem has
been created by a combination of Federal laws that have grown too
loose, that have been further loosened by the Supreme Court of the
United States in its interpretation of it, and that the need for it
has, in fact, escalated.
Point No. 2 that he makes--this is the third time--sounding, I think,
a little frustrated by the fact that we tried to do this multiple
times. Well, forgive me, but the case for it has continued to build. It
has continued to build steadily, even at the same time that the House
of Representatives has now passed it.
This does matter. So he is mistaken here in that nothing has changed.
He says that there is no evidence of this. That is not true. That is
news to me, given that the world learned yesterday of this evidence
that just came out from the secretary of state's office in Oregon
showing that complete review revealed 1,259 people in that State who
didn't provide proof of U.S. citizenship, and they had been added to
Oregon's voter registration rolls a number of--four times the
previously reported figure.
That is also news to States like Texas and Virginia, just to state a
couple. There are more that have been going through their voter
registration rolls and discovered a lot of noncitizens. I mean, you add
them all up, and we are talking about thousands of noncitizens
registering to vote.
[[Page S6403]]
Then he pivots a little bit, and he says that there is no evidence of
massive voter fraud. If thousands of illegally registered voters--
people who illegally register to vote in Federal elections--if that is
not massive, I don't know what is.
Now, as to the next point that he makes: Ballots have already been
mailed out. I don't dispute that. I am absolutely certain that that is
the case. That is in no way, shape, or form an argument against the
SAVE Act, nor is it an argument against passing this now.
In fact, there is no reason not to pass this now. There is good
reason to pass it now, given that in fully 22 States in the United
States of America--fully 22 States allow voter registration up to and
including the day of the Presidential election. So in addition to the
thousands of persons who are noncitizens and therefore may not lawfully
register to vote or vote in a Federal election who have already
registered to vote, many of whom have been shown in past elections to
have voted illegally--we don't even know what the total number is. We
don't even know what the total number of people is who might register
to vote and then vote unlawfully between now and the 5th of November
when the election is held. Yet in addition to the 22 States where you
can register to vote, up to and including the day of the Presidential
election, there are a whole lot of others who allow it, to varying
degrees, at some point between now and election day.
Then he goes back to the fact that this is not a serious proposal. I
don't know what that means, other than Democrats don't like it. And I
understand that they don't like it. It is serious. I assure you, Madam
President, and I assure my colleagues, this is a very serious matter
when people register to vote and vote illegally. That disenfranchises
actual U.S. citizens.
Finally, I do take exception to something. I take exception to the
suggestion as to motive, suggesting that the reason I am here to do
this is to disingenuously plow what he refers to as ``fear and
uncertainty'' as to the legitimacy of our elections.
Not only is this kind of speech uncalled for and prohibited under
rule XIX of the Senate rules where you are not supposed to characterize
somebody's motive as something devious like this, if I were out here
deliberately trying, just for kicks and giggles, to undermine the
legitimacy in the outcome of the election, that would be inappropriate.
That is not accurate. There is not a scintilla of proof for that. And
there is a mountain of proof that we have darned good reason to bring
this about.
I am deeply disappointed that we can't pass this. This is not a heavy
lift. It is not too much to ask that we put something in place, putting
teeth into existing law that has been on the books for decades that
Americans overwhelmingly agree with and says you can't vote in a U.S.
election unless you are a U.S. citizen.
The House passed it; we could pass it today. This could make a
difference. We should pass it. It is inexcusable that we are not.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The junior Senator from North Carolina.