[Congressional Record Volume 172, Number 49 (Wednesday, March 18, 2026)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1307-S1309]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
SAVE AMERICA ACT
Ms. KLOBUCHAR. Mr. President, I rise today to join many of my
colleagues in standing up to protect American citizens' constitutional
right to vote and fighting back against this administration's most
recent attack on access to the ballot box.
What are Americans really talking about right now? What do they
really wish we were focused on in this great Chamber? Not the SAVE
America Act. They would like us to focus on the ``Save America Money
Act,'' because Americans see rising costs because of these across-the-
board tariffs that I oppose, the gas prices that are surging, the
healthcare costs doubling and tripling, because the White House and
congressional Republicans decided not to extend the tax credits for
their health plans--doubling and tripling of people's premiums,
particularly in rural areas where they tend to rely on these plans
more.
So instead of simply making their case to the voters of this country,
the American citizens, or maybe taking a look at their policies in case
there is a way to work with us on the Affordable Care Act tax credits
and compromise, or trying to add more energy to the grid instead of
taking wind projects off the grid, they are trying to pass legislation
to pick the voters with this bill.
And it is by President Trump's own admission. This is not me saying
it. He is the one--an exact quote that says of this bill:
It will guarantee the midterms.
As my friend and colleague Senator Raphael Warnock has said: Some
people don't want some people to vote.
That is why so many of us have come to the floor this week. We don't
think eligible American citizens should be kicked off voter rolls or
there should be burdensome hurdles for people to register to vote.
Nothing is more fundamental to our democracy than our fair and free
elections and rights of Americans to make their voices heard at the
ballot box, whether they are Democrats, Republicans, Independents,
whatever political beliefs they have.
Throughout even the most difficult times, Americans have stood in
ballot lines because a right to vote is what secures our freedoms. But
right now, we are seeing unprecedented attacks on the foundation of
democracy from this administration, and we all know it is not for the
first time.
There was the insurrection on January 6, right here, right in this
Chamber. Someone came up, sat there on the Presiding Officer's desk, a
violent mob, for the purpose of trying to stop us from certifying the
results of the 2020 election.
I know Senator Blunt and I were the only two Senators left at 4 in
the morning with Vice President Pence, who made that walk with the last
of those ballots, by officers whose faces were scratched, over broken
glass, over to the House. That happened, but democracy in the end
prevailed.
And now, the President has threatened to nationalize election
administration, replacing the judgment and experience of State and
local officials, going so far as to say:
Republicans should say, `We want to take over.' We should
take over the voting . . .
Exact quote.
He also issued an unlawful Executive order to overhaul our Nation's
elections and assert Federal control over State-run elections.
Minnesota and 18 other States sued and have won a preliminary
injunction because as the judge wrote: The Constitution does not grant
a President any specific powers over elections.
Undeterred, the President continues to float illegally ending mail-in
voting nationwide, which is incredibly popular in red States and blue,
incredibly popular in Utah and Colorado, in Minnesota; and he continues
to double down on his repeatedly disproven conspiracy theories about
the 2020 election. The FBI seized election ballots from 2020 in
Georgia, as well as election records in Arizona.
There are also concerns that Federal agents could be deployed to
polling locations. When asked at her oversight hearing about ICE being
sent to polling locations, Secretary Noem did not rule out the Agency
deploying officers in the future.
And the Justice Department, under this administration, has turned
away from its mission of enforcing the Voting Rights Act and has
experienced a mass exodus of attorneys.
It has also illegally pressured States to provide voters' sensitive
and personally identifiable information to the administration which, by
the way, is highly relevant to the bill before us now.
In fact, Attorney General Bondi on the same day that Alex Pretti was
killed by Federal agents--shot in the back--that same day, that same
few hours, she sent a letter to Minnesota saying the administration
would remove ICE from our streets if Minnesota violated the privacy of
its citizens by turning over their personal voter data.
So she said: OK, we will get ICE out of there if you guys will give
us your data on your voters.
That happened.
In a court hearing, a Federal judge in Minnesota asked the Justice
Department:
Is the Executive trying to achieve through force what it
cannot achieve through the courts?
That is a pretty good question when you read that letter, but it is
not just Minnesota that is standing up against the Justice Department's
pressure. State election officials in 24 States, including Republican
officials in Georgia, Republican secretary of state of New Hampshire,
Republican officials in Kentucky, and Republican officials in West
Virginia have refused to comply with the voter file demands.
And four Federal judges, including judges appointed by President
Trump, have ruled that the Justice Department's effort to obtain this
data is illegal.
Now, President Trump and congressional Republicans are trying to
force through this bill. That would result mandatory in voters' data
being turned over to the Federal Government and would empower the
Department of Homeland Security to kick American citizens off State
voter rolls.
Under this bill, the Department of Homeland Security would run
voters' personal data through a tool, a DOGE tool, and tell States who
they have to purge from their voter rolls.
So, remember, 24 States, including several Republican officials,
including in conservative States like West Virginia, have said no to
this. They don't want to give over those data rolls, of the voter data
rolls.
But now, this would mandate it that it go to the Department of
Homeland Security, the same Agency that gave us ICE in Minnesota.
This will result in these American citizens--when you go back and you
are supposed to run this through this tool, this system, these
algorithms, and we are supposed to believe that that will all work
great, given what we have seen from Homeland Security in the last few
months. No way.
At least 24 States, as I noted, already have agreements to share
voter data with DHS, and already the Department's tool has
misidentified hundreds of American citizens as ineligible to vote. So I
already have a proof point. The SAVE America Act isn't about what they
are saying it is. In the 64 election lawsuits brought by President
Trump and his allies contesting the 2020 election, no judge, including
judges appointed by President Trump himself, found evidence of
widespread fraud.
[[Page S1308]]
His own Attorney General said there wasn't evidence of widespread
fraud.
And according to a bipartisan policy center analysis of the Heritage
Foundation's database of noncitizen voting across 25 years, there were
only 77 cases out of nearly 2 billion votes cast of noncitizens voting.
In each of these cases, they faced an investigation.
I know when I was the county attorney in my State, way before any of
this technology existed, we would get cases referred to us from the
Minnesota secretary of state, and I actually put an investigator on
this and looked at every single case to make sure there wasn't a
problem. And the vast majority of them, with the exception of one where
the school board line went through someone's house and they voted
twice, which was illegal, and another one where a guy decided he was
going to vote twice. This is in our biggest county. They were all
fathers and sons with the same names.
We looked diligently at every single case. We had a Republican
secretary of state. She sent them over. We looked at them. We explained
it back. That is what I did as county attorney. So I had some
experience with this.
Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem said:
[We need to make sure that] we have the right people
voting, electing the right leaders to lead this country . . .
And President Trump himself said that, with this bill, Republicans
will ``never lose a race'' in 50 years.
So you wonder why we are concerned about this. I believe in free and
fair elections. I like the fact that my State has the highest voter
turnout. I like the fact, like a number of States, including some red
States, we have same day registration. I like the fact that we make it
easier for people to vote by mail.
Our State actually was not nearly on the bandwagon with vote-by-mail
like Utah was, the Presiding Officer's State, or Colorado. Some States
recently changed the rules to be consistent with some of these other
States to make it easier for people to vote-by-mail.
But this idea that we are suddenly going to turn over all of our
voter data to what is now Kristi Noem's Department, despite her soon
departure, is just--I don't think most people in America would think
this is a good idea.
The Department of Homeland Security has already violated Federal law
by repurposing its SAVE program to verify voters and only issuing their
prior notice after being sued by the League of Women Voters. And the
Department of Justice even admitted in court--and this was bad--that
Elon Musk's DOGE employees shared Americans' personal Social Security
data with partisan organizations that worked to purge voter rolls.
Let me say that again. They have already admitted, so you wonder why
whenever these secretaries of state, including Republican secretaries
of state, don't want to give up this voter data, well, the Department
of Justice admitted in court that Elon Musk's DOGE employees shared
Americans' personal Social Security data with partisan organizations
that worked to purge voter rolls.
So what else happens? There are costly and burdensome hurdles that
are designed to make it harder for eligible U.S. citizens to register
and cast their ballot. Many common sources of identification that
people have come to rely on--driver's license, military ID--would not
be enough under this bill.
So people would either have to present a birth certificate or a
passport or, as my colleague from Utah pointed out, some kind of
affidavit through a State process that may or may not be set up as an
alternative.
And if someone's current name doesn't match the name on their birth
certificate, the barriers are even higher. So 69 million married women
who changed their name, they have to provide some kind of additional
documentation that they may not have in order to register. Maybe their
State won't set up some process, and maybe they won't want to drive in
rural areas hours to go in and submit some affidavit, or maybe they
won't have someone that can help them do this affidavit.
In most cases, these women will need to dig up their birth
certificates, and I think many of us for one thing or another have had
that experience. It is not always easy to get that birth certificate.
You try to hide it somewhere, and then you don't remember, and then you
have to go and you have to get another copy of the birth certificate.
That is what is going to happen here. Marriage licenses, maybe mine
is in my wedding book, don't know. That is what people are going to be
thinking right now.
So what happens if people don't have these documents on hand? In
fact, more than 21 million Americans lack ready access to the documents
necessary to register under this bill, and more than half of
Americans--146 million--don't have a passport.
So as Americans are already facing rising costs for necessities like
healthcare and housing and energy, now they have to figure out this
paperwork--when they are trying to call Social Security and no one
answers, when they are trying to call the VA and no one answers, when
they are trying to get a loan and USDA is down 20 percent of employees
and they can't get anyone to answer or help them, now they have this.
Marriage license, $10; birth certificate, I don't know, in my State
it is $24; passport, $165. Maybe your State gets you an affidavit, but
where are you supposed to go? How are you supposed to get that done?
But it is not just about the documentation.
The SAVE America Act also makes it harder to vote by effectively
ending some of the most popular methods of voter registration.
Right now, voters in 45 States, including my State, can register to
vote online. And in 2024, more than 14.4 million voters did that.
Americans in 46 States and the District of Columbia can register by
mail using the Federal form, while two other States use a State
absentee voter mail-in registration form.
And in 2024, more than half of all voters registered through
automatic voter registration--what a smart way to do it. When they get
their driver's license renewed at the DMV or when they interact with
another State agency, like their State department of health. But under
the SAVE America Act, Americans wouldn't have these options; instead
they would have to provide necessary documentation in person. As a
result, mail registration, no; online voter registration, no; motor
voter is severely limited; and nonpartisan voter registration drives
are gone too.
Altogether, the SAVE America Act's in-person voter registration
requirements would clearly be a significant barrier, especially for new
voters and people who get registered when they get their driver's
licenses.
For rural Americans driving 4\1/2\ hours roundtrip or people in
Alaska and Hawaii actually having to get on a plane just to register to
vote or Tribal voters in remote areas or people who lack reliable
transportation and then those in Minnesota and in 22 other States who
exercise their rights, under State law, to register in person on
election day, as more than 2.6 million Americans, particularly young
voters, did--uh-uh. It undermines it. It is by design. It makes it
harder. It is kind of hard to see through all of those pages, but it
makes it harder and undermines mail-in voting by requiring Americans to
provide copies of ``this'' and ``this'' when they submit their mail-in
ballots.
President Trump's message on mail-in voting has been inconsistent. He
actually voted by mail multiple times, and in 2024, he urged his
supporters to do the same. It was good enough for him and his
supporters. It should be good enough for all Americans now.
You know, voting by mail is nothing new. It dates back to the Civil
War. Now 36 States allow voters to cast their votes by mail, and nearly
one-third of voters do. That is a good thing, and it is why I lead
legislation that would make sure Americans in every State can request a
mail-in ballot. In Minnesota, as I said, we have made it easier for
people to vote. There is no excuse vote-by-mail--a lot of States have
that--and 46 days of early voting and same-day registration.
By the way, with some of the best voting laws and the highest voter
turnout, we have elected Republican Governors like Tim Pawlenty. We
have elected Independent Governors like Jesse Ventura, and we have
elected Democratic Governors. We had in the legislature, with this
voting system, one House Republican and one House
[[Page S1309]]
Democratic last year. We have had statewide officials from both parties
with an election system that makes it easier for people to vote.
But as Steve Simon--Minnesota's respected secretary of state--has
testified, the bill would cost States, counties, and cities untold
millions of dollars to implement, and it would require implementation
within 60 days of becoming law. As Steve put it, it is a recipe for
chaos in our election system.
I think we should be making it easier for people to vote. That is why
I worked with my colleagues on the Freedom to Vote Act. That is why I
support the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act.
Instead of talking about this right now, we should be doing something
about Americans' expenses, and why don't we also talk about how AI is
being used to deceive voters? Whether you are a Democrat or a
Republican, no one wants to see fake ads or robocalls where you cannot
even tell if it is a candidate you don't like or the candidate you
love.
While a number of States--red and blue--have enacted laws to address
these threats to our elections, we cannot rely on a patchwork of State
laws. Congress must act. That is why I lead legislation to ban content
that falsely depicts Federal candidates in political ads to influence
Federal elections. I have worked with Senator Josh Hawley--not exactly
a flaming liberal. There is another bill to require disclaimers on
political ads with images--audio or video--that are substantially
generated by AI. That is for the ones, of course, that are
constitutional and that allow for parity in certain uses. You could at
least put a disclaimer on those to show that it is created by AI so you
know if it is real or not. Then, on the ones that falsely depict
people, you could actually ban those. That is what they have done in
other countries.
While we are talking about protecting our elections, we also need to
talk about the need to support our State and local election offices as
they work to maintain their election infrastructure to keep pace with
new technology and combat cyber security.
But instead of strengthening our election security and making sure
that, in our campaigns, AI is not being used in a way that is going to
mislead people and that voters are given knowledge of what they are
seeing, which is something that is coming right at us in this next
election--instead of talking about how to get rid of these across-the-
board tariffs that cost households $1,700 last year or the small farm
bankruptcies that are at a 5-year high, which has nearly doubled over
the last year--as one farmer put it, a perfect, perfect storm of ugly--
or instead of working together to extend the healthcare tax credits or
doing something about electricity prices that went up an average of
$110 or doing something with this war that they unilaterally started
and did not allow Congress to have a say in--and now we have seen an
increase of $30 to $40 a barrel. Every $10 increase in a barrel of oil
is a $450-a-year increase in gas prices for the average American
family. But instead of doing all that when we have seen jobs down in
January alone 108,000, and then in February, we lost 92,000 more jobs--
instead of dealing with this and not rubberstamping this President's
policies, we are here, talking about a bill that makes it harder for
people to vote.
So I urge our Republican colleagues to change course and to work with
us on where people really are, which is doing something about how much
it costs for them to go on with their daily lives; to work with us on
everything from permitting reform to doing something about getting more
energy on the grid, to doing something about bringing grocery prices
down. We are messing around here.
Protecting the freedom to vote has never been easy, and we have had
to course-correct many times to ensure that our democracy is there for
people. Americans have fought and died to protect our freedom to vote.
They have done so on the battlefield, and they have done it in marches
and the civil rights movement; and 61 years after the Voting Rights Act
was passed by this Chamber and signed into law, that fight continues
today. This bill is not the right bill for this country.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Connecticut.
____________________