[Congressional Record Volume 172, Number 116 (Thursday, July 16, 2026)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4122-S4123]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                          Voter Identification

  Mr. President, when I was elected in North Carolina and ran the 
campaign to get us to a majority and become speaker, one of the 
promises that I made to the people of North Carolina is that we would 
pass a voter ID bill; we would be smart about it; we would get it 
cleared through the Obama Justice Department; we would implement it in 
a methodical fashion so that we could further increase the already 
acceptable levels of election integrity in North Carolina.
  It took a couple of years. It actually took a couple of losses before 
we got it done, but we got it done. So for anybody to accuse me of 
saying that I don't like voter ID, you ought to check your facts and 
take a look at the signature on the law that was ratified by then-
Speaker Thom Tillis in the State of North Carolina.
  Why do I tell you that? To at least put forth my bona fides with 
respect to implementing complex legislation. I have been trying to 
explain for nearly a year that the SAVE Act--whether it is the SAVE 
Act, the SAVE America Act, the new SAVE legislation that is being 
proposed in the House, ``SAVE Goes to Hollywood,'' ``SAVE Goes to 
Hawaii,'' whatever the sequels are--all of them are fundamentally 
flawed and impossible to implement by this election.
  Now, let me explain why. In addition to actually having experience 
with legislating, ratifying, and implementing voter ID law in North 
Carolina, I also happened to be a partner at Pricewaterhouse, 
PricewaterhouseCoopers, and IBM Global Business Services. My entire 
career has been founded on implementation.
  When you look at implementation, you look at the complexity of what 
it takes to get anything done--even the most simple thing. The reason 
why businesses pay firms like Pricewaterhouse to do what we do is 
because details matter, planning matters, execution matters.
  Now, let's talk about the SAVE Act or the SAVE America Act or 
whatever the heck they are calling the next thing that they are talking 
about putting in the reconciliation bill.
  States fit into two categories when it comes to how they administer 
elections. There are 41 States that administer at a county level--and 
I'm doing this to better explain it to my friend the senior Senator 
from Utah--41 States at the county level. What does that mean? Well, in 
North Carolina it means that we have 100 counties, and we have the 
State. We have 101 election entities that would have to implement 
whatever we put into law in North Carolina.
  If you multiply that by the 41 States that do it the same way, we 
have almost 4,000--let's narrow it because somebody will say: Oh, you 
overestimated. We have over 3,000--it is actually somewhere around 
3,600--3,000 governmental entities that have to implement the letter of 
this law, OK?
  So we will just go with 3,000. Keep it low. Now, we have nine States 
that actually administer at the State, county, and municipal level. 
That actually adds about another 7,000 governmental entities that would 
have to implement the letter of this law--whatever the law is, all 
right?
  The election is going to be held on the second Tuesday of November, 
right? We are August, September, October, right? So we have fewer 
than--let's just call it 100 days before the election. You are telling 
me that whatever proposal is being considered in the House can come and 
get done in the House, which it hasn't done, come to the Senate and get 
passed, go to the President's desk--let's say all of that--let's just 
say a miracle occurs. We can take it out of the Crock-Pot, put it in 
the microwave--we get it done in 2 weeks, right? OK. Well, 2 weeks from 
now happens to be about the first week of August, so that would be 
August, September, October--3 months after

[[Page S4123]]

ratification to implement complex voter ID policy that is generally 
administered at the State level in time for this election. Well, it 
can't be implemented on day one, right? South Dakota actually starts 
voting 46 days before the election.
  No. 1, you have got to go back and tell these 10,000 different 
entities: We don't know what the timing is. We have got to implement 
this stuff.
  So your early voting, your absentee ballot voting, the people that 
requested ballots, the military members overseas that are actually 
getting teed up with the current laws--that is all off the books, and 
we are going to get you something new in 60 days.
  Folks, I have done implementation work. The math doesn't work. I have 
to believe that these people who are Ivy League educated, qualified to 
go to the Supreme Court, can do basic math.
  It can't be done. It can't be a serious effort. And if it is a 
serious effort, I would suggest that they engage somebody who has 
actually implemented it before, instead of assuming that they can 
because they simply can't.
  And so when I have somebody put a microphone up in my face and say: 
Why are you against voter ID? I would say: First, do your homework. I 
ratified it. I fulfilled a promise. We have solid elections in North 
Carolina.
  I am against it because people are selling you a bill of goods. When 
I had this discussion with the senior Senator from Utah, it was like: 
Well, you know, I understand that it doesn't work in practice, but it 
should work in theory.
  He didn't say that, but that is effectively how he responded to it. I 
don't work in a theoretical world. I grew up in a trailer park. I 
worked as a management consultant. I work in a practical world. And in 
a practical world, I don't care how much you want voter ID done, the 
only thing you are going to have in this election is 72 Members of the 
Senate who already have voter ID in their States--did you know that? 
You would think that we didn't have any.
  Mr. President, 36 States already have voter ID. You want to sit down 
here and talk about how you upped the bar, and you give people a year 
or two to get it implemented, fine. But don't fool the American people 
into thinking you can implement something of this complexity over 60 
days. My God, it needed to happen 2 years ago.
  As a matter of fact, the senior Senator from Utah's legislature has 
recently changed their policy, which I think they should have called 
for years ago, of mass mailing ballots to everybody, right? This should 
be fairly simple. You are only going from mass mailing ballots to 
saying: Hey, we have got to request it, right? They decided to take 3 
years to implement that.
  I would ask the senior Senator from Utah: Why don't we speed it up? 
Why don't we do it this year? If we can do something as expansive as 
all this that they have tried to do in the three different sequels to 
the SAVE Act, you can certainly do that in Utah, can't you? Because the 
effect of this bill would be to eliminate it anyway. So get `er done. 
Do it now. Or let's start being honest with the American people.
  We should figure out a way to get every State to get to voter ID. We 
should put in grants that say: If you hit this threshold, we will help 
you with the implementation; and if you don't, we are going to spend 
that money to audit your elections.
  That is fine. That is good governance. And that is giving the States 
the option to decide whether or not they want to up the ante and 
increase the integrity of their elections or expect an audit from the 
Federal Government if they don't.
  That is what I would be advising my client. This is what I am 
advising my client right now--the President of the United States--like 
CEOs that I have advised before: Mr. President, these people are 
misleading you if they are telling you that this can be implemented by 
November. The only thing that will occur is an undermining of the 
integrity of our elections right now.
  So, folks from North Carolina, our State motto is ``Esse quam 
videri''--``To be, rather than to seem.'' This seems like a legit 
proposal, but it isn't, and it hasn't been for the last year because 
you couldn't have gotten it done with 10,000 election entities if we 
had passed it last July.
  So let's be honest with the American people. Let's focus on getting 
every State to have voter ID. Let's provide funding that lets the 
States opt into it and have a consequence if they don't in terms of 
audit. But let's stop the charade. Let's stop the distraction. Let's 
get the government funded. Let's use reconciliation if we need to, but 
let's not clog it up with another piece of policy airdropped by a 
Member of this Senate or the White House that will undermine this bill, 
undermine what we need to get done before the election.
  So the fact is, we are not going to have 10,000 people doing things 
radically by election day. What we are going to do if we continue down 
this path is to convince the American people that you can't count on 
your election results. And that is dangerous. That is irresponsible.
  If you see voting improprieties in your State, report it. There are 
tools right now to investigate them. But don't further undermine the 
confidence of the American people by saying: My goodness, they can't 
get this implemented? The election must be invalid.
  That is not an America that anybody should sign up for. We ought to 
do it right, and we have to do the work. So if I see a reconciliation 
bill come from the House with another failed attempt to confuse this 
election, I will use every device I have available to slow down the 
wheels of government until people cop a clue and do the math.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Louisiana.