The SAVE Act is a bogus piece of legislation. It isn’t about security; it’s a calculated effort to shrink the voting pool. While the rhetoric claims to protect “election integrity.” The primary targets of this “paperwork wall” are American citizens—specifically married women, low-income families, and those with “non-standard” names.
The Logical Collapse of the Conspiracy
The rationale behind this act is built on the false claim by the person in the Oval Office that he won the 2020 election. We have seen the pressure tactics—the January 6th insurrection and the desperate phone calls to election officials to “find” votes. To a leader like this, “finding” votes simply means doing whatever is needed to ensure he wins.
Six years later, the dude is still trying to reverse the 2020 election results. If the 2020 election were actually reversed, he would have already served his second term. By law—specifically the 22nd Amendment—that would make him ineligible for 2024. In the world of his own conspiracy, he shouldn’t even be there. The runner-up would have replaced him long ago.
The dude and his flunkies are scared. They are trying anything to ensure they win the midterms.
“Security” as a Smokescreen
His thesis is: American citizens, and only American citizens, should decide American elections. The White House social media has propagated the claim of widespread fraud in elections. However, the actual impact of the law tells a different story:
“Supporters call the efforts a security measure and say they’re trying to reinforce laws that will bar noncitizens from voting. However, voting rights advocates say it’s exceedingly rare for noncitizens to vote and such anomalies aren’t pervasive enough to influence election outcomes. These groups, including the Brennan Center for Justice, say the laws could make it more difficult for millions of Americans to cast a ballot, especially younger voters and voters of color.” —
USA TODAY
The High Cost of a “Free” Vote
Another victim of the SAVE Act is the low-income American. For many, a passport is a luxury they cannot afford. The cost of a passport is around $160, plus the cost of supporting documents, which can be an additional $35–$50.
When you add in the logistics of travel and time off work, you are looking at a significant financial barrier just to register. This is a reinvention of the old poll tax, which was abolished by the 24th Amendment in 1964. By requiring “documentary proof of citizenship” to be presented in person, this law effectively ends mail-in registration and voter registration drives. Acquiring these documents costs both money and time that many working-class families simply do not have.
The Name-Change Trap
For a married woman, this law turns her personal history into a legal hurdle. If your current legal name doesn’t match your birth certificate or passport, you are suddenly a “risk” in the eyes of the state.
The group most impacted is married non-Hispanic women. Culturally, Hispanic women often do not take their husband’s name. So, his own supporters would more likely be impacted by this law.
“Millions of women whose married names aren’t on their birth certificates or passports could also face extra hurdles to register to vote and cast their ballots.” — USA TODAY
In most cases, getting these documents is not hard. It is just one extra step that impacts predominately women. Most men will need a birth certificate or passport, even with a Real ID. In 44 of 50 states the Real ID will not prove citizenship. Also, it is possible for non-citizens to get a driver’s license and by default have a real ID.
The Special Character Trap
Beyond marital changes, there is a technical glitch built into these laws that targets cultural identity. Having an apostrophe or an accent mark, like D’Artagnan, O’Quinn or Peña offers challenges that are not easily corrected by the person. The name will be spelled correctly on their birth certificate. However, many state DMV systems are outdated and cannot process these special characters, often dropping them or replacing them with spaces on a Driver’s License.
Under the SAVE Act’s strict requirements, this minor computer error becomes a reason to reject a voter. The only way to fix it is to legally change the name to eliminate the character entirely. But for many, dropping that character doesn’t just “clean up” the name—it changes it into a completely different form. In my own case, dropping the special character would change my name into a masculine form, causing immense confusion and stripping away my identity just to satisfy a government database.
When a leader tries to narrow the definition of who is “worthy” to vote, they aren’t protecting democracy—they are dismantling it. I believe we must see through the “security” theater and stand up for the basic common agency of every voter.
The Dee Zone 