The Save Act

[LafayetteBear]

Do you have any idea how owners of corporations elect directors, approve auditors, and approve other important matters? How do you think they know who's eligible to vote?

bd: I certainly DO know how owners of corporations (aka shareholders) elect directors, approve auditors, and approve other important matters. They vote. And most shareholders VOTE BY MAIL. I'd wager that I receive at least two corporate shareholder election notices per week, and they invariably contain a ballot which I can fill out, sign, and mail in if I so wish. And there is no requirement that I provide a copy of my California Driver's License along with such mail-in ballot.

LOL, I think you stepped in it a little with that post of yours. Whoops!!

 

[dpic73]

Was that in the Save Act as well?!! I know that Trump had his minions send out written requests to every state asking for a copy of its voter rolls, complete with Driver's License Numbers, Social Security Numbers, etc., but I did not think that ask was part of any proposed legislation. If so, there's one more reason to oppose the Save Act.

Yes, it does

The short answer: Yes, the SAVE America Act (the current version) does include a voter roll submission requirement, though it's not quite framed as "turning rolls over to the government."


Specifically, the bill would require states, within 30 days of enactment, to submit voter lists to the USCIS/DHS SAVE system to verify citizenship for voter eligibility. Congress.gov States can already voluntarily use this system, but the bill would make it mandatory.


Critics argue this goes further than just verification. The Campaign Legal Center characterizes this as an attempt to pressure states into sharing voters' sensitive personal information with the federal government, noting that the SAVE America Act places no restrictions on what the federal government can do with the data once DHS receives it, and includes no safeguards against using it to force voter purges or question election results. Campaign Legal Center


The broader context: The voter roll data issue exists alongside — but is separate from — the bill's primary requirements. The core of the SAVE Act prohibits states from accepting and processing a voter registration application unless the applicant presents documentary proof of U.S. citizenship. Congress.gov


The SAVE America Act passed the House in February 2026 and is currently stalled in the Senate due to a Democratic filibuster, with President Trump urging Republicans to change Senate rules to allow passage with 50 votes rather than the 60 needed to end a filibuster. SCOTUSblog


So to directly answer your question: the legislation does require states to submit voter rolls to a federal DHS verification system, which critics say amounts to the federal government gaining broad access to voter data — though supporters frame it purely as a citizenship verification mechanism.

https://claude.ai/chat/3516a2f6-5b87-452f-b28c-7ac96f36fd83

 

[LafayetteBear]

Two years ago I went to vote in a blue state. No voter ID, just a signature. I had to submit a provisional ballot because for some reason my name was removed from the roll.

Wait, wut?!! Your name was removed from the voting roll? What would they call that again? "Culling," no? And here I thought you said that the voting rolls were never culled.

BTW, I get a voter information/registration card from my County Registrar of Voters on a regular basis. I think it is annually, but I am positive it is no less frequently than every two years. They use that to update my information on voting rolls, as well as to keep track of me for jury service notices. (Yes, LafayetteBear has served on a jury. More than once.) And that is here in this haven of extreme government ignorance and mismanagement (aka California). Just imagine how well a truly sophisticated and well-governed state like Mississippi, Kentucky or Idaho does in keeping its voter rolls tidy and up to date.

 

[bdgan]

bd: I've posted, repeatedly, that I would support a voter ID requirement IF AND ONLY IF it was accompanied by: (1) changes to state laws and policies (in each and every state) that made it easier, faster, and cheaper to get the requisite form of ID; and (2) provisions in the voting laws that required polling places to accept provisional ballots, and count them if an issue with a voter's ID is resolved within a reasonably prompt interval following election day. Elections are never officially confirmed within a week or two of Election Day. It always occurs a bit later. So that should not be problematic.

The big problem with the Save Act is that it is larded up with a lot more vote restricting provisions than just voter ID. It includes provisions requiring proof of citizenship, outlawing mail-in voting, and even anti-trans stuff (as if voting legislation needed to include stuff related to this country's tiny community of transsexuals). It's almost as if the Republican sponsors of the Save Act had no intention of getting it enacted. Oh, wait ...

1) Proof of citizenship is what it's all about.
2) Mail in ballots can still be requested if away from home or health issue makes it difficult to vote in person. Just no mass mailing of ballots.

 

[bdgan]

bd: I certainly DO know how owners of corporations (aka shareholders) elect directors, approve auditors, and approve other important matters. They vote. And most shareholders VOTE BY MAIL. I'd wager that I receive at least two corporate shareholder election notices per week, and they invariably contain a ballot which I can fill out, sign, and mail in if I so wish. And there is no requirement that I provide a copy of my California Driver's License along with such mail-in ballot.

LOL, I think you stepped in it a little with that post of yours. Whoops!!

Corporate voting is only for shareholders of record as of a certain date. They need time to prove you're a shareholder with a legal right to vote. That's the only way you get a ballot. They aren’t mass mailed to everybody.

Most voting is done online and you can only vote if you have a control number. You're out of luck if you aren't legally authorized to vote. Your control number can only be used once.

Stepped in it? I was in charge of this stuff for a publicly traded company. I think I know how it works.

 

[bdgan]

Wait, wut?!! Your name was removed from the voting roll? What would they call that again? "Culling," no? And here I thought you said that the voting rolls were never culled.

BTW, I get a voter information/registration card from my County Registrar of Voters on a regular basis. I think it is annually, but I am positive it is no less frequently than every two years. They use that to update my information on voting rolls, as well as to keep track of me for jury service notices. (Yes, LafayetteBear has served on a jury. More than once.) And that is here in this haven of extreme government ignorance and mismanagement (aka California). Just imagine how well a truly sophisticated and well-governed state like Mississippi, Kentucky or Idaho does in keeping its voter rolls tidy and up to date.

This wasn't culling. This was because someone with the same last name went through the process of having their registration removed and they removed me by mistake.

 

[TigerGrowls]

Ned, all states regularly cull their voter rolls but that doesn't mean that the rolls are perfectly updated at all times, nor does it mean that that if they missed some that means there is a lot of voter fraud. If you'd be honest with yourself you'd admit it would be a horrible idea to let Donald Trump and Steven Miller decide who gets to be removed. Just because a state isn't perfect does not mean a corrupt madman best known for his attempt to overturn a free and fair election would do it better. That's my point.

Blue states are not culling the voter rolls. Not even close. Your rationalization and imagination here is amazing honestly dpic.

 

[TigerGrowls]

You can play dumb all you want but now you're arguing about a point no one is making. This is not about getting a driver's license, it's about a new Act that would require those that have moved or whose name doesn't match their birth certificate to bring a birth certificate or passport along with their marriage certificate(if it applies) to the registrar's office IN PERSON to get a new registration AND a new driver's license before they can vote.

So this means they may incur the cost of getting those documents, PLUS the cost of a new driver's license just to be able to vote, unlike any other year in our 250 year history, which means the NEW requirements are a poll tax. Not to mention the extra time and hassle required to get this done before November. And not because more than a handful of undocumented immigrants attempt to vote but because a treasonous, paranoid election denier wants to prevent more people from voting because he fears the American people will hold him accountable, and let's be clear, that's why you want it too.

Fairy tale land.

 

[TigerGrowls]

bd: I've posted, repeatedly, that I would support a voter ID requirement IF AND ONLY IF it was accompanied by: (1) changes to state laws and policies (in each and every state) that made it easier, faster, and cheaper to get the requisite form of ID; and (2) provisions in the voting laws that required polling places to accept provisional ballots, and count them if an issue with a voter's ID is resolved within a reasonably prompt interval following election day. Elections are never officially confirmed within a week or two of Election Day. It always occurs a bit later. So that should not be problematic.

The big problem with the Save Act is that it is larded up with a lot more vote restricting provisions than just voter ID. It includes provisions requiring proof of citizenship, outlawing mail-in voting, and even anti-trans stuff (as if voting legislation needed to include stuff related to this country's tiny community of transsexuals). It's almost as if the Republican sponsors of the Save Act had no intention of getting it enacted. Oh, wait ...

Leftist bs.

 

[dpic73]

Blue states are not culling the voter rolls. Not even close. Your rationalization and imagination here is amazing honestly dpic.

It's true because your nutty, conspiratorial *** says so?

Fact: States have multiple systems in place to update voter rolls and continually improve their accuracy.​

​All citizens must affirm they are eligible to vote in their state and jurisdiction before they are added to the voter rolls. Under federal law, a person registering for the first time must present an ID.

Federal and state law require election officials to maintain voter rolls and continually improve their accuracy. Federal law requires states to remove voters who have died, moved, or otherwise become ineligible. Election officials have various practices in place to do so, such as regularly cross-checking voter rolls with state and federal agencies and other sources that track deaths and changes of address. Those sources include the Social Security Administration, the post office, and court records. Keeping voter rolls up to date not only ensures that only eligible voters can vote but also allows election officials to communicate with voters and direct them to the correct voting location.

Even when rolls contain voters who are no longer eligible because they moved or passed away prior to the rolls being updated, there are additional steps in place to prevent these outdated or ineligible registrants from voting and bar others from casting ballots on their behalf.

Rumor: Voter rolls contain large numbers of ineligible voters who are illegally voting.​

Voter rolls have received increased attention in recent years as conspiracy theorists have falsely claimed that inaccurate rolls have led to widespread fraud. Members of the public are generally unaware of the many procedures in place to update the rolls to continually improve their accuracy and the additional steps in place to prevent fraud. Bad actors are exploiting this education gap to spread false information and erode trust in our elections.

Voter Roll Accuracy

States have multiple systems in place to update voter rolls and continually improve their accuracy.

www.brennancenter.org

 

[dpic73]

Fairy tale land.

Prove it

 

[TigerGrowls]

It's true because your nutty, conspiratorial *** says so?

​

Fact: States have multiple systems in place to update voter rolls and continually improve their accuracy.​

All citizens must affirm they are eligible to vote in their state and jurisdiction before they are added to the voter rolls. Under federal law, a person registering for the first time must present an ID.

Federal and state law require election officials to maintain voter rolls and continually improve their accuracy. Federal law requires states to remove voters who have died, moved, or otherwise become ineligible. Election officials have various practices in place to do so, such as regularly cross-checking voter rolls with state and federal agencies and other sources that track deaths and changes of address. Those sources include the Social Security Administration, the post office, and court records. Keeping voter rolls up to date not only ensures that only eligible voters can vote but also allows election officials to communicate with voters and direct them to the correct voting location.

Even when rolls contain voters who are no longer eligible because they moved or passed away prior to the rolls being updated, there are additional steps in place to prevent these outdated or ineligible registrants from voting and bar others from casting ballots on their behalf.

Rumor: Voter rolls contain large numbers of ineligible voters who are illegally voting.​

Voter rolls have received increased attention in recent years as conspiracy theorists have falsely claimed that inaccurate rolls have led to widespread fraud. Members of the public are generally unaware of the many procedures in place to update the rolls to continually improve their accuracy and the additional steps in place to prevent fraud. Bad actors are exploiting this education gap to spread false information and erode trust in our elections.

Voter Roll Accuracy

States have multiple systems in place to update voter rolls and continually improve their accuracy.

www.brennancenter.org

Dpic...you are wrong. I have been all over this issue for years.

 

[dpic73]

Dpic...you are wrong. I have been all over this issue for years.

Hey Gomer, you are completely detached from reality! Remember?

 

[Moogy]

I didn't say anything about turning voter rolls over to the federal government. I said that democrats would be against any form of ID even if adjustments were made.

Do you have any idea how owners of corporations elect directors, approve auditors, and approve other important matters? How do you think they know who's eligible to vote? Do you think the vote is wide open? Do you think you can buy a share this morning and vote this afternoon? Do you think people who no longer own the stock are still allowed to vote?

Two years ago I went to vote in a blue state. No voter ID, just a signature. I had to submit a provisional ballot because for some reason my name was removed from the roll. My children were both on the roll even though they've been gone for a decade. I asked what I had to do to remove my children but was told they would have to come back to the state, wait in a line, and complete a form. Guess what? There's no way that's going to happen. Meanwhile I noticed the name of a deceased neighbor on the roll. Is this is what you call a secure system? Don't answer, it was a rhetorical question. Even Schumer and many fellow democrats agreed until they learned that voter ID might hurt their turnout.

What happened to you, bdgan?

Once upon a time you were a fairly decent, albeit boring, conservative poster. Even when you were wrong, your stances were fairly reasonable and thought out. You represented the old school neocon/Reagan-era Now you're just an illogical shill for Trump, hurling facebook-meme-worthy lies, misrepresentations and propaganda.

What happened? Are you degrading, mentally (progressing in age, etc.), so that those facebook-meme'ish lies now seem reasonable and true to you? Do you feel cornered now that most of the superficial reasons you said you voted for Trump have gone away, but you still feel an obligation to defend him (and your decision)?

While everyone else who was in your position is now waking up and coming to terms with the fact that were misled and lied to, and they're jumping off the Trump-train, you seem to be entrenching yourself in the crazy.

 

[TigerGrowls]

Hey Gomer, you are completely detached from reality! Remember?

Lol...nope cousin goober. Its you.

 

[dpic73]

Lol...nope cousin goober. Its you.

 

[LafayetteBear]

Corporate voting is only for shareholders of record as of a certain date. They need time to prove you're a shareholder with a legal right to vote. That's the only way you get a ballot. They aren’t mass mailed to everybody.

Most voting is done online and you can only vote if you have a control number. You're out of luck if you aren't legally authorized to vote. Your control number can only be used once.

Stepped in it? I was in charge of this stuff for a publicly traded company. I think I know how it works.

1. Ballots are mailed to every shareholder, not just to shareholders who request a mail in ballot. That's not "mass mailing?"

2. OK, I'll concede that shareholders may vote either via mailed in ballot or online. But my point is that shareholders are not required to show up in person at a shareholder meeting in order to cast their vote. And how is voting online measurably different from voting via mailed in ballot, at least from a risk of voting fraud perspective?

 

[LafayetteBear]

Blue states are not culling the voter rolls. Not even close. Your rationalization and imagination here is amazing honestly dpic.

You are such a font of knowledge, TG. I just mentioned my own first hand personal experience with efforts by my County Registrar of Voters to keep County voting records up to date. But you, in all your wisdom, tell us that "Blue states are not culling the voter rolls." Your blanket assertion pairs well with your recounting the many and varied assertions of Q, Eagleman, and the other RWNJ sources you love to cite.

Here, for your edification, is link to a Fact Sheet from the Contra Costa County Registrar of Voters. (I live in Contra Costa County,) If you look at Page 2 of the linked Fact Sheet, you will see the following phrase: "If a voter remains inactive for a period of two federal elections, they are cancelled." Frankly, I had no idea my county cancelled voter registrations so quickly, but I vote in every election so that sentence has no relevance to me.

chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://www.contracostavote.gov/wp-content/uploads/9.-CCC-Fact-Sheet-2-Voter-Registration-List-Maintenance.pdf

 

[LafayetteBear]

Leftist bs.

You poor thing. You're obviously upset that your Orange Master's popularity is plunging, that Republican prospects for November are plunging along with it, and you don't know what to do with yourself. Perhaps a board timeout would be in order.

 

[TigerGrowls]

You are such a font of knowledge, TG. I just mentioned my own first hand personal experience with efforts by my County Registrar of Voters to keep County voting records up to date. But you, in all your wisdom, tell us that "Blue states are not culling the voter rolls." Your blanket assertion pairs well with your recounting the many and varied assertions of Q, Eagleman, and the other RWNJ sources you love to cite.

Here, for your edification, is link to a Fact Sheet from the Contra Costa County Registrar of Voters. (I live in Contra Costa County,) If you look at Page 2 of the linked Fact Sheet, you will see the following phrase: "If a voter remains inactive for a period of two federal elections, they are cancelled." Frankly, I had no idea my county cancelled voter registrations so quickly, but I vote in every election so that sentence has no relevance to me.

chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://www.contracostavote.gov/wp-content/uploads/9.-CCC-Fact-Sheet-2-Voter-Registration-List-Maintenance.pdf

Its good if the little county is doing its job but its not occurring on a widespread uniform level in the blue states in particular.

 

[TigerGrowls]

You poor thing. You're obviously upset that your Orange Master's popularity is plunging, that Republican prospects for November are plunging along with it, and you don't know what to do with yourself. Perhaps a board timeout would be in order.

I have already called it. Republicans hold the house and senate in November. MAGA will show up for Trump.

 

[TigerGrowls]

Here is another:

This time in the state of Georgia:

NASA and MIT cybersecurity expert Russell Ramsland confirms:

—96,600 mail-in ballots were never returned but were counted and voted on November 3, 2020.

We have seen sedition in other parts of the country because it’s easy for Dominion rigging systems to assign a person to a mail-in ballot.

PASS THE SAVE AMERICA ACT!

 

[LafayetteBear]

I have already called it. Republicans hold the house and senate in November. MAGA will show up for Trump.

We'll see. It's not looking good for Republicans right now, but it's a long way to November. I'll give you that.

 

[TigerGrowls]