When a Democrat Supporting the SAVE Act is News
Voter ID laws affect Democrats in much the same way that kryptonite affects Superman. These laws diminish the party’s strength, instill fear, and incite outrage.
After Sen. John Fetterman’s first year in office — marked by a noticeable shift to the right as he recovered from the massive stroke that nearly derailed his 2022 Senate campaign — satire site The Babylon Bee ran a brutal headline: “Weird: Man Becomes More Conservative As He Regains Brain Function.” The piece opened with the line, “In a bizarre coincidence, Senator John Fetterman has suddenly become more conservative after his brain resumed working.”
Happily, that trend has continued. The Pennsylvania Democrat has voiced strong support for Israel and tougher border security, and even backed several of President Trump’s Cabinet nominees. Unsurprisingly, those positions have made him a frequent target of criticism from within his own party.
In an appearance on Fox News program Sunday Morning Futures, Fetterman once again ruffled Democratic feathers by affirming his support for voter ID laws, telling host Maria Bartiromo they were “a no brainer.”
Requiring citizens to show identification before casting a vote should be a no-brainer. But in today’s Democratic Party, it is considered sacrilegious.
Anyway, Fetterman’s public endorsement of voter ID laws spread rapidly on social media. And bucking his party once again, he found himself squarely in its crosshairs.
What does it say about the Democratic Party when a member supporting a position favored by 80% of Americans is considered newsworthy?
Well, voter ID laws affect Democrats in much the same way that kryptonite affects Superman. These laws diminish the party’s strength, instill fear, and incite outrage.
In other words, they make cheating in elections far more difficult. And without the competitive advantage of cheating, Democrats are likely to win fewer elections.
BREAKING: Democratic Senator John Fetterman joins the Republicans and comes out in favor of requiring an ID to vote in every election across the country.
“I do not believe that it’s unreasonable to show an ID to vote.”
Fetterman is right once again. pic.twitter.com/UDX0NldnN4
— Ian Jaeger (@IanJaeger29) February 8, 2026
ELECTION INTEGRITY: Voter ID is an 83-17 issue. Senator Fetterman explains that voter ID is a no brainer. pic.twitter.com/p7RYVkEkY7
— @amuse (@amuse) February 8, 2026
As tensions mount over the SAVE Act, which would require voters to present proof of citizenship when they register to vote, photo ID at the ballot box, and obligate states to remove noncitizens (and other ineligible individuals) from voter rolls, Americans must demand answers from Democrats. Why do they oppose a bill meant to safeguard election integrity? Why, when the vast majority of countries on the planet, including Venezuela, require citizens to show ID in order to vote, does America stand alone?
When Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-FL) proposed attaching the SAVE Act to the massive funding package under consideration by the House last week, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) immediately rejected the idea.
In a post on X, Schumer wrote, “The SAVE Act is nothing more than Jim Crow 2.0. It would disenfranchise millions of Americans. Every single Senate Democrat will vote against any bill that contains it. Speaker Johnson should tell SAVE Act Republicans to stand down or else this shutdown will be on them.”
In a separate statement, Schumer maintained that Democrats must defeat the SAVE Act to “defend free and fair elections.”
The last time the House considered including the SAVE Act in a spending bill, Rep. Jennifer McClellan (D-VA) offered one of the most specious justifications ever. In an interview with The Hill, she argued that it costs money to obtain IDs that some voters may not be able to afford. “The SAVE Act puts barriers on American citizens voting,” she said, “and actually is a modern poll tax.”
McClellan’s remarks should have been shut down immediately. Most — if not all — states already provide free or reduced-fee identification cards to residents who cannot afford them.
The SAVE Act will not disenfranchise any eligible voters. It will, however, prevent illegal ballots from being cast by those who have already voted, those who are deceased, those who have moved, and those who are not U.S. citizens.
I recall hearing the same objections from former President Joe Biden and most Democratic lawmakers in 2021 when Georgia passed its Election Integrity Act. Yet despite those warnings, voter turnout in the state exploded during the 2022 midterms.
Voter ID commands overwhelming support: 76% of black voters, 82% of Latino voters, and 85% of white voters favor it — along with 71% of Democrats.
🚨 BREAKING: In a stunning blow to Democrats, 76% PERCENT of BLACK Americans want nationwide voter ID — in other words, the SAVE America Act
White voters: 85% want it
Latino voters: 82% want itAnother leftist narrative just got decimated.
Pass voter ID. GET THIS PASSED. 🇺🇸 pic.twitter.com/HFnVtlccvh
— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) February 3, 2026
In 2024, when Trump’s margin of victory far exceeded the margin of fraud, the issue carried less weight. However, in closer elections — such as the 2020 presidential election — even a small amount of fraud in the right states can decisively alter the outcome.
There are legitimate reasons why so many voters continue to question former President Joe Biden’s victory. The irregularities reported at battleground-state vote-counting centers on election night were numerous and striking. More than 1,000 sworn affidavits from poll workers in swing states alleging misconduct during ballot counting were summarily dismissed. Courts declined to hear their claims of impropriety and those raising concerns were called election deniers or conspiracy theorists.
Democrats, Big Tech, weaponized federal agencies, and the legacy media formed an unholy alliance that treated any discussion of fraud in the 2020 election as misinformation or disinformation. Much of this conduct was exposed by the Twitter Files.
Only now — long after Biden’s presidency has ended — are some of those issues beginning to be acknowledged.
Unfortunately, this belated recognition has not translated into meaningful reform among Democrats. For example, many blue state leaders repeatedly resist the Justice Department’s efforts to clean up state voter rolls, leaving in place bloated lists that include deceased voters, duplicate registrations, former residents, and non-citizens.
None of this should be controversial. Every American has a stake in ensuring that only eligible citizens cast ballots. Each time a non-citizen votes, a lawful citizen is disenfranchised.
The Democratic Party’s fierce opposition to even the most basic election-security measures is a flashing red warning sign. If we don’t have secure elections, we don’t have a country. It really is as simple as that.
Elizabeth writes commentary for Legal Insurrection and The Washington Examiner. She is an academy fellow at The Heritage Foundation. Please follow Elizabeth on X or LinkedIn.
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
“Each time a non-citizen votes, a lawful citizen is disenfranchised.”
Exactly. I’ve been bringing this exact point up for years and leftists are completely unfazed.
That’s because they never wanted an honest process and they don’t care at all about people being disenfranchised.
Enough talking, get the vote to Congress and The Senste now so it’s passed in time for November (and also to clear the subsequent law suits to come from Democrats to ensure their reliable illegal alien base can continue to vote.
Also be a good win if SCOTUS fumigates racial voting that has favoured Democrats for decades.
Both these things will force Democrats to two one of two things, fumigate the radicals from office or force them to become even more violent.
It’s probably too late for it to take effect before November. Even if the senate Republicans force the Democrats to have a real filibuster they’ll do it, and it will take time until they’re all talked out. Then there’ll be the lawsuits, based on voters not having enough time to get their ID sorted out before their state’s primary. That will delay it until it really is too late to enforce it by November. But there’s plenty of time for it to be in effect for 2028.
“The SAVE Act is nothing more than Jim Crow 2.0. It would disenfranchise millions of Americans.”
What Schumer is saying is that he believes that blacks lack the intelligence to obtain the most basic of IDs.
Who’s the racist again, Chuck?
“There are legitimate reasons why so many voters continue to question former President Joe Biden’s victory.”
Yeah, the guy had been running for president since the 80’s and never won a single delegate. Then, after showing *clear* signs of dementia that would soon addle his already middling intellect, he suddenly won the South Carolina primary and subsequently received the most popular votes in American history.
🐂 💩
He was never the legitimate president. We knew it at the time of the election, we know it now. The election was stolen from the American people.
Period.
“Requiring an ID to vote nothing more than Jim Crow 2.0. It would disenfranchise millions of Americans.”
How about requiring an ID to:
to fly on a plane
to open a bank account or cash a check
to apply for a loan
to withdraw money from a bank
to drive a car or renew a license
to enroll in SS, Medicare & food assistance
to buy alcohol, tobacco, or prescriptions
to pick up packages at the post office
to enter a secure Federal Building
to verify identity and work eligibility
There you go talking sense again, Paula.
Stop it! You’re going to trigger a liberal with a weak constitution.
The answer Paula is that all those are example of the systematic racism that permeates this country. If an ID was not required then white people would be free to fly, bank, borrow, and so on.
This country would be in a far better place if voter ID had been a requirement
starting at least in the 190’s I may be off but that’s when I became aware of
changes regarding voting requirements. MN used to provide cards approving one’s right
to vote. Eventually the Dems/DFL remove that and went down hill, mail in voting” and vouching – MN elections are a joke.
Uh huh. Fettterman is no ally. His actions do not prevents the democrats from blocking the SAVE act. He’s just playacting for political advantage.
TBH he seems sincere on this and a few other common sense issues. He’s on the left for sure but he’s a center/left populist not a radical lefty/wokiesta. We don’t need to ‘adopt’ him, just accept his willingness to work for common sense on an issue by issue basis, we don’t need to endorse the guy in a general election.
Uh no, Fettterman is not a man of principle. He acts in a coordinated fashion with Democrat party leadership. They’ve just lost the public on the SAVE act. and for reasons related to internal vulnerabilities in his state, he can express support for the measure. He’s a hack.
I don’t doubt there’s an element from d/prog leaders of ‘oh Fetterman is from PA a swing State and so we gotta cut him some slack let him vote for the 80% + issues’.
There’s plenty of insincere, unprincipled, opportunistic hacks in both the d/prog and GoP. See GoP Senators Graham, Cornyn, Lankford alongside d/prog Senators Warnock, Ossoff among many others.
My point is I don’t care why Fetterman ultimately votes for things favored by the GoP. All that matters is that he does. As he did during the Senate votes over the prior shutdown. Again I didn’t say we should adopt him just be willing welcome his vote when he is willing to vote for common sense.
Nobody said Fetterman actually VOTES for things favored by the GOP; in fact, people have specifically said he never does — he just gives them free lip service.
He does and has voted for things favored by the GOP — when he agrees that they are good things. Of course that doesn’t happen all the time, or even most of the time, but it does happen a significant number of times.
With 95% Republicans for it and 75% Dems for it as well as 75% blacks for it, if this doesn’t pass the it is Congress that is the problem. This is the most agreed upon issue in American history for about 100 years and there can be NO reason not to pass it. When the cowardly Schumer was asked about his “Jim Crow 2.0” comment to explain what is Jim Crow about it, he couldn’t even stutter an answer. It is total BS.
Fetterman will talk on a show that he is for Voter ID (THE SAVE ACT) but he is a Dem and he always vote lock step with the Dems so he will not vote yes for THE SAVE ACT.
That’s absurd. He will definitely vote for it, and against any filibuster against it.
McClellan, like most Americans, has no idea what a poll tax is.
There seems to be a common myth that a poll tax is a tax on voting, and that the 24th amendment banned poll taxes. Neither of these is true.
The 24th amendment does not ban poll taxes. It merely says that “the right […] to vote […] shall not be denied or abridged […] by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax”. The USA or any state or locality can have a poll tax if it likes. It just can’t use that, or any other tax, as an excuse to stop people from voting if they don’t pay it.
A poll tax has nothing to do with voting. A poll tax is simply a tax that has a flat rate per person. In the main part of the constitution it is called a capitation tax, and the constitution says that any federal poll tax must be “laid in proportion to the census”, whatever that is supposed to mean. States and localities, of course, are not bound by that.
The association of poll taxes with voting, and the reason they are singled out by name in the 24th amendment, is simply due to a historical coincidence. It so happens that a number of racist states used to prevent black people from voting by imposing a poll tax that most people couldn’t afford and didn’t bother paying, made loss of the franchise the only penalty on not paying it, but put in the infamous “grandfather clause”, i.e. that anyone whose father or grandfather voted would also be allowed to vote even if they didn’t pay the tax.
The upshot was that almost no one paid the tax, but only black people couldn’t vote as a result. White people didn’t pay either, but they could vote anyway because their fathers and grandfathers could. That’s why when the constitution was amended to ban this practice the amendment specified “any poll tax or other tax”.
But this could have happened with any tax. They could have set an absurdly high income tax, waived enforcement except for loss of the franchise, and exempted anyone whose grandfather voted. The result would have been the same, and in that case the 24A would have specified “any income tax or any other tax”.
I think the 24A is wrong; there is a strong case to be made that voting should be limited to net taxpayers. Those who pay nothing into the public fisc should have no say in its disposal. But that’s water under the bridge. The amendment is in the constitution, and it would be an impossible task to get it out again.
In any event, though, a reasonable fee to obtain ID is not a tax. If the fact that it costs money to obtain the documents necessary to prove ones eligibility to vote were a tax, then so must be the fact that it often costs money to get to a polling place. Anyone who lives too far away from their polling place to comfortably walk there must either drive, which involves paying for gas, or else take paid transport. Is that a tax?! Must the state provide free transport to and from the polls for anyone who asks?! Political parties often do that, but of their own free will. Would anyone claim the 24A requires the state to do it?! It’s absurd.
Also in most (probably all) states you can’t show up to vote naked. If you wish to vote you must be wearing clothes, and clothes cost money. Is that a tax?! Of course not. So why is the cost of proving that you’re entitled to vote a tax?
Merriam-Webster:
Synonyms of capitation
: a direct uniform tax imposed on each head or person :
Synonyms of poll
: head
little language background…
As you said, Poll tax is head tax, not tax on polling/voting
Disclaimer: I am not an entomologist
Should have included origin of capitation:
from Latin capit-, caput “head”
Democrats would support the bill if death certificates were included as a valid form of identification.
When is the photo taken? At what stage of decomposition?
Is it before or after rigor mortis relaxes?
Make this THE political issue of the mid
terms!
Tee it up in the Senate and use the Senate rules to force an actual filibuster by the Democrats to stop it. Let them go on the floor and speak for however long it takes to get to a vote.
If this can be done, I predict that a more than a few Democrat Senators will be reluctant to take their turn in the well.
There is actually a possibility that the filibuster fails and there is an actual up or down vote. Even if it does not get to a vote the optics for the Democrats would be terrible. Only their most rabid base would support them. Independents would be turned off and most likely support the GOP effort or at least be disgusted enough by the Dems to sit the election out.
but noooo
the dems would never ever evahhhh
rig an election
First world countries that require ID to vote
United Kingdom (photo ID required nationwide since 2023)
France
Germany (poll card plus ID if requested)
Italy
Spain
Netherlands
Belgium
Denmark
Norway
Sweden
Finland
Switzerland
Austria
Ireland
Czech Republic
Poland
Portugal
Greece
Canada (ID or combination of documents required)
Japan
South Korea
Israel
Chile
Yet he always votes with the Democrats
Of course he usually votes with the Democrats. He is a Democrat, after all. What else would you expect? But he has common sense, and when the Democrats are so obviously wrong on something he votes against them.
There’s a novel out there, what’s the title? Anyway, this monster is created and townspeople take it in, only later try to chase down with torches and pitchforks when it won’t do what it’s told. If that’s not a book, Holy Mary, it should be!