RightDataUSA

Demographics and Elections Commentary tagged with SAVE Act

2/12/2026: Will the Senate GOP "SAVE" Us? [RightDataUSA]


Photo credit: newsweek.com

On February 12, as the Republican-controlled (sort of) Senate is trying to line up cosponsors for S.128 -- better known as the "SAVE Act" -- it was revealed by some Twitter account that Republican Senator Susan Collins of Maine is apparently not a "hard no"; she is leaving folks with the impression that she will consider signing on to the legislation as a cosponsor. Which of course is not quite the same as actually voting in favor of it.

As this commentary is being written there are 49 cosponsors, all 49 of which are Republicans; Mike Lee (R-UT) is the original sponsor. The lone GOP holdout aside from Collins and, of course, the always-reliable Lisa Murkowski (RINO-AK), is Mitch McConnell (RINO-KY). Intrepid Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) courageously stuck his finger into the wind and finally joined the list earlier in the day. This is probably a good indicator that Thune knows the Act will never pass under his "leadership".

The Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act would prohibit states from accepting and processing an application to register to vote in a federal election unless the applicant presents documentary proof of U.S. citizenship. Additionally, states must remove noncitizens from their official lists of eligible voters. The bill establishes criminal penalties for certain offenses, including registering an applicant to vote in a federal election who fails to present documentary proof of U.S. citizenship. Somehow this is controversial, with Democrats passionately (and hypocritically, seeing how many other things they demand ID for) opposing it en masse. Almost en masse, anyway -- the bill passed 218-213 in the House with one non-Republican vote, that of endangered Texas Democrat Henry Cuellar.

Now we can say the SAVE Act has "bipartisan" support!

Which it does -- at least according to every poll not taken solely among those who directly benefit from vote fraud.


Here is a statement from the pious and virtuous Senator Murkowski, who benefits from Rigged Choice Voting in her home state of Alaska:

"When Democrats attempted to advance sweeping election reform legislation in 2021, Republicans were unanimous in opposition because it would have federalized elections, something we have long opposed. Now, I'm seeing proposals such as the SAVE Act and MEGA that would effectively do just that. Once again, I do not support these efforts."

Fact check: Republicans were not "unanimous in opposition" to the Democrat takeover of elections in 2021. One Republican Senator voted in favor of the plan which would benefit the left.

That Republican Senator was. . . Lisa Murkowski, the liar who is quoted above.

Proof: Vote Data for S.4 (11/3/2021): "The John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act"


Defending Susan Collins?

It takes a reprobate like Lisa Murkowski to make Susan Collins look good, but we sympathize with Collins' plight here. She is being pressed hard from both sides about the SAVE Act, and she is running for re-election in November; Murkowski's Senate seat is not up until 2028, at which point she is likely to retire (especially if she thinks a Democrat will replace her).

Collins has a couple of inconsequential GOP primary opponents this year, so her only real concern is the general election which is a complete tossup. This SAVE Act business is almost certainly so much Kabuki theater anyway, because the Senate requires 60 votes to pass the SAVE Act legislation unless the Republicans muster the courage (LOL!) to force Democrats to filibuster -- a real filibuster, that is. One which would require Democrat Senators to stand up and babble endlessly until they collapse. Painful (though humorous) as that would be to watch, once the filibuster ends only 50 votes would be necessary for passage.

It is assumed that if Collins were to cosponsor the Act, she would also vote in favor of it. That's not necessarily true. Collins is really between a rock and a hard place on this one because it probably means her career. Only a complete moron would think that some conservative could beat her in the primary and THEN actually win a general election.

In Maine.

She's the GOP's best chance to maintain a Senate seat in that state -- and the only chance.

It's one thing to root against Republican squishes like John Cornyn in Texas or Bill Cassidy in Louisiana as they are running for re-election this year, because other viable options exist in those states and any of them can win if the incumbent goes down in the primary. But guess what -- Maine isn't Texas or Louisiana.

Is this vote worth forfeiting her Senate seat after 2026 (Maine isn't the only state Republicans are set to lose) and as a result possibly giving Democrats full control of the legislative branch come next January? For something that Democrats will repeal instantaneously the moment they regain control of the government?

The knee-jerk answer is easy and obvious -- the SAVE Act is important, even critical -- and we agree, but there are potential ramifications if this theatrical production amounts to nothing. If the GOP chickens out on the filibuster then the Act is dead, and Collins (along with many others in her party) may be ousted anyway, because Republicans will have removed one of the few incentives that voters had to get out and support them in November.


Photo credit: legalinsurrection.com

Sigh. . . He's at It Again

Pennsylvania Senator John Fetterman -- every Republican's favorite Senate Democrat -- temporarily annoyed the vote-fraudsters in his party by appearing to tepidly support the SAVE Act when he appeared on a recent weekend television news program. The Act is a hill on which Democrats are rightfully willing to die, because if counting only legitimate votes -- and counting them only once -- ever becomes "a thing" in the U.S. then Republicans will control both the federal government and many state governments for the foreseeable future, and Democrats are well aware of this.

Fetterman said that voter ID laws are a "no-brainer" (perhaps an unfortunate choice of words in his case) and rejected the Democrats' racist but cleverly-rhyming assertion that requiring ID to vote is "Jim Crow Two-Point-Oh". Talk is cheap however, as we have observed numerous times in the case of Flip-Flop Fetterman. He frequently talks a good game, but nearly never backs it up with votes when it counts or when his vote could actually make a difference.

Sure enough, Fetterman began backtracking almost immediately after those common-sense words were out of his mouth. Pressured by the liberal media, Fetterman rushed to assure horrified Democrats that he fully supports fraud-ridden tactics such as unlimited mail-in voting and declared that he never promised to vote for the SAVE Act (which he will not).

Is there anyone out there who still falls for this guy's "Last Sane Democrat" act?

Tags:

2026 Senate SAVE Act