Share and Follow
Senate Democrats are mounting a vigorous opposition to the SAVE Act, voicing concerns that the requirement for Americans to present a photo ID at voting polls, even when provided free of charge, could impede eligible voters from participating in elections.
Their primary argument is that the necessity of proving citizenship could create barriers for millions who do not have straightforward access to essential documents like birth certificates or passports. They assert that this could lead to the disenfranchisement of minority groups, particularly among Black and Hispanic communities.
Across the globe, however, many democracies enforce similar voting regulations. Countries in both affluent Western regions and the developing world have implemented these rules without significant controversy.
For instance, every nation in Africa mandates government-issued identification to vote, with 51 out of 54 requiring prospective voters to provide proof of citizenship during registration.
Furthermore, Mexico and all 12 nations in South America require voters to present government-issued photo IDs and verify citizenship as part of the voter registration process.
Mexico’s rules, similar to those proposed in the SAVE Act, require voters to prove their citizenship with an original birth certificate issued by a civil registry, a naturalization certificate or a Mexican passport.
Our southern neighbor even requires a thumb stain when casting a ballot, to prevent double-voting.
All 47 European countries require government-issued photo identification at the polls.
Virtually all of them check voters’ citizenship against national databases, though France requires them to submit documentation, too — and the United Kingdom, Cyprus and Ireland reserve the right to demand documents when citizenship is in doubt.
Why the tight security? To combat widespread vote fraud.
Mexico enacted major reforms in 1991 after election fraud became endemic there.
The government required biometric photo voter-IDs, banned absentee ballots and mandated in-person registration.
And despite the tighter rules, turnout rose.
In the next three presidential elections, average participation reached 68% of eligible voters, up from 59% in the prior three.
As confidence in the system increased, so did participation.
Similarly, in Northern Ireland, decades of intense sectarian conflict fueled aggressive electoral tactics, and observers described voter fraud as “widespread and systemic.”
Both Conservative and Labour governments acted.
In 1985, under Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, the United Kingdom began requiring voters to show identification at the polls, but that failed to solve the problem: Investigators found that individuals could easily forge medical cards — the accepted ID — or obtain them fraudulently to cast illegitimate votes.
IRA Belfast commanders subsequently admitted to complex scams that had volunteers donning disguises — wigs, different clothes, glasses — to vote multiple times, and running taxis to transport fraudulent voters between polling stations.
By 2002, a UK Electoral Commission survey found that 64% of voters believed fraud in some areas was significant enough to change election outcomes. Only 10% disagreed.
That year, the Labour government strengthened ID requirements, introduced harder-to-forge identification and implemented rules to prevent multiple registrations — and voter confidence rose.
Rep. Henry Cuellar, the only House Democrat supporting the SAVE Act, says he does so “because I believe in a fundamental principle: American citizens should decide American elections.”
Seven states already require proof of citizenship, such as a birth certificate, passport, tribal documentation, or naturalization papers, to register to vote — similar to the SAVE Act’s proposed rules.
And polls show strong support for voter-ID requirements among all voters, both Democrats (71%) and Republicans (95%).
Even though Democrats like Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer damn the legislation by claiming it “would impose Jim Crow-style restrictions on voting,” minority voters don’t seem see any danger: significant majorities of black Americans (76%) and Hispanic Americans (82%) favor voter ID.
“The bottom line is this: voter ID is not controversial in this country,” CNN chief data analyst Harry Enten recently noted.
Nor does it spark controversy virtually anywhere else.
Yet despite voters’ own preferences, only one Democratic House member and one possible Senate Democrat, Pennsylvania’s John Fetterman, support the SAVE Act.
Unless seven more of the Senate’s 47 Democrats step forward, their filibuster will kill the bill.
But if voter ID and proof of citizenship destroy democracy, Democrats would have to label virtually every other democracy in the world as undemocratic.
John R. Lott, Jr. is the president of the Crime Prevention Research Center.