Murkowski defends SAVE Act position in WSJ Column

quote:

---

President Trump made his case for the SAVE America Act on Thursday, claiming the security of our elections is at stake.

While I support the bill’s core tenets—ensuring that only American citizens vote and requiring identification when voting—I remain opposed to it. Why? Because it would have serious negative effects in Alaska, and the current text doesn’t allow for the time and resources needed for proper implementation.

As written, the SAVE America Act isn’t a simple fix to safeguard elections, as proponents claim. It would impose costly new barriers and prevent some, perhaps many, from voting, while also creating chaos before the November elections.

Part of the problem lies in the bill’s mechanics. Right now, Alaskans can register to vote online. There is no evidence of significant fraud anywhere in that system. Yet the bill would effectively end online voter registration by requiring voters to present documentary proof of U.S. citizenship in person to an election official.

That wouldn’t be a major obstacle in most places in the Lower 48, but Alaska has only six election offices where that requirement could clearly be met. Six places in a state more than twice the size of Texas, where roughly 80% of our communities, and about 20% of our population, aren’t connected by road.

Even in cities such as Ketchikan and Kodiak, which have Department of Motor Vehicle offices where Alaskans can register to vote under current law, the logistics would be daunting. Under the bill, they would become completely unworkable in more remote communities.

Say you are an 18-year-old living in Savoonga, on a remote island in the Bering Sea, who wants to register to vote for the first time. If the SAVE America Act passed, your only option would be to buy a ticket on Bering Air to Nome, which runs about $780 round-trip. A night at the Aurora Inn would be more than $300. So, not counting food and local transportation, it would cost more than $1,000 just to register to vote.

Or maybe you’re a fisherman in Unalaska, out on the Aleutian Islands. The flight to Anchorage—the closest election office, some 800 miles away—would cost about $1,500 round-trip. You would also need a hotel, cabs and food while in Anchorage because it would be impossible to fly in, register and return home the same day.

These examples assume you have on hand the documents necessary to prove your citizenship. But take one more: You are an 85-year-old Native elder born in your parents’ house, 18 years before statehood. Getting a certified copy of your birth certificate, especially if you have never had one before, would be incredibly difficult.

Many Native people rely on tribal identification to register to vote, but the SAVE America Act would require the card to show that the applicant’s place of birth was in the U.S., along with a photo and expiration date. While many tribes’ identification cards have a photo, not all have expiration dates and few include a place of birth.

Only about half of Alaskans have passports. And many Alaskans—including women who have changed their names after marrying or divorcing—wait one to two months to receive certified copies of their vital records.

Beyond registration is voting itself. Alaska is a “no excuse” state, meaning you can vote by mail without providing a reason. More than 50,000 Alaskans did in the 2024 general election. Voting by mail is an important alternative in Alaska, particularly in small communities that don’t have places or poll workers for in-person voting. Given the unpredictability of weather in November, many Alaskans prefer the ease and reliability of voting by mail.

The SAVE America Act as the text currently stands would add strict ID mandates to mail-in voting. President Trump is pushing for the final version to go even further—essentially canceling mail-in voting unless a voter falls into one of four specific exceptions, such as military service. This despite the absence of any significant abuses of these systems in Alaska or across the nation.

I have expressed my concerns with the SAVE America Act for months. I filed several amendments when it came to the Senate floor. No effort has been made to correct its flaws.

I’ve also asked for the effective date of the legislation to be pushed back to give all states enough time for implementation. As written, the bill would take effect immediately—but it is unreasonable to expect immediate compliance.

This bill would force many states to modify their election laws. Some legislatures might need special sessions to do that. Thousands of local jurisdictions would have to implement new processes and find workers willing to risk being personally sued. Under the bill’s private right of action, individuals or groups could sue election officials if they believe verification requirements aren’t being strictly enforced.

Even if federal resources are provided through the budget reconciliation process to help facilitate these changes, it will take weeks or months for those dollars to arrive and much longer to overhaul state voting processes.

When allowed to speak candidly, state election officials from both parties have been clear: Provisions of the SAVE America Act won’t work, especially in the time frame envisioned by advocates.

The president is right that we should protect the security of our elections. But we can’t make it harder for American citizens to cast their ballots, because free and fair elections are the cornerstone of our republic.

---