The SAVE Act is not about ID

I get so tired of folks eliding the difference between requiring an ID to vote vs. requiring a birth certificate or passport to register to vote.

The federal SAVE Act (Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act) is a proposed law focused on voter registration and election administration. Its central provision is requiring documentary proof of U.S. citizenship to register (or re-register) to vote in federal elections, along with related verification and enforcement mechanisms.

Proponents argue that all the SAVE act does is require identification to vote just like identification to cash a check or see an R rated movie.

The analogy is inapt. One is about proving who you are at the time of the transaction, the other is about establishing whether you have the right to participate at all in our democracy, that is, whether you can exercise a fundamental right.

It’s the difference between being asked to verify your identity at the time of a transaction with readily available documents we all have, and conditioning access to a fundamental right on producing particular records for approval in advance... records that are not readily available and can be costly in time and money to procure.

The barrier to participation imposed by the proposed SAVE Act is especially high if you, like me, are an American citizen born of American citizen parents abroad, or like my husband are one of 5 million people who have a birth certificate issued in Puerto Rico before July 1, 2010, all of which were voided by the Puerto Rican government and require significant investment to replace, or, like me, and many others, are a woman who changed her name when she got married. And, the documents being required aren't free so if you are poor or live on a fixed income, the barrier to participation is also higher for you.

Virginians already have to show ID at the polls to prove that they are who they say they are. Requiring passports or birth certificates as a condition of participation is a different thing altogether. Such a significant burden on a fundamental right should only be imposed based on credible evidence of wide spread fraud. Even the Heritage Foundation data base has no such evidence.