-9999

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. LEE. Mr. President, the Democrats' talking points against the SAVE Act are being proven wrong day after day after day.

We heard them say repeatedly: Noncitizens, including illegal aliens, don't vote because they can't vote. That is to say, they don't vote because they are not allowed to vote because Federal law prohibits noncitizens from voting in U.S. elections. But they do. They have. And existing laws make it, unfortunately, far too easy for them to do so.

In fact, Oregon officials, to cite just one example, admitted just recently an error of the State's automatic voter enrollment problem. And they acknowledged that it was much more significant an error than they previously thought, having registered 1,259 possible noncitizens just since 2021 alone. Some of the mistakenly enrolled noncitizens, thereafter, went on to cast a ballot, according to Oregon's secretary of state.

This enrollment error in Oregon was first unearthed earlier this month with officials admitting to wrongly registering around 300 voters through an Oregon DMV program that registers legal citizens when they obtain a driver's license or a State ID. But this week, the DMV and the secretary of state's office said a complete review showed 1,259 people who didn't provide proof of U.S. citizenship were added to Oregon's voter rolls, a number four times the previously acknowledged and reported figure.

Unfortunately, Oregon is not unique in this regard. There are other States that have acknowledged problems--a long list of them--including States like Texas and Virginia, each clearing thousands of noncitizens from their existing voter registration rolls.

Yet Democrats say this isn't happening. They continue to dismiss the need for the SAVE Act, citing an existing law under which noncitizens are, in fact, already barred from voting in Federal elections, as well they should be. They are barred; but the fact that they are barred doesn't mean that a combination of circumstances based on existing law makes it far, far too easy for noncitizens to vote. As I said a moment ago, they do, even though they are prohibited from doing it; and in many circumstances, they have.

But we are seeing it happen in realtime.

This is our final chance to address this issue before what I think most of us would acknowledge is going to be one of the most consequential elections of our lifetimes. If Democrats truly believe, as most Americans do, that voting in U.S. elections should be reserved for American citizens, then they must agree to pass the SAVE Act.

This is not too heavy a lift. This is something that just makes it possible for us to enforce existing law--existing law that, to my knowledge, nobody in this Chamber or the other legislative Chamber down the hall has suggested we change. That is all this does. That is all the SAVE Act is about.

This is, in fact, the last chance to prove that they care about election integrity in order for it to matter in enough time that it can make a difference between now and the November general election. After all, since the Biden-Harris inauguration, over 10 million undocumented immigrants entered the United States illegally. This figure--just that figure of 10 million who came into the country illegally in the last 3\1/2\ years alone--that figure exceeds the population of most of our States--36, in fact. A supermajority of all of our States have populations smaller than the population of illegal immigrants that have come through unlawfully under the Biden-Harris watch.

With millions of unauthorized people on U.S. soil--a total of 30 million noncitizens living in the United States--the potential for election fraud through ineligible voting is not a hypothetical risk. This means the foundational principles that underpinned our republic-- or any republic, for that matter--are under attack. It is under attack because President Biden, Secretary Mayorkas, and ``Border Czar'' Vice President Kamala Harris refuse to enforce the law.

With the influx of illegal aliens under this administration, if even a fraction--let's just say, 1 in 100--were to vote, this could translate into hundreds of thousands of votes. Depending on where they are located and concentrated, this could be far more than enough to sway many of our most tightly-contested elections and alter their outcomes, especially in the case of the Presidential election.

So make no mistake: This matters. It has consequences. And what we do or choose not to do will make a difference.

This is concerning considering a recent study. And in that study, we found that noncitizens have ample openings and significant opportunities, repeatedly, to vote unlawfully. This study found that anywhere from 10 to 27 percent of noncitizens in the U.S. are, in fact, today registered to vote. And anywhere from 5 percent to 13 percent of noncitizens in the United States currently do vote in Presidential elections.

So, no, don't tell me this doesn't happen. Don't tell me it is already unlawful so we don't need to do anything about it. We know that existing law, while it prohibits noncitizen voting in Federal elections, existing law makes it far too easy to do. And that is what we want to do in America with our elections. We want to make it easy to vote; hard to cheat. The last thing we want to do is make it easy to vote for those who will cheat--who do cheat by virtue of their voting because they are not entitled to do it.

It is what it means to be a citizen in a republic. It is what it means to be a country and to have a vote. You are stealing other people's votes. You are diluting their votes. You are, in fact, disenfranchising legitimate votes when you participate unlawfully, fraudulently, feloniously, but in a way that current law makes far too possible.

Across the Nation, instances abound where States have inadvertently, apparently, facilitated this crisis. Who knows to what degree of inadvertence this was, but it is always referred to as an inadvertent error. And unless or until we can prove otherwise, we have to deal with it.

But regardless of the degree of awareness and intentionality that went into it, these things did, in fact, happen, everything from unsolicited voter registration forms being mailed directly to the addresses of noncitizens and driver's licenses being issued without adequate checks, relying merely on the honesty of illegal aliens as they complete forms. All of these practices have opened up the floodgates to voter fraud.

Now, there is no law in place telling the States, as they process voter registration forms under the 1993 National Voter Registration Act, or NVRA--this is the so-called Motor Voter law. It is a law that allows people, when they apply for a driver's license, to simultaneously register to vote in Federal elections simply by checking a box and signing their name. Nothing in the NVRA or in any other current provision of Federal law tells the States exactly how or what they must do in order to verify the citizenship of voters who plan to participate in Federal elections.

Regrettably, a few years ago, the Supreme Court of the United States interpreted the NVRA, based on the fact that it doesn't instruct the States on how to verify citizenship, as somehow precluding, prohibiting the States from asking for proof of identification verifying citizenship at the time someone registers to vote under the NVRA in a Federal election.

This really was wrong, in my opinion. It was a majority opinion of the Supreme Court, and I believe they got it wrong. It is the Court's ruling, nonetheless, and it stands. It was issued over the strong dissent of Justice Alito, who pointed out the reasons why it shouldn't have been interpreted that way, but that ruling stands nonetheless, and the States have to abide by that order.

So, to be clear, under the law as it now stands, somebody going into a State and applying for a driver's license--as you are allowed to do, by the way, as a noncitizen, in all 50 States. You can apply for a driver's license in all 50 States and the District of Columbia. If you check the box on the attached NVRA form saying you want to register to vote and then sign your name saying ``Yeah, I am eligible to do this,'' that is it. The State isn't even allowed to ask you for any kind of identification. That is the end of the matter. A mere check of a box and a signature is all it takes, with little to no risk of being caught. In fact, noncitizens are being encouraged to vote and not warned of the consequences of doing so.

The fact that the Supreme Court wrongly interpreted Federal law to ban States from requiring proof of citizenship when registering voters via Federal forms makes it all the more urgent and important for us to do this. This signals loudly and clearly that this is how you get around this thing. We have to fill this gap.

An increasing number of localities permit noncitizens to vote in local elections. Now, that is their decision. I think it is a terrible decision on their part, but it is a decision over which we as Congress, we as the lawmaking branch of the U.S. Government, have no control. But what we do have control over is who may vote in Federal elections. That part is our business.

Prominent Democrats have openly discussed these tactics as beneficial to their agenda--``these tactics'' meaning deliberately bringing about the registration to vote in Federal elections by noncitizens and participating in Federal elections and casting ballots unlawfully as noncitizens.

Only months ago, every Senate Democrat voted to count illegal aliens in the census to help them shore up more seats in Congress and more votes in the electoral college. This cannot continue.

It is one thing to do that in the context of the decennial apportionment count--the part of the census that is used to distribute seats in Congress and in the House of Representatives and in the electoral college; it is quite another thing to let them actually vote. No sane republic would or should do that--certainly not this Republic.

The American people agree overwhelmingly on this. If you are an American citizen, you can vote in Federal elections; if you are not, you can't, and you shouldn't be able to.

It is our responsibility, it is our imperative to close these gates-- these gates that have been left wide open as a result of a combination of circumstances, including the NVRA, the wrong interpretation of it by the Supreme Court a few years ago, and then the 10 million-plus illegal aliens coming in in the last 3\1/2\ years alone and the total of 30 million-plus noncitizens living in the United States today, coupled with the fact that it has never been easier to apply for a driver's license in all 50 States and the District of Columbia even if you are a noncitizen.

My bill, called the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act, or the SAVE Act, would be a vital step in securing the electoral process, ensuring that every vote cast must be legitimate, that every vote cast must be cast by a U.S. citizen, and that every voter be duly and lawfully registered.

The SAVE Act amends the National Voter Registration Act so that States can ensure that only U.S. citizens may participate in Federal elections. The SAVE Act requires States to obtain concrete documentary proof of citizenship at the time of voter registration. It specifies that acceptable documentation must be provided, and it explains what kind of documentation. It also requires States to establish alternative verification processes for those rare cases where standard documents might be unavailable.

In that respect, the SAVE Act is far easier to comply with than other examples we can identify under existing Federal law where Americans routinely can be and are required to produce proof of citizenship in order to do a certain thing.

The most common of these instances of Federal law requiring proof of citizenship involve the submission of the form known as the I-9. If you are not familiar with that, I can guarantee, if you are a U.S. citizen and you have ever had a job, you filled one out.

The I-9 is the form that you have to present whenever you start new employment. If you are starting as an employee, you have to fill out the I-9. Attached to the I-9 has to be proof of citizenship. Typically, it is most easily satisfied if you have a U.S. passport. If you don't have a U.S. passport, you have to show a U.S. birth certificate and then, I think, a couple of forms, a government-issued photo ID, to prove that you are the person identified on that birth certificate, and then you are good.

The SAVE Act is even more flexible than that. That is not too onerous by itself, but recognizing that the right to vote is at stake and that some people might not have or might have lost some of these documents, it provides myriad other avenues by which they may prove their citizenship. This is not too onerous.

It also requires the States that set up these verification processes to make sure that they can get this done. It provides incredibly expansive ways to prove citizenship, and if you don't have any documented proof, you can do it.

This will in no way make it hard for any U.S. citizens to vote, not even the poorest or the least fastidious about recordkeeping among us. Every one of them will be able to vote if they are U.S. citizens. Indeed, it will prevent their votes from being canceled by foreign actors trying to bring about what really amounts to foreign interference with U.S. elections, which is something we all claim to care about and be opposed to aggressively.

Furthermore, the SAVE Act compels States to proactively remove noncitizens from voter rolls and introduces severe Federal penalties for those individuals who knowingly register noncitizens to vote.

The bill echoes the sentiments of the American people themselves, from coast to coast, from north to southeast to west. It transcends political affiliations and speaks directly to the core of what makes our country great: fair, free, and secure elections.

There is a lot that divides us here, that sets Democrats against Republicans and that can result in us disagreeing on the basis of a genuine disagreement among our voters, among our constituents. Republicans and Democrats, voters and Senators alike, often just disagree depending on our political alignment. But in this particular instance, it is the Senators who are opposed to each other, not reflected in the way the American people feel. Among the American people, this is like an 80-percent issue. Like 80 percent of Americans believe that we should be doing this. In fact, they feel like it is absolutely crazy to not do it.

This is about transcending those political affiliations and going back to what is so important about being a U.S. citizen and casting our vote. Your vote doesn't mean much if it can be canceled out by somebody else who is not entitled to be here.

There is not a corporation in America that would allow nonshareholders to participate in a shareholder election. They wouldn't let a nonshareholder vote if the whole point of the vote was to let shareholders vote.

If I were to wander into the Senate Democratic caucus as they are holding their leadership elections or any other important deliberation where they have to vote, they wouldn't in a million years let me vote in there because I am not a Senate Democrat.

When I arrived in the U.S. Senate, each of the three times I have been sworn in as a U.S. Senator, I had to produce documentary proof that I had, in fact, been elected in Utah. I had to produce an election certificate issued by the chief election official in the State of Utah, the Lieutenant Governor, who indicated that I won my elections--first in 2010, then in 2016, then in 2022. Without being able to prove that I was entitled to be here and to cast a vote here, I would never have been allowed to vote, nor should I be. It is no less true with U.S. elections. We cannot let those who are not entitled under the law to do it because they are not citizens, to vote in our elections.

This is about protecting our elections from foreign interference-- something my Democratic colleagues claim to care immensely about. Every day that we delay, the foundation of our electoral processes erodes a little more. We can't wait for this administration to enforce the law.

This bill will make it harder to cheat in elections and ensure the integrity of every single ballot that gets cast. There is really no valid argument against it, so heretofore people opposed to it have just been throwing out red herrings like ``It is already illegal,'' which, for reasons I explained a minute ago, means nothing if there is no way to enforce the law, and existing law makes it far too easy to cheat without getting caught or, alternatively, just ignoring it altogether. But there is no valid argument against this bill. That is why you don't hear any valid argument against this bill--it doesn't exist.

The only reason to oppose this bill would be if you need or are counting on illegal votes to win elections, if you want to rely on them--perhaps in the first instance or as backup; I don't know. But there is no valid, legitimate reason to oppose it.

By passing the SAVE Act, we would send a clear message that in the United States, voting is not just a privilege of citizenship but also a protected and cherished right, one that we need to protect.

As debates about election integrity rage, the SAVE Act stands out by guaranteeing that only American citizens will have a say in our elections. American elections must be decided by Americans, by American citizens. Without that, without them, we have no right to be here. We have no right to pass laws on behalf of the people without those people being citizens. So we have to make sure that those people determining who is here, who is in the Chamber down the hall, and who sits in the White House, are, in fact, U.S. citizens.

I acknowledge the presence of my friend and colleague, the distinguished Senator from Kansas.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. LEE. I recognize the presence of my friend and colleague the senior Senator from Tennessee.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. LEE. Madam President, as if in legislative session, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 439, H.R. 8281, the SAVE Act; further, that the bill be considered read a third time and passed, and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. LEE. Madam President, my distinguished friend and colleague the Senator from California makes an impassioned plea that we not pass this bill. I appreciate his thoughtfulness and care and consideration that he routinely gives to matters pending before the Senate. I wish I could say that always translates into accurate statements.

Today, it didn't. He made several statements that are just not accurate. First and foremost, he suggested--not just suggested, he said that this bill--the SAVE Act, which I am trying to pass right here, right now--failed to pass in the House of Representatives; that even in the Republican-controlled House of Representatives it couldn't get the votes to pass.

That is not true. It is 100 percent false. In fact, this has passed the House of Representatives. It passed the House of Representatives not only with the Republicans voting for it but they picked up five Democrats along the way. So they passed it. They passed it with a bipartisan vote.

Now, he may be referring to the fact that there was another vote-- another vote cast last week in which they attached the SAVE Act to a spending bill. It was the spending bill that caused the combined measure to fail. But, in fact, the SAVE Act has been passed by the House of Representatives.

It was passed with a bipartisan vote because even these Democrats, who joined with all the Republicans over in the House of Representatives, acknowledged that this is a problem. The problem has been created by a combination of Federal laws that have grown too loose, that have been further loosened by the Supreme Court of the United States in its interpretation of it, and that the need for it has, in fact, escalated.

Point No. 2 that he makes--this is the third time--sounding, I think, a little frustrated by the fact that we tried to do this multiple times. Well, forgive me, but the case for it has continued to build. It has continued to build steadily, even at the same time that the House of Representatives has now passed it.

This does matter. So he is mistaken here in that nothing has changed.

He says that there is no evidence of this. That is not true. That is news to me, given that the world learned yesterday of this evidence that just came out from the secretary of state's office in Oregon showing that complete review revealed 1,259 people in that State who didn't provide proof of U.S. citizenship, and they had been added to Oregon's voter registration rolls a number of--four times the previously reported figure.

That is also news to States like Texas and Virginia, just to state a couple. There are more that have been going through their voter registration rolls and discovered a lot of noncitizens. I mean, you add them all up, and we are talking about thousands of noncitizens registering to vote.

Then he pivots a little bit, and he says that there is no evidence of massive voter fraud. If thousands of illegally registered voters-- people who illegally register to vote in Federal elections--if that is not massive, I don't know what is.

Now, as to the next point that he makes: Ballots have already been mailed out. I don't dispute that. I am absolutely certain that that is the case. That is in no way, shape, or form an argument against the SAVE Act, nor is it an argument against passing this now.

In fact, there is no reason not to pass this now. There is good reason to pass it now, given that in fully 22 States in the United States of America--fully 22 States allow voter registration up to and including the day of the Presidential election. So in addition to the thousands of persons who are noncitizens and therefore may not lawfully register to vote or vote in a Federal election who have already registered to vote, many of whom have been shown in past elections to have voted illegally--we don't even know what the total number is. We don't even know what the total number of people is who might register to vote and then vote unlawfully between now and the 5th of November when the election is held. Yet in addition to the 22 States where you can register to vote, up to and including the day of the Presidential election, there are a whole lot of others who allow it, to varying degrees, at some point between now and election day.

Then he goes back to the fact that this is not a serious proposal. I don't know what that means, other than Democrats don't like it. And I understand that they don't like it. It is serious. I assure you, Madam President, and I assure my colleagues, this is a very serious matter when people register to vote and vote illegally. That disenfranchises actual U.S. citizens.

Finally, I do take exception to something. I take exception to the suggestion as to motive, suggesting that the reason I am here to do this is to disingenuously plow what he refers to as ``fear and uncertainty'' as to the legitimacy of our elections.

Not only is this kind of speech uncalled for and prohibited under rule XIX of the Senate rules where you are not supposed to characterize somebody's motive as something devious like this, if I were out here deliberately trying, just for kicks and giggles, to undermine the legitimacy in the outcome of the election, that would be inappropriate. That is not accurate. There is not a scintilla of proof for that. And there is a mountain of proof that we have darned good reason to bring this about.

I am deeply disappointed that we can't pass this. This is not a heavy lift. It is not too much to ask that we put something in place, putting teeth into existing law that has been on the books for decades that Americans overwhelmingly agree with and says you can't vote in a U.S. election unless you are a U.S. citizen.

The House passed it; we could pass it today. This could make a difference. We should pass it. It is inexcusable that we are not.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source