The SAVE Act Sounds Reasonable. The Patriot Act Did Too

The principle is simple: only citizens vote. The question is whether this bill actually fixes anything.

The core principle of the Save Act sounds reasonable. Only citizens should vote in federal elections, and requiring verification for that is not inherently outrageous.

Then again, the Save Act is the exact kind of federal power grab and bureaucratic overreaction the people should be very weary of. We didn’t think “The Patriot Act” was a big deal at the time either.

This week, Trump said, “It will guarantee the midterms. It will guarantee the midterms. If you don’t get it, big trouble“, when discussing the Save Act. Hear him word for word in the clip below starting at the 30 seconds mark.

Which leads me to say, “You’re using a tiny problem as the excuse for a much bigger expansion of government power.”

If a law can “guarantee elections,” it isn’t protecting democracy, it’s controlling it.

Just the mere fact that Trump says this publicly, should alarm everyone. Noncitizen voting is already illegal by federal law. Documented cases of noncitizens voting in federal elections is extremely rare.

Where have I heard of something like this? Maybe 20 years ago? G Dub Bush? Its starting to ring a bell now.

We’ve Seen This Before.

Twenty years ago, Americans were told the Patriot Act was necessary to keep them safe.

The SAVE Act deals with voting rights, while the Patriot Act dealt with personal data and surveillance. At first glance, they seem completely unrelated. Though the subjects are very different, the methods and madness behind them both align perfectly, let’s review these similarities.

They both were sold as targeted solutions to specific threats.

Both bills expand federal authority beyond previous norms.

They shift power away from local or decentralized systems

Save Act and Patriot Act both rely on bureaucratic enforcement rather than direct voter choice

Most critics say both create systems that can be expanded later

Donald Trump said it himself, the midterms will be guaranteed if we pass the Save Act. The Patriot Act showed how easily a narrowly framed law can evolve into something much bigger. Critics worry the SAVE Act could follow the same pattern.

The Patriot Act taught us something important. When government asks for “just a little more power,” it rarely stops there.

The question Americans should be asking about the SAVE Act isn’t whether only citizens should vote.

It’s whether expanding federal control over elections is a cure worse than the disease.

We have seen this play out in the past, and the Patriot Act is just one example. There are too many examples to name of trojan horse type legislation that makes its way into law, and then becomes a complete constitutional nightmare for Americans.