Catching the California Wave

The Revised SAVE Act is an Unapologetic Attempt to Keep Women Who Are More Likely to Vote Blue from the Polls

By Jennifer Kady Stanton and Karen Benedict

Reducing the number of Democratic-leaning women voters due to these unnecessary obstacles would significantly affect election outcomes. The SAVE Act is not only unnecessary to address such a small number of illegal votes, but it will, in essence, prevent millions of legitimate votes from women, the majority of whom would have voted for the Democratic ticket, by requiring unnecessary documentation, which may be difficult to obtain for many women.  

We are the Daughters of the Suffragist Movement and are writing today to voice our outrage and opposition to the Revised SAVE Act, which is currently before the Senate. Karen Benedict shares ancestry with Susan B. Anthony, and Jennifer Kady Stanton shares ancestry with Elizabeth Cady Stanton. Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Susan B. Anthony fought tirelessly to ensure women had a voice in shaping American politics. Today, that right is now under attack. 

Under the new Revised SAVE Act requirements, voters must present proof of citizenship in person to register to vote or update their registration mainly due to a name change or move. On the surface, some may argue that this is a logical step toward ensuring election integrity and that presenting a Real ID or passport is a logical requirement. However, according to numerous studies, voter fraud accounts for only a minuscule number of cases on election day. ”According to the Brennan Center for Justice, only 30 cases of suspected voting by noncitizens were discovered among the 23.5 million votes cast in the 2016 election. This translates to only 0.0001% among a voting jurisdiction with a high immigrant population (Keith & Perez, 2017). The Heritage Foundation, which is conservative-leaning, has also not documented evidence of widespread voter fraud. For example, Heritage’s data from over 36 elections and 42 million votes found only 36 cases of voter fraud, representing approximately 0.0000845% from a right-leaning source. (How Widespread Is Election Fraud in the United States? Not Very | Brookings, 2024)

Clearly, the voter fraud rate of 0.0001% is not the driving force behind these sweeping changes, which would disproportionately affect women voters because of the documentation required to prove a name change when registering to vote for the first time or when updating registration information after a name change or move. According to the Brennan Center for Justice, only 30 suspected cases of voting by noncitizens were identified among the 23.5 million votes cast in the 2016 election.

The Revised SAVE Act is a clear, unapologetic attempt to change election outcomes to keep more women from the polls. According to the Pew Research Center, more women are far more likely to vote Democratic. “According to a Pew Research Center survey conducted June 15-26 (before the Republican and Democratic conventions), there is a 16-point gender gap in general election support for Clinton. Overall, 59% of women voters say they would support Clinton over Trump, compared with 43% of men.”  (Chaturvedi, 2016)

The voting gender gap only appears to be widening, with far more women voting Blue. The Revised SAVE Act would require not only proof of citizenship but also an in-person presentation of name-change documentation, such as a divorce decree, marriage certificate, or court order. For women who have changed their name due to a marriage or a divorce, this would create a disproportionate barrier to voting. The loss of original documents and the difficulty in obtaining duplicate paperwork through the court system create unfair disadvantages for women, in addition to the financial hurdles they present. Women who live in rural communities, the elderly, disabled, or those who have limited resources would be disproportionately affected, creating unnecessary obstacles to voting that do not currently exist.

Since voter fraud is not a legitimate issue, the Revised SAVE Act is a clear attempt to keep more women, who are far more likely to vote for a Democratic ticket, from the polls on election day, thereby increasing Republicans’ chances of success.  

Women must stand united against an attempt to silence their voices. We must not lose these cherished rights through gradual measures that slowly erode our ability to be heard. When fewer women can vote, other issues that predominantly affect women will also be affected. The ripple effects of this bill will extend to other legislation as our voices become silenced and our voting numbers diminish. It is essential that we remember our heritage of strong, hardworking women who refused to have their voices muted and, as a result, shaped our modern world. We must not step back into a time when these rights were not available to all women, regardless of their background, social status, or ability to present name-change documentation.

Contact your Senators today and tell them to vote no on the Revised SAVE Act. Voters must be able to identify the true motivation behind the Act, which is clearly not to solve a problem that does not exist. It is an attempt to create needless barriers for women, who are far more likely to vote Blue, through the voter registration process.  

References

Chaturvedi, R. (2016, July 28). A closer look at the gender gap in presidential voting. Pew Research Center. Retrieved February 12, 2026, from https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2016/07/28/a-closer-look-at-the-gender-gap-in-presidential-voting/

nancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/noncitizen-voting-missing-millions

Keith, D., & Perez, M. (2017, 05 05). Noncitizen Voting: The Missing Millions. Brennan Center for Justice. Retrieved 09 28, 2025, from https://www.bren

Levitt, J. (2020). How widespread is election fraud in the United States? Not very. Brookings Institution. https://www.brookings.edu/articles/how-widespread-is-election-fraud-in-the-united-states-not-very/