A right wingnut solution in search of a problem.

American Citizen. Got married? Took your spouse’s name? Got divorced? Got remarried? Be prepared to present documents for every event in your life from birth.

Yesterday:

Eric Burlison
[February 9, 2026]

If we’re serious about saving the country, pass the SAVE Act.
Make Democrats defend why they oppose requiring citizenship to vote. Force that vote.
The American people deserve to know where everyone stands.
[….]

The reality:

Review of Allegations of Noncitizen Registrants and Voters
July 2025

[….]

…in the context of each state’s voting eligible population, claims of noncitizen registrations and voting allege vanishingly small numbers. Even the largest claims (which are the most likely to be severe overestimates) never allege numbers that are more than a few tenths of a percent of the number of eligible voters in the state. This indicates that existing safeguards are broadly effective, as even highly motivated efforts identify only a relatively small number of records for potential concern. Election officials and other authorities are able to thoroughly investigate these concerns and move swiftly to address any evidence of improper registration or voting that may be found. Instead of highlighting a systemic or pervasive problem, these small numbers underscore the overall integrity of the underlying system…

[….]

“Useless laws weaken the necessary laws.” – Charles-Louis de Secondat, baron de La Brède et de Montesquieu (1689 – 1755)

Some of the responses to Eric Burlison (r):

Is JD Vance going to be required to present 3 forms of ID for each name change?

Heh.

Citizenship is already required to vote.

It’s already a law that only US Citizens can vote in Federal elections, so no one is opposed to requiring citizenship to vote. In most places you also have to show ID such as a driver’s license as well – but that doesn’t prove citizenship, even REAL ID
We’re opposed to legislation that as written, will impose a “poll tax” on many married women because it has no provision for using marriage certificiates or court documents to show their birth certificate (in original name) and their current state ID (in another name) are both them.
If this isn’t the case, explain why AZ state law specifically mentions marriage certificates and court documents being acceptable along with birth certificates to prove citizenship, but the SAVES act does not?

Many eligible citizens don’t have documentary proof of citizenship
According to the U.S. Department of State, examples of primary citizenship evidence include a birth certificate, a U.S. passport, a Consular Report of Birth Abroad, a Certificate of Citizenship, or a Naturalization Certificate. (While Real IDs are often assumed to be a reliable proxy for citizenship, they do not definitively establish citizenship.)
Although at least one of these documents are in theory available to most citizens, not all voters have them readily available. According to recent studies:
9% of all eligible voters do not have, or do not have easy access to, documentary proof of citizenship.
52% of registered voters do not have an unexpired passport with their current legal name.
11% of registered voters do not have access to their birth certificate.

You say you’re for traditional family values, then want to take voting rights away from women who take their husband’s surname so that they can start their own family unit.
Make Eric defend why he opposes women voting (as if we don’t already know why).

I have voted in every election since I turned 18. Every. Single. One. I was born in the US. My parents and grandparents (and their grandparents) were born in the US). Under the SAVE act, it would cost me hundreds of dollars and months of work to find a method to prove that I’m a citizen because when I got married, I took my husband’s name.Explain to me how that makes any logical sense. I’ve been a registered voter for more than 35 years. Aren’t the GOP supposed to be pro-marriage and pro-family? It’s actually easier for me to have my name changed back to my birth name and give up my married name than to prove I’m the same person. It’s nothing but a clear attempt to disenfranchise women.

Eric Burlison, tell us about the roadblocks this could cause for voting women of all political parties.

and anyone else who has had name changes, like adopted children.

Republicans can’t win without voter suppression. It’s not about illegal voting. If they had any policy they wouldn’t need voter suppression.

Burlison apparently doesn’t know we already show ID at the polling places. To add a requirement of also showing birth certificates and/or passports is overkill.
Or is it just that Republicans want to make it harder for married women and non-international travelers to
vote?
(Cost of passport – $165)

Isn’t this just more work for women he take their husbands name?

This has nothing to do with Democrats. We already have a voter I.D. card, show our identity validated photo I. D. and are on the registered voter list. Anything more than that is redundant, serves no purpose and will prevent Americans from voting which is their Constitutional right.

It has everything to do with MAGA Trump sycophants fearing the outcome of the 2026 election.

Cool making it tougher for married women to vote 👍🏽

Deceitful comments Eric.

==========

Nobody but USA born should be voting.

Wait for it.

not even naturalized citizens?! They worked hard for the honor… and probably know more about the nation than natural born citizens. They deserve voting rights.

Including the First Lady?

==========

Dude. It’s already in the constitution that only citizens can vote. Why waste time on this nonsense?

In a normal world the person who represents us should be able read these comments and see how unpopular their idea is. In a normal world the person who represents us would answer the phone and listen to their constituents with respect and thoughtfulness, not badger them and hang up the phone. But apparently Burlison is not up to either of those tasks.

I have voted in every election for more than 40 years and I showed my ID every single time. Stop trying to create problems to solve

It’s going to be much harder if you ever move and have to explain why your last name is different than your birth certificate. And prove it with documentation. Which means you have to track down every document, which costs time and money, and even then, you may have jurisdictions that have different requirements. You have jurisdictions that may require in-person registration, which disenfranchises those with mobility issues.
It is a poll tax, and the burden is overwhelmingly carried by married women. That’s the goal. Suppress the vote among the lower income voters and women. The reason is to disenfranchise democrats, since both of those demographics favor Dems.

This would create a difficulty for those of us who are married and chose to take our husbands last name- I am against this. My grandmother fought and gained the right to vote in 1920. She was an advocate for voters rights and the importance of voting in every election. You represent me and I do not want any restriction placed on my right to vote.

It is already a law that only US citizens can vote. There are already multiple safeguards in place to uphold that law. There is no significant evidence that illegal immigrants are casting great swaths of votes. The “SAVE America Act” is voter suppression, full stop. It’s a pay to play bill that largely affects women. Stop pretending you’re the good guy. You’re not.

Please stop embarassing our state.

The SAVE Act is nothing more than a gussied up voter suppression tactic to “save” an unpopular party in the midterms.

Call it what it is, the Save act is all about voter Suppression, not Security.

Our elections are already secure, stop trying to cheat! How about Affordability?

This is voter suppression—a wolf in the sheep’s clothing of patriotism. Why are you trying to disenfranchise my elderly mother, who is one of your constituents? She changed her name when she married. If she doesn’t have a RealID or passport, then under this proposed law, she couldn’t vote. But apparently that’s okay with you, and according to you there’s something wrong with Dems for opposing this misogynistic bill. Your straw man arguments are designed to stoke division and outrage to cover a nefarious purpose of this bill—to suppress the votes of women. You seem to think your voters are stupid or uninformed. I hope they demonstrate that they are neither of those by voting you out!

TELL THE TRUTH! The Save Act will prevent millions of US citizens from voting. Some in your own district. It will require identification that many don’t have (I don’t travel so I don’t have a passport and my birth certificate has a different last name since I got married). This is the GOPs way of disenfrantchiseing people from voting because they know they are going to lose in Nov.

Stop trying to disenfranchise voters.

Jim Crow and Poll Taxes all over again.

Solution without a problem that just makes it more difficult for women and minorities to access voting.

Eric, you want to block women’s right to vote! You say there is a problem and yet I don’t see it Greene County? That is your turf. Are you making accusations?

Don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater. SAVE is another Project 2025 brainchild meant to hijack elections by centralizing control with the federal government. It is NOT meant to make elections safer but infinitely more corruptable.

They have a plan.

So, you are saying that all of the mostly Republican County Clerks that the citizens of Missouri have voted into office are worthless at their jobs? 🤨

Voter fraud is about .003% in this country. There is an OVER ABUNDANCE of words on this topic, but NO EVIDENCE of the kind of fraud Trump TALKS about. The SAVE ACT is a voter registration suppression attempt – half the people in the country don’t have passports, millions cannot put their hands on their birth certificates. My parents lost my birth certificate and I had to pay to acquire one. Is Burlison suggesting we are required to purchase something so we can vote? Of course, there is the extra burden for married women because their married name won’t match their birth certificate. The SAVE ACT promises to solve a problem we don’t have.

If Burlison is serious about saving the country, he should start by telling the truth: citizenship is already required to vote in federal elections. It’s been the law for decades. Every state already verifies eligibility. The SAVE Act isn’t about ‘saving the country’ – it’s about creating new barriers for millions of legal, already-registered voters – especially women.
If Burlison wants to “force a vote,” Democrats welcome it. Let’s put on the record who’s voting to make it harder for women – especially married, rural, and older women – to cast a ballot.

Only U.S. citizens can vote in federal elections. That’s already the law. Democrats aren’t opposing “citizenship to vote,” they’re opposing performative legislation designed to solve a problem that doesn’t exist while making voting harder for people who are already eligible.
If this were really about election security, Republicans wouldn’t keep losing court cases for lack of evidence. And they wouldn’t block measures that actually protect elections, like funding poll workers, upgrading machines, or stopping partisan interference.
“Force the vote” isn’t about transparency. It’s about manufacturing suspicion, suppressing turnout, and then claiming victory when fewer people participate.
Saving democracy doesn’t start with pretending it’s under attack by imaginary voters. It starts with defending the right of real citizens to vote without obstacles invented for political gain.

Citizenship is already a requirement for voting. Maybe take a break from this and go attend a fourth grade civics lesson.

The only thing Eric Burlison is good at is looking for a problems where none exists.

This man is lying to you.

Why don’t you just admit you don’t want women to vote.?

What a nonsense post. Utter nonsense.

If you’re truly serious about saving the country, you’ll vote in November to replace this UFO-chasing nitwit with an actual grownup.

Heh.