Sign up for the Today newsletter
Get everything you need to know to start your day, delivered right to your inbox every morning.
Here’s why readers support voter ID laws, even as some take issue with SAVE America Act
Though some readers were flat-out against voter ID requirements, many favored an ID policy — whether through the SAVE act or other means.
Previously:
With the U.S. Senate poised to vote next week on the SAVE America Act, New Englanders are split on the controversial voter ID bill, some calling it “a dangerous scam” while others hail it as just plain “common sense.”
The Safeguard American Voter Eligibility, or SAVE America Act, would require voters to show proof of citizenship to register to vote in federal elections, or to update their registration. (For most, this would mean a passport or birth certificate.) Under the proposed law, voters would also need to show photo identification in order to cast a ballot — already a requirement in some states.
Advertisement:
The SAVE act passed the U.S. House of Representatives last week by a slim margin, with only one Democrat voting in favor. Massachusetts congresspeople have largely denounced the legislation as an attempt to sway the 2026 midterm elections and potentially disenfranchise voters who may lack sufficient documentation.
The bill now faces a 60-vote threshold in the Senate, where Republicans hold 53 seats.
We asked our readers if they want to see Congress pass the SAVE act, and hundreds responded to our poll. Those who weighed in came out largely in favor of some form of voter ID policy, whether through the SAVE act or other means. In fact, a couple readers felt so strongly about the need to enact voter ID requirements and curb potential voter fraud, they cast hundreds of duplicate votes.
Advertisement:
Some also insisted it wouldn’t be a problem because, they said, a REAL ID would be enough to satisfy the bill’s proof of citizenship requirements for registering to vote. But that’s not actually the case. Notably, while the SAVE act includes on its list of acceptable documents “a form of identification issued consistent with the requirements of the REAL ID Act,” a REAL ID itself typically doesn’t indicate whether someone is a citizen. In fact, some non-citizens are also able to legally obtain a REAL ID.
State-issued Enhanced Drivers Licenses, which do provide proof of U.S. citizenship, are currently only available in five states: Michigan, Minnesota, New York, Vermont, and Washington. Idaho also offers IDs with an optional citizenship marker.
A driver’s license or state-issued ID card would, however, suffice for photo identification when casting a ballot.
Still, millions of adult citizens don’t have an up-to-date driver’s license, or may lack a government-issued photo ID entirely, according to the Center for Democracy and Civic Engagement at the University of Maryland. In the center’s 2024 report, about 23 million Democrats and 15.7 million Republicans indicated they did not have a license with their current name and/or address.
Advertisement:
What’s more, obtaining a driver’s license or state-issued ID in Massachusetts typically costs residents somewhere in the realm of $25 to $50. Many Democrats and public policy organizations have also raised concerns about the impacts for married women and people who have legally changed their name; voter drives that rely on mail-in or online registration; and election offices that are already stretched too thin.
What are Mass. Republicans saying?
On the other hand, prominent Massachusetts Republicans argue voter ID laws are necessary to protect not only election integrity, but trust in electoral outcomes.
“The Save America Act protects the sanctity of the most fundamental right we have: the right to vote,” said Amy Carnevale, chair of the Massachusetts Republican Party. She pointed to a 2025 Pew Research Center poll that found 83% of respondents favored requiring all voters to show government-issued photo ID.
“So this isn’t a partisan issue, it’s about common sense,” Carnevale added.
John Deaton, a Republican running for U.S. Sen. Ed Markey’s seat, also cited the Pew findings and a similar Gallup poll as he expressed support for the SAVE act.
“I want to ensure that those who have the right to vote can exercise it and that their votes are not diluted by those who cannot,” Deaton said. “Growing up, the only barrier my mother would have faced was cost, so I support a Free Vital Records initiative to make sure cost never stands in the way.”
Advertisement:
Two Republican candidates for governor, Brian Shortsleeve and Mike Minogue, called voter ID requirements “common sense.” A third Republican gubernatorial candidate, Mike Kennealy, did not respond to a request for comment.
“You need an ID to board a plane, cash a check, or pick up a prescription,” Shortsleeve said. “We need to make sure voters trust the integrity of the electoral process, whether it’s a convention, a primary, or a general. Every legal vote needs to count.”
He also called for accessible IDs to ensure eligible voters aren’t excluded. Minogue, meanwhile, emphasized the importance of an election process “that instills confidence in Massachusetts voters.”
“It’s long overdue,” MassGOP National Committeewoman Janet Fogarty echoed, adding, “anyone that’s a citizen would not have an issue presenting their identification just to go in and vote, just like if they’re, you know, going in to take out a library book or something.”
Asked about concerns that voters might struggle to meet the documentation requirements after a name change, Fogarty replied, “That’s silly, really. I mean, people get married and change their names all the time and have to change identification accordingly, including passports.”
She likewise pushed back on claims that the SAVE act could suppress voter turnout in the 2026 midterms. In fact, Fogarty suggested, the bill might have the opposite effect.
“Because there is a lot of voter apathy that some voters think, ‘Oh, my vote doesn’t matter. It doesn’t count,’” Fogarty said. Knowing that voters were required to prove their eligibility and identity might encourage turnout, she added.
What do Boston.com readers have to say about the SAVE act?
Unsurprisingly, the SAVE act also generated strong opinions among Boston.com readers. Some were flat-out against voter ID requirements, noting the lack of widespread fraudulent voting by non-citizens.
Advertisement:
“It’s not a problem, never has been,” said Rich D. from Hampden. “It’s an excuse to lower turnout of working class and voters on the margins who could potentially swing the election to Republicans. If you can’t smell a rat on this then you’re not paying attention.”
Others, like Alan B. from Bedford, argued that the documented low rates of fraudulent voting are beside the point.
“I’ve always found it absolutely insane that I can walk into a polling location, go up to a clerk, say my name and address, and I’m just handed a ballot without any verification at all,” he wrote. “Adding steps to ensure our elections stay solid and safe shouldn’t be a controversial topic.”
Several readers agreed with the need for voter ID, though they took issue with the SAVE act’s proposal.
“I think we should be working to create a special ID when people initially register to vote, that doesn’t have onerous, expensive, and time-consuming restrictions attached that seem to be specifically designed to disenfranchise voters,” said Mike from Groton. “Given that this is coming from a party that attempted to violently overturn the election in 2020, this reeks of corruption.”
Below, more readers share their thoughts on the contentious SAVE America Act.
Responses have been lightly edited for grammar and clarity.
Do you want to see Congress pass the SAVE America voter ID law?
Yes, extremely strict rules are needed
“This is common sense. If you need an ID to get on an airplane or get into a bar, you certainly should have one if you’re going to have a say in the direction of our country. This shouldn’t be a party issue. We need to come together and bring civility back into the country. The finger pointing is exhausting.”
— James, Amherst
“You need ID for everything in this country. Voting should require it as well. Most Americans agree, both Republican and Democrat. Once again the MA politicians ignore the desires of their constituents.”
— Bob, Boston
“I want honest, fair elections. ID unfortunately is the only way to help get there. If you’re complaining about showing an ID to vote but you’re OK with needing one for Mass. lotto or to buy alcohol, you have allowed the media to brainwash you.”
— Dave, Beverly
“If you aren’t responsible enough to have a birth certificate or passport, you aren’t responsible enough to make election decisions.”
— Margaret H., Boston
“Common sense and logic. It’s insulting to insuate that people are incapable of getting a photo ID to vote.”
— John M., Somerville
No, I agree with voter ID but this proposal makes it too hard to register
“It is impossible to believe that the proponents of this law didn’t understand the negative impact this would have on married women and others who’ve legally changed their name. Their intent is therefore clear, they are knowingly attempting to make it nearly impossible for millions of American citizens to vote.”
— Jack, Lynn
“Some of us ladies who are contemplating marriage would still like to vote! And voting is a right.”
— No name given
“In a true democracy the government should make it easier to vote, not harder.”
— Andrew F., Brookline
“Like most things that require an age limit, an ID is needed. I am not fundamentally opposed to showing ID, but it must be made attenable to everyone. There are many people who do not drive and therefore, do not have a driver’s license. A free photo ID that is provided by the government for all eligible voters is OK. The SAVE Act is a disgrace, limits voter eligibility for the sake of politics. It should not be passed.”
— No name given
No, we don’t need voter ID
“It’s finding a solution for something that is not a problem. It is yet another effort to disenfranchise those who would vote against the Republicans.”
— Mike, Stoneham
“It’s a poll tax. IDs cost money, taking time to get an ID means time away from work for many when the nearest center could be across a county.”
— DW, South Shore
“Forcing poll workers to be the arbiters of who’s eligible would be a disaster, leading to arguments, likely to violence, and certainly to court cases, and as such would require a police presence at every poll site. The SAVE Act creates more problems than it solves. The voting fraud rate is vanishingly small, never anywhere near enough to sway an election, as is shown by a multi-year voting fraud database that is found on the Heritage Foundation’s website. (Yes, the Heritage Foundation that wrote Project 2025 and supports Trump.)”
— Dylan O.
“The SAVE act is a dangerous scam, intended to cripple most of the electorate. It demands documents that are for most people extremely difficult to provide and allows frequent purging of the voter rolls. Voting is our fundamental right as U.S. citizens. The cynically named SAVE Act would strip us of our rights to fair elections.”
— Mark F., Winchester
“We don’t need to solve imaginary problems, there are enough real issues to worry about.”
— E., Seekonk
Be civil. Be kind.
Read our full community guidelines.To comment, please create a screen name in your profile
To comment, please verify your email address