Tangle - The SAVE America Act before the Senate.

Starting point is 00:00:00 From executive producer Isaac Saul, this is Tangle. Good morning, good afternoon, and good evening, and welcome to the Tangle podcast, a place we get views from across the political spectrum, some independent thinking, and a little bit of my take. I'm your host, Isaac Saul, and on today's episode, we're going to be talking about the Save America Act, a new voting rights, voting ID, voter election reform bill that is, now before the Senate, they're going to debate it. So we're going to talk a bit about what's happening, what's in the bill and our view, or more specifically, my view on it. Before we jump in, I want to give you a quick heads up that tomorrow we're announcing some changes to tangle, some language

Starting point is 00:00:57 choice changes, some structural tweaks, some refined coverage approaches, and our first ever moderation policy for the comments section on our website. Pretty excited about all of this. I think it's going to be changes for the better. But keep an eye out or an ear out for the podcast and the newsletter, which will be dropping tomorrow. And unlike most Friday editions, we're going to be releasing them to everybody. So you guys all know what's going on. It's going to be an interesting, good edition, I think, and I'm looking forward to it. All right.

Starting point is 00:01:28 With that, I'm going to send it over to John for today's main topic, and I'll be back for my take. Thanks, Isaac, and welcome everybody. A quick note that this week we will not have our normal episode of Suspension of the Roald. rules. Instead, we are going to be releasing a two-part interview with Michael Tracy and Tara Palmeri. That's going to come out later on this weekend and we'll have more details in the coming days. All right, here are your quick hits for today. First up, Russia has reportedly expanded its intelligence sharing and military cooperation with Iran to assist its attacks on U.S. forces in the Middle East. Number two, the Israeli military struck an Iranian natural gas processing facility.

Starting point is 00:02:11 The first such strike in the current conflict, U.S. officials confirmed. that the Trump administration approved the strike. Separately, President Donald Trump waived the Jones Act, a law requiring goods shipped between U.S. ports to be transported on ships that are U.S. built, owned, flagged, and crude for 60 days. The White House said the move is intended to mitigate the short-term disruptions to the oil market during the Iran War. Number three, the Federal Open Market Committee voted 11 to 1 to keep interest rates unchanged at its current 3.5 to 3.75 percent range.

Starting point is 00:02:43 The committee noted uncertainty in the U.S. economic outlook due to the conflict in the Middle East. Number four, National Intelligence Director Tulsi Gabbard testified before the Senate Intelligence Committee to update lawmakers on threats facing the United States. On Iran, Gabbard said the regime appears to be intact, but largely degraded by U.S. and Israeli strikes. And number five, the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs voted 8 to 7 to advance Senator Mark Wayne Mullen's nomination as Department of Homeland. Security Secretary to the full Senate. Senate Majority Leader John Thune says a final confirmation vote could come as soon as next week. The House has officially passed the GOP's Save America Act. The act would require government-mandated proof of citizenship, such as passports or birth certificates, do register to vote. It would

Starting point is 00:03:40 also require states to remove non-citizens from existing voter rolls. On Tuesday, the Senate voted 51 to 48 to begin debate on the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act, also known as the Save America Act. The bill would require citizens to present documentation confirming their citizenship when registering to vote and require photo identification to vote in federal elections. Tuesday's vote formally initiates discussion of the bill on the Senate floor, a precursor to a potential final vote. For context, in September 2024, the House rejected an attempt to pass an earlier version of the Save Act that was paired with a government spending bill. In April 2025, the House passed another version of the bill, but the Senate did not take it up. The latest version of the bill has become a

Starting point is 00:04:24 priority for President Donald Trump, with the president saying earlier this month that he will not sign any legislation until the act is passed. The House voted 218 to 213 to 13 to pass a bill in February, but it must still overcome the 60-vote filibuster threshold to pass the Senate, where Republicans have a 53 to 47 majority. Under current law, people registering to vote must present their driver's license or the last four digits of their social security number, to verify their eligibility. If neither form is available, states can verify citizenship through a federal database. For those registering to vote by mail and ballot, states verify identity by comparing the signature

Starting point is 00:05:00 on the ballot to the one on file. The Save America Act would limit mail or online voter registration and require documentary proof of citizenship, such as a birth certificate or passport to register. The bill would also mandate government-issued photo ID at polling places. To vote by mail, voters would need to attach a copy of their identification when requesting a ballot and sending it back. Alternatively, people voting by mail could submit the last four digits of their social security number, along with an affidavit stating that they could not obtain a copy of a valid

Starting point is 00:05:30 photo ID. Furthermore, the law would require states to submit their voter rules to the Department of Homeland Security for cross-referencing with citizenship data. Republicans say the bill is necessary to maintain the integrity of U.S. elections, particularly by preventing non-citizens from voting. In recent weeks, some GOP lawmakers have called on Senate Majority Leader John Thune to force a talking filibuster, requiring Democrats to physically hold the floor to block the bill from coming to a vote, to work around the 60-vote threshold that stands in the way of a

Starting point is 00:05:59 final vote. Thune, however, has so far resisted, saying that Republicans do not have sufficient votes for the move. In proceeding to debate on the bill, Republicans say that they want to bring national attention to the effort and force Democrats to go on record about why they don't support it. Senator Eric Schmidt, the Republican from Missouri, is expected to begin debate with a series of amendments. backed by President Trump, including ending unsolicited mail-in ballots, with exceptions for military service, disabilities, illnesses, and travel, banning biological males from competing in women's sports and prohibiting transgender surgeries for minors. On Tuesday, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said that the Democrats are united in opposition to the bill and will fight its passage for

Starting point is 00:06:39 as long as the debate process lasts. Democrats claim the Save America Act addresses a non-existent issue, voter fraud, and non-citizen voting, and its restrictions would only be. dissuade or burden potential voters. Some have also suggested the effort is designed to promote mistrust in election security ahead of the midterm elections, allowing Republicans to claim the results are fraudulent if they suffer significant losses. Today, we'll cover the latest developments in the push to pass the Save America Act with views from the left and the right, and then Isaac's take.

Starting point is 00:07:19 We'll be right back after this quick break. All right, first of all let's start with what the left is saying. The left opposes the bill, with many arguing it would disenfranchine. a significant number of Americans. Some say the legislative push is derived solely from Trump's grievances. Others suggest Republicans have little shot of passing the bill. For the Brennan Center, Michael Waldman wrote about the Save Act reaching the Senate. Why this bill now? President Trump, in the middle of a drive to undermine future elections, calls it his number one priority. The public has a different idea. A recent New York Times-Syna poll asked voters what they see as the most

Starting point is 00:08:02 important problem facing the country. The war, the economy? The percentage of voters who wanted Congress to focus on election integrity was zero, Waldman said. This legislation goes far beyond, say, requiring identification at the polls. The requirement to show a passport or birth certificate to register to vote would block many, many more American citizens from voting than any voter ID rule that has come anywhere close to passage. The newest version of the SAVE Act has been stuffed with bad ideas. It would require states to hand sensitive voter roll information over to the Department of Homeland Security to scrutinize. We already know that the federal government has requested, and in some states received, the ability to demand the removal of specific voters from the rolls,

Starting point is 00:08:44 Waldman wrote. Again, we must ask, why this? Why now? Senator Mike Lee, the Republican from Utah, said the quiet part out loud. He posted a chart showing the prediction site Polly Market now shows that Democrats are the favorites to win control of the Senate in 26. In the New York Times, Jamel Bowie asked, this is what the president is fixated on right now? As the president sees it, and as the name would have you believe, the Save Act is meant to secure American elections against corruption and malfeasance, Bowie wrote.

Starting point is 00:09:14 But to this president, as we should know by now, a rigged election is one that he lost or did not win to his satisfaction. To Trump, the 2016 presidential election, in which he won the Electoral College but lost, the popular vote, was rigged. So was 2020, where he lost outright and then led his supporters in a failed but destructive effort to stop the steal. Trump does not believe that he can legitimately lose an election. The Save Act is an attempt to make that distinction a political reality by removing as many mere Americans from the voting pool as possible and elevating the true people of the United

Starting point is 00:09:47 States, who just so happened to support Trump in the Republican Party as the only legitimate players in American political life, Bowie said. The point of the SAVE Act is to use the Jindup panic over non-citizen voting to disenfranchise the tens of millions of Americans who oppose the president and who have, as a result, been placed outside the political community. In CNN, Aaron Blake suggested Republicans face a growing conundrum on the Save America Act. Congressional Republicans have spent years playing into President Donald Trump's wild claims about undocumented immigrants and illegal voting.

Starting point is 00:10:20 The party appears stuck between a rock and a hard place when it comes to the legislation the GOP has dubbed the Save America Act to address this purported problem, Lake Road. The rock is the increasingly apocalyptic demands of a base and a president who appear insistent about this legislation, and the hard place is the fact that Senate Republicans don't appear to have any straightforward way to pass it like the House did. Perhaps the most oft-mentioned idea is implementing the talking filibuster, but this works better in theory than in practice. In reality, it could simply mean that the Senate's efforts get gummed up for weeks or months with no guarantee of success. The process would also mean Democrats could offer amendments that could torpedo the whole bill, Blake said. The final option would be to mix the filibuster entirely, the so-called nuclear option. But similar to when Democrats floated this idea earlier this decade, the Senate GOP doesn't seem to have the votes. And some more institutionally minded and centrist Republicans would surely fear what that would portend.

Starting point is 00:11:28 All right, that is it for what the left is saying, which brings us to what the right is saying. The right supports the bill, and many note that its core provisions are overwhelmingly popular with voters. Some worry that the Trump-backed version of the bill could backfire on the GOP. Others encourage Republicans to accept a compromise. In the Daily Caller, Travis Taylor said, if democracy means listening to voters, the Senate should pass the Save America Act. As a professional pollster, I can tell you that few political issues, if any, enjoy the kind of strong, bipartisan support that the Save America Act enjoys, Taylor wrote. When it comes to election integrity, there are two groups of people.

Starting point is 00:12:05 One group wants to ensure only eligible Americans are casting ballots. The other group is willing to tolerate election fraud. There is no third group. The American people are overwhelmingly in the first. Despite what the elites say, Americans' concerns about election integrity aren't discriminatory or paranoid. They are perfectly reasonable. Democracy requires trust in elections,

Starting point is 00:12:26 so that no matter who wins or loses, everyone accepts the outcome. This leads to more civic harmony, a stronger society, and a government more in line with what people actually want, Taylor said. Senate Democrats should take a look at the polls and realize that supporting the Save America Act is a huge opportunity to deliver for most of their voters. And if they won't do that, then Republican leader John Thune should force the issue and show the American people which party reflects their values. The Wall Street Journal editorial board wrote about why the Save America Act won't.

Starting point is 00:13:00 Mr. Trump now wants to expand the Save America Act. One of his ideas is to countermand dozens of state laws on mail voting by restricting such ballots to people who are sick, disabled, serving in the military, or traveling, the board said. As an election policy, this has real upside. Yet many GOP states let anyone vote absentee. Your Republicans really want to endorse having the federal government overrule the election laws in Florida, Georgia, Wisconsin, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Oklahoma, Kansas, and more. Audits in the various places, Georgia, Michigan, Texas, Utah, Idaho have found non-citizen voting

Starting point is 00:13:35 and registration to be rare. Other states might be worse, but consider incentives. Illegal immigrants who want to say are trying to avoid being noticed by the authorities, the board wrote. But the Save America Act wouldn't turn blue states red, and it can't save Republicans from voter anger at unpopular policies. In the MAGA era, the bill could even marginally hurt the GOP. Kamala Harris in 2024 won college graduates and voters earning over $100,000 a year. Mr. Trump carried those with no degrees and lower salaries, which coalition is most likely not to have passports and birth certificates handy?

Starting point is 00:14:10 In Fox News, David Marcus argued the Senate GOP should take Federman's deal on voter ID. Over the next several days, perhaps even stretching into next week, the United States Senate, that grave and august deliberative by, will performatively waste time with impassioned speeches over the Save America Act, which they all know will never pass, Marcus said. There may, however, be an off-ramp to this Mobius loop of legislative futility. A proposal from Senator John Federman, the Democrat from Pennsylvania, would have the upper body vote on a clean, simple voter ID bill

Starting point is 00:14:42 without provisions regarding mail and ballots or citizenship. Even without the provisions regarding citizenship and mail-in voting, a law requiring a valid ID to vote in federal elections would be a most, major victory for Republicans. Politically speaking, such a clean voter ID bill would put Democrats in a much tougher bind than they are in today because they lose every one of their somewhat plausible sounding objections to the Save America Act, Marcus wrote. The American people neither need nor desire a week of pointless speeches about a bill that can't pass. Instead, let the Senate do some actual work and at the very least pass a simple, popular, and effective voter ID bill.

Starting point is 00:15:21 All right, let's head over to Isaac. for his take. All right, that is it for it with the left and the writer saying, which brings us to my take. So I'll cut to the chase and just put my cards on the table immediately. One, we do not need to change the proof of citizenship requirements for people to vote. And number two, we could benefit from voter ID laws with one important stipulation. Now that you know where I'm going to land at the end of this take, I'll show my work here. As longtime Tangle readers and listeners know, I inadvertently became one of the more prominent reporters on the election fraud beat over the last five years. I had a thread on Twitter that went viral during the 2020 election where I explained, debunked, or in rare cases validated voter and election fraud allegations in real time.

Starting point is 00:16:23 I went on a radio show where the host was giving out cash awards to people who could share an election fraud theory that I couldn't explain. and since then I've investigated and written extensively about all manner of allegations that the 2020 election was stolen, from debunking Dinesh D'Souza's film 2000 Mules to the way the story was proffered by characters like Sidney Powell. And I'm proud to say, I changed a lot of people's minds. In short, this is an area where I've become a bit of a quote-unquote expert, and it's one I'm deeply interested in because, honestly, if the 2020 election was stolen or our elections were vulnerable to widespread fraud, it'd be the biggest story of my lifetime. I would want to be the journalist who broke that story. But after years of reporting on this issue extensively, a few obvious truths stand out between that theory and reality.

Starting point is 00:17:12 First, voter fraud, that is, individuals casting illegal ballots happens in most large elections. A lot of people who trust our elections get caught by denying that fact, but it does happen. It's just a very tiny fraction of all votes cast. voter fraud is often caught and prosecuted, and I don't know of a single election where instances of fraud changed the outcome. That's voter fraud. It often happens accidentally through people voting at the wrong precinct or casting a ballot when they are no longer eligible. When it happens intentionally, it's most often a thing like a family drama, someone trying to cast a ballot for their dead parent who hasn't yet been cleared from the voting rolls. Election fraud,

Starting point is 00:17:51 which is the systematic infringement of an election by groups, is extremely rare. election fraud has changed the outcome of small, local elections and rare cases where a few hundred votes can decide the outcome. Most recently, a 2020 New Jersey City Council election in Patterson, New Jersey. Another prominent example in the 21st century featured former representative Michael Ozzie Myers, who in Philadelphia's elections from 2014 to 2018 was caught bribing election workers to stuff ballot boxes. He pleaded guilty in 2022 and served two and a half years in prison. That's a good example of what election fraud often looks like. Unauthorized immigrants casting ballots may be the least common version of both voter fraud and election fraud.

Starting point is 00:18:36 We know this because many states, including Georgia and Texas, have spent millions of dollars auditing elections and investigating this very phenomenon. Texas's audit in total found one million people on voter rolls it deemed ineligible, so unauthorized immigrants make up a very tiny fraction of just this ineligible but registered public. population. And again, these weren't people who voted, but simply might have been able to get away with voting because of bad voter records. Still, given all this, I don't think this issue is quite as simple as we're trying to fix a problem that doesn't exist. There is a problem, which is that people lack trust in our elections. And in states like Texas, where voter rolls are not being kept up properly, we do end up with a lot of people who are still eligible to vote even when they shouldn't be. Have Trump and Republicans exasperated this lack of trust? Of course. Do I think it is absurd the

Starting point is 00:19:28 president is talking about refusing to sign any legislation until this non-pressing problem is addressed? Definitely. Do I wish they were focused on solutions like better data sharing access across state lines and keeping voter rolls more up to date? Absolutely. Am I happy about any of this? No. But is there a solution here that might be beneficial? Actually, I think so. In 2023, I wrote about how I change my mind on voter ID laws. The upshot of that piece is that voter ID laws are commonplace across our Western peers, and it shouldn't be that controversial to ask people to show their identification to vote. Also, voters presenting IDs could reduce time and cost elsewhere,

Starting point is 00:20:08 and it would almost certainly reduce the number of people accidentally voting in the wrong precincts or voting as a dead relative or casting ballots that later needs to be cured because of a bad signature or some other minor technical issue. It could even relieve some stress on states that have to cross-reference all manner of data points if we had a more direct system of voter verification. Just as little evidence shows election fraud is a real problem, very little evidence shows that voter ID laws actually disenfranchise voters. We have studied this in the states that have implemented these laws.

Starting point is 00:20:40 Obviously, regulations will impact more people if they're implemented at the federal level, but I think the solution is simple. In conjunction with a voter ID law, include funding to provide government, and issue ID is free to anyone who doesn't have one, often the elderly and low income. If Republicans are serious about this issue, they could spend a little bit of money to make sure no American citizens are cut out of the process for lack of means. Short of that, I would not support a voter ID law, but I think that would be a real path to get it done. Indeed, Senator John Fetterman, the Democrat from Pennsylvania, is proposing a standalone voter ID bill that with some small

Starting point is 00:21:14 amendments could be just the kind of thing that God willing restores our faith in our elections and does it without restricting the right to vote for any American. Another upside of this route is that would avoid all the other negative impacts of the Save America acts complicated and in some cases draconian provisions. For example, requiring people who are registering to vote or changing their precinct present not just photo ID but proof of citizenship would create all manner of complications, especially for married women who have changed their names, some 69 million Americans, and town clerks who would be responsible for processing millions and millions of documents for a very, very small issue. Given the cost, time, and absolute mayhem these changes would cause at the local level, the upside is very close to non-existent. To learn more about this, I definitely recommend reading

Starting point is 00:22:03 or listening to our deep dive on the original Save Act from April 2025. So maybe such a compromise doesn't stand a chance in this iteration of Congress, but real reform that helps improve confidence in our elections, brings us in line with pure countries in the Western world, and does it all without disenfranchising anybody is the kind of thing most Americans would rally behind. We'll be right back after this quick break. All right, that is it for my take, which brings us to your questions answered. This one's from Morgan and Lenoxa, Kansas. I hope I'm saying that, right? Morgan asked, is there a reason oil production volume is measured in barrels, but spilled oil is measured in gallons? Great question. So measuring,

Starting point is 00:22:59 crude oil production in barrels is actually a vestige of the history of the oil trade between American and English merchants. It's pretty interesting. In 1866, American oil producers met in Titusville, Pennsylvania to agree on a standard unit of measurement when shipping oil. They decided to use the tiers, a specific type of 42-gallon barrel that had developed in England over centuries of craftsmanship. Watertight tierses were a common shipping container for a variety of goods in the 19th century United States, and when filled with oil, they weighed about 300 pounds, the most weight one worker could reasonably handle during shipping. Because of its standard use in shipping, the 42-gallon barrel became the industry standard measurement for oil production over the following

Starting point is 00:23:41 two decades. It has remained the industry standard for measurement since then, even as the preferred method for shipping became modern oil drums that hold 55 gallons. Measuring oil spills has its own complicated history. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration tracks oil spills in both barrels and gallons. During and after the 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill, the U.S. government also issued estimates in both barrels and gallons, and media coverage used both metrics to discuss the spill. Some writers criticized this coverage, arguing that using barrels or switching between barrels and gallons was confusing for U.S. readers and misled them on the amount of oil that was spilled. Environmental organizations tend to primarily use gallons to describe spilled oil, arguing it is easier for the public to comprehend the measure.

Starting point is 00:24:27 However, barrels spilled is the metric used to impose fines or track the economic impact of oil spill. So lots of history, I think actually weirdly fascinating, and I hope that answers your question. All right, I'm going to send it back to John for the rest of the pod, and I'll see you guys tomorrow. Have a good one. Peace. Thanks, Isaac. Here's your under-the-radar story for today, foo. On Tuesday, Arizona Attorney General Chris Mays filed criminal charges against prediction market platform Kalshi, alleging the company operates in a legal gambling business.

Starting point is 00:25:03 Kalshi and its rival platform, Polymarket, offer users the ability to place bets on real-world outcomes in politics, business, sports, and more. Arizona claims that Kalshi's business runs a foul of state laws on unlicensed gambling by allowing bets on professional and college sporting events as well as elections. Calci, which called the charges meritless, has argued that its platform is a financial marketplace and should not be subject to gambling regulations. Other states have sued these platforms on civil grounds, but Arizona's criminal lawsuit raises the stakes in this ongoing fight. The New York Times has this story, and there's a link in today's episode description. And last but not least, our Have a Nice Day Story.

Starting point is 00:25:46 Kakapo are large, lime green, flightless birds native to New Zealand who have become endangered. At the beginning of 2026, only 236 Kakapo remained around the world. However, Kakapo mating this year surged due to the season's abundance of Riemu Berries, a necessary component of the bird's mating ritual. The strong breeding cycle was particularly celebrated by the Na'i Tahu, a Maori-Iwi tribe that cares for the birds on New Zealand's South Island. It's a Tonga species, a treasure to us. Tane Davis, representative for the tribe's Kakapo conservation effort said,

Starting point is 00:26:18 Scientific America has this story and there's a link in today's episode description. All right, everybody, that is it for today's episode. As always, if you'd like to support our work, please go to reetangle.com, where you could sign up for a newsletter membership, podcast membership, or a bundled membership that could do a discount on both. We did not record a suspension of the rules episode, and in lieu of that, we actually have two very special interviews coming up this weekend. It's a two-part interview with Michael Tracy and Tara Paul Mary discussing the Epstein files.

Starting point is 00:26:49 where they each bring their opposing expertise and perspectives on the subject. We will send more information with a newsletter about those releases later on this weekend. A note that we will be off next week for our spring break and will return the following week. I hope y'all have an absolutely wonderful week while we're gone, and we'll talk to you soon. Peace. Our executive editor and founder is me, Isaac Saul, and our executive producer is John Wall. Today's episode was edited and engineered by Dewey Thomas. Our editorial staff is led by managing editor Ari Weitzman with senior editor Will Kayback and associate editors Audrey Moorhead, Lindsay Canuth, and Bailey Saul.

Starting point is 00:27:27 Music for the podcast was produced by Diet 75. To learn more about Tangle and to sign up for a membership, please visit our website at retangle.com.

Tangle - The SAVE America Act before the Senate.

There aren't comments yet for this episode. Click on any sentence in the transcript to leave a comment.