1. United States
2. Iowa
3. Letter

I am a constituent writing with serious concern about the SAVE America Act, legislation that would impose new documentary proof requirements that risk preventing eligible Americans from voting while imposing significant financial and administrative burdens without clear evidence of necessity. This is what I understand from the last study: the SAVE America Act would require voters registering or updating registration to provide a passport or birth certificate and effectively “show their papers” when voting. More than 21 million Americans lack immediate access to these documents, placing seniors, married women whose legal names differ from birth records, rural voters, and low-income citizens at risk of losing practical access to the ballot. Recent election administration experience shows that documentation mandates create real barriers even for lawful voters. In October 2022 in Arizona, proof-of-citizenship requirements placed thousands of eligible voters into restricted voting status, creating confusion and limiting participation (citizen disenfranchisement risk). In September 2023 in Texas, administrative verification procedures required eligible voters to retrieve costly documents to maintain registration (due-process failure). Across multiple states during recent election cycles, name-change mismatches disproportionately affected married women, forcing time-consuming corrections and additional fees (administrative barrier). The cost and time requirements are significant. A passport typically costs about $165 including application and execution fees, with routine processing times of six to eight weeks or longer. Replacement birth certificates generally cost $20–$60 plus notarization, mailing, or travel expenses, and can require interstate requests that take weeks. For many Americans — especially those in rural areas or living paycheck to paycheck — these requirements function as economic barriers rather than neutral administrative steps. Election officials have also warned that implementing nationwide documentary verification systems would impose substantial administrative costs on state and local election offices through new infrastructure, training, and compliance obligations. These burdens must be evaluated against the actual scale of the problem. Extensive research examining election data shows that in-person voter impersonation fraud is extraordinarily rare. One widely cited analysis identified only 31 credible impersonation cases among more than one billion ballots cast, demonstrating that the level of fraud addressed by documentary proof laws is extremely small relative to the number of eligible voters who could face new barriers. These provisions raise serious constitutional concerns under the First Amendment’s protection of political participation and the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection and Due Process guarantees. Policies that disproportionately burden lawful voters without clear necessity risk undermining both access and public confidence in elections. I am asking you to publicly state on the record that unnecessary documentary barriers to voting are unacceptable and dangerous. I also ask you to oppose the SAVE Act and initiate or sign a joint congressional oversight letter demanding a full cost analysis, implementation funding plan, and evidence-based justification before such requirements move forward. If legislative opposition is unsuccessful, I ask that you pursue additional steps including requesting committee hearings examining the real-world impact of documentary proof requirements and supporting amendments that protect access for voters lacking immediate documentary proof. Further disenfranchisement resulting from these policies will be foreseeable and preventable, and Congress will share responsibility if barriers are enacted without sufficient justification. I expect your office to take these steps within the next 30 days and publicly report your actions to constituents.