County: SAVE Act poses big impacts to local elections
Concerns raised over proposed federal legislation.
Updated
EPHRATA — Grant County officials have joined in expressing concerns to proposed federal legislation that would affect voter registration requirements and election procedures for states and counties.
On Tuesday, commissioners Kevin Burgess, Cindy Carter, and Rob Jones and auditor Shannon Falstad signed a letterprovided through the Washington State Association of Counties that asks U.S. Senators Maria Cantwell and Patty Murray to oppose the SAVE America Act.
If passed by Congress and signed into law by President Trump, the legislation would “take effect immediately upon passage, with no transition period” and no federal funding for implementation, the letter says.
Cantwell and Murray, both Democrats, have both spoken against the legislation, saying it would unduly burden and disenfranchise qualified voters.
Among other provisions, the bill calls for states to provide unredacted voter rolls to the federal Department of Homeland Security, which would use the information to attempt to verify voter citizenship, and require voters to show photo identification when voting. In vote-by-mail states like Washington, voters would need to include a copy of their photo ID when returning their ballots. In several other states, ballots are already being cast in the 2026 midterm elections.
Local officials noted that Grant County’s ballots for the Nov. 3 general election were proofed and sent to print on Sept. 1, that military and overseas ballots must be submitted by next Friday (Sept. 18), and voting equipment accuracy testing is scheduled by Oct. 8.
The county commissioners and auditor, all Republicans, said it would be an “incredible challenge” at this late date to inform and require Grant County’s 56,998 registered voters to provide additional documentation for comparison against existing voter rolls.
“That work is sequenced months in advance and is well underway … a new front-end citizenship verification requirement introduced now would require us to reopen work that is already complete, with no additional staff and no additional funding,” they wrote.
If Congress does move forward with new federal election requirements, local officials asked that lawmakers “provide sufficient and sustained funding” to cover implementation at the county level, allow at least 18 to 24 months before the requirements take effect, and to “preserve flexibility for how individual states and counties administer elections.”
They also asked that any legislation remove language which calls for criminal penalties against election workers who in some instances must make “good-faith decisions” in determining the sufficiency of a voter’s citizenship documentation. That could include mistakes involving citizens who are qualified to vote, but may not have ready access to birth certificates, unexpired passports with their current legal names, or enhanced driver’s licenses.
“We cannot ask temporary election workers to accept criminal exposure for a good-faith judgment made at a check-in table during a rush of voters, and we expect this provision would cost us workers we have already recruited,” wrote Falstad and the three commissioners.
The Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act would amend the National Voter Registration Act of 1993. Any implementation will likely face legal challenges and be costly: the National Association of Counties estimates the bill would add $510 million in costs per election cycle.
“It would impose new, unfunded duties and increase legal exposure for election administrators, including many county officials, without authorizing resources necessary to implement these mandates,” wrote Eryn Hurley, NACo chief government affairs reporter, earlier this year.
In late July, the U.S. House of Representatives narrowly advanced the bill to the Senate by including it in the National Defense Authorization Act (H.R. 8800). Separately, provisions of the SAVE Act may be considered through “reconciliation,” a special fast-track process which allows the Senate — which Republicans control by a 53-47 majority — to pass fiscal bills with a simple majority vote rather than face a Democrat-led filibuster that would require a 60-vote majority.
Thus far, Senate GOP leaders have been reluctant to take up the bill, which President Trump says is essential to protect election integrity nationwide from ineligible voters.
However, critics say states — not the federal government — are constitutionally responsible for administering elections, that Trump has repeatedly failed to substantiate his claims of widespread voter fraud in the past, and this is a last-ditch effort by his administration to sow doubts about the validity of the upcoming midterm elections.
In addition, the President signed an executive order in March that directs the U.S. Postal Service to screen mail ballots based on state voter rolls and only deliver ballots that comply with new verification rules. They would require ballot envelopes to include an official “election mail” logo, bear each voter’s unique Postal Service bar code, and be scanned by Postal Service machines.
Washington — where vote-by-mail has been the norm for over two decades — is among two dozen states which contend the directive is unconstitutional and have sued to stop it. The legal dispute continues to churn in federal courts with the midterms only eight weeks away.
About one-third of all voters in the U.S. vote by mail, and some have already received their state’s ballots.
We use cookies to keep GCJ.news working and, with your consent, to understand how our community uses the site. We use this data only internally to run and improve the site — we never sell your personal information. See our cookie & privacy policies.
County: SAVE Act poses big impacts to local elections
Concerns raised over proposed federal legislation.
EPHRATA — Grant County officials have joined in expressing concerns to proposed federal legislation that would affect voter registration requirements and election procedures for states and counties.
On Tuesday, commissioners Kevin Burgess, Cindy Carter, and Rob Jones and auditor Shannon Falstad signed a letter provided through the Washington State Association of Counties that asks U.S. Senators Maria Cantwell and Patty Murray to oppose the SAVE America Act.
If passed by Congress and signed into law by President Trump, the legislation would “take effect immediately upon passage, with no transition period” and no federal funding for implementation, the letter says.
Cantwell and Murray, both Democrats, have both spoken against the legislation, saying it would unduly burden and disenfranchise qualified voters.
Among other provisions, the bill calls for states to provide unredacted voter rolls to the federal Department of Homeland Security, which would use the information to attempt to verify voter citizenship, and require voters to show photo identification when voting. In vote-by-mail states like Washington, voters would need to include a copy of their photo ID when returning their ballots. In several other states, ballots are already being cast in the 2026 midterm elections.
Local officials noted that Grant County’s ballots for the Nov. 3 general election were proofed and sent to print on Sept. 1, that military and overseas ballots must be submitted by next Friday (Sept. 18), and voting equipment accuracy testing is scheduled by Oct. 8.
The county commissioners and auditor, all Republicans, said it would be an “incredible challenge” at this late date to inform and require Grant County’s 56,998 registered voters to provide additional documentation for comparison against existing voter rolls.
“That work is sequenced months in advance and is well underway … a new front-end citizenship verification requirement introduced now would require us to reopen work that is already complete, with no additional staff and no additional funding,” they wrote.
If Congress does move forward with new federal election requirements, local officials asked that lawmakers “provide sufficient and sustained funding” to cover implementation at the county level, allow at least 18 to 24 months before the requirements take effect, and to “preserve flexibility for how individual states and counties administer elections.”
They also asked that any legislation remove language which calls for criminal penalties against election workers who in some instances must make “good-faith decisions” in determining the sufficiency of a voter’s citizenship documentation. That could include mistakes involving citizens who are qualified to vote, but may not have ready access to birth certificates, unexpired passports with their current legal names, or enhanced driver’s licenses.
“We cannot ask temporary election workers to accept criminal exposure for a good-faith judgment made at a check-in table during a rush of voters, and we expect this provision would cost us workers we have already recruited,” wrote Falstad and the three commissioners.
The Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act would amend the National Voter Registration Act of 1993. Any implementation will likely face legal challenges and be costly: the National Association of Counties estimates the bill would add $510 million in costs per election cycle.
“It would impose new, unfunded duties and increase legal exposure for election administrators, including many county officials, without authorizing resources necessary to implement these mandates,” wrote Eryn Hurley, NACo chief government affairs reporter, earlier this year.
In late July, the U.S. House of Representatives narrowly advanced the bill to the Senate by including it in the National Defense Authorization Act (H.R. 8800). Separately, provisions of the SAVE Act may be considered through “reconciliation,” a special fast-track process which allows the Senate — which Republicans control by a 53-47 majority — to pass fiscal bills with a simple majority vote rather than face a Democrat-led filibuster that would require a 60-vote majority.
Thus far, Senate GOP leaders have been reluctant to take up the bill, which President Trump says is essential to protect election integrity nationwide from ineligible voters.
However, critics say states — not the federal government — are constitutionally responsible for administering elections, that Trump has repeatedly failed to substantiate his claims of widespread voter fraud in the past, and this is a last-ditch effort by his administration to sow doubts about the validity of the upcoming midterm elections.
In addition, the President signed an executive order in March that directs the U.S. Postal Service to screen mail ballots based on state voter rolls and only deliver ballots that comply with new verification rules. They would require ballot envelopes to include an official “election mail” logo, bear each voter’s unique Postal Service bar code, and be scanned by Postal Service machines.
Washington — where vote-by-mail has been the norm for over two decades — is among two dozen states which contend the directive is unconstitutional and have sued to stop it. The legal dispute continues to churn in federal courts with the midterms only eight weeks away.
About one-third of all voters in the U.S. vote by mail, and some have already received their state’s ballots.