Solutions in search of a problem | Columns - GJSentinel.com

By JIM SPEHAR

“The right to vote is the basic right without which all others are meaningless. It gives people — people as individuals — control over their destinies.”

— Lyndon B. Johnson

In presidential election years, about 60% of eligible voters exercise that “basic right’” discussed by former president Johnson. That percentage is higher here in Colorado, but might diminish if current attempts to make it more difficult to vote are successful.

Principal among those is the SAVE America Act, already passed by the U.S. House of Representatives (with the concurrence of our 3rd District Congressman Jeff Hurd) and headed for a promised Senate vote in the coming week. Various individual states have already adopted more restrictive voter requirements. Others have implemented or are considering mid-cycle partisan redistricting, redrawing congressional district boundaries outside of the normal efforts following the national census conducted every 10 years.

The SAVE America Act and similar state measures ostensibly would guard against ineligible voters casting fraudulent ballots. The supposed problem is usually about non-citizen immigrants taking part in elections. Those legislative attempts are solutions in search of a problem.

Certainly, the integrity of our elections is important. No one, regardless of political philosophy, wants a tainted ballot process. But no proponent of more restrictive voter identification or election processes can point to statistical evidence of major issues with illegal voting. What examples that can be posted show “illegals” are not primary perpetrators of voter fraud.

The database for election fraud compiled by the conservative Heritage Foundation lists 24 cases here in Colorado between 1982-2025, several here in Mesa County. All resulted in criminal convictions under existing laws. Only one of those two dozen cases was listed under the category “alien.” Providing some context, more than 3.1 million Coloradans voted in the 2024 presidential election. This miniscule level of voter fraud in Colorado is repeated in every other state.

The National Conference of State Legislatures notes existing federal law clearly prohibits non-citizens from voting in federal and state elections and that all states review voter lists to identify potentially ineligible voters. It also cites a University of Maryland poll showing as many as 21 million eligible voters don’t have easy access to documents proving citizenship. While asserting federal control over voter processes assigned constitutionally to states, the SAVE America Act provides no funding for required extra state and local efforts. And according to the NCSL, it potentially could require separate state and federal elections.

So what’s behind federal and state efforts to make voter involvement more difficult? Why did the House vote find Colorado’s delegation split on party lines? Hurd and fellow GOP members voted for the SAVE America Act, House Democrats from Colorado opposed it, and our U.S. senators, both Democrats, are “no” votes

Any political observer with an IQ above this week’s abnormally high outside temperatures can see the handwriting on the wall heading into the November election. While the party in power traditionally loses seats in Congress, recent state elections and special congressional elections, even in solid red states, indicate that prospect seems to be multiplied this year.

Despite all the lofty eloquence from Hurd and his fellow Republicans, this isn’t about “integrity.” It’s obviously all about political survival, maintaining their majorities and appeasing a president whose policies and their results continue to aggravate voters and who still doubles down on long disproven charges that the 2020 presidential election was “stolen.” Never mind that his 2024 return to office came under the same rules that applied when he lost four years earlier.

Senate Majority leader John Thune has promised a Senate vote on the SAVE America Act in the coming week but thinks passage in the upper chamber is problematic. Any chance of approval would require a change to the Senate’s filibuster rules, something Thune is rejecting, citing unintended longer-term consequences.

“I can’t guarantee the outcome on this legislation,” Thune says. “But I can guarantee we are going to put Democrats on record.” Meanwhile, the president says he’ll refuse to sign any other legislation, presumably including held up Department of Homeland Security funding, unless the SAVE Act passes.

Which also emphasizes this whole process is purely political with little practical or statistical foundation, an attempt to mitigate potential mid-term losses, and truly a solution in search of a problem.

Jim Spehar began voting in 1968. He might have missed 1972 while ricocheting around Europe in a rusty old VW bus but can’t recall. (It was the 70s after all.) Comments welcome. Sent them to [email protected].