Proof-of-citizenship voting bill push could threaten government shutdown

A conservative-backed push for stricter proof-of-citizenship requirements for voting could complicate efforts to avert a government shutdown next month.

Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle have acknowledged a stopgap of some kind, also known as a continuing resolution (CR), will be necessary to keep the government funded past Sept. 30.

But calls are growing among House conservatives to use that must-pass measure to force consideration of a partisan bill aimed at barring noncitizens from voting — laying the groundwork for a clash with the Democratic-led Senate, which would likely reject such a package.

The hard-line conservative House Freedom Caucus took an official position this month urging Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) to attach the measure, dubbed the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act, to spending legislation next month. 

Since then, the GOP conference’s right flank has only ramped up public calls for the move, which has also seen some pickup in the upper chamber and among prominent figures such as tech mogul Elon Musk, as the party looks to seize on immigration as a key campaign issue ahead of November.

Deciding which approach to take on spending will be one of the most important decisions Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) makes before the end of the year, with implications not only for government funding but for whether he can keep the support he needs to lead the House GOP next year.

Johnson has not dismissed the idea of attaching the SAVE Act, introduced by Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas), saying on a press call last week that discussions are ongoing to “build consensus to come up with the final decision.”

“I can verify for you that the SAVE Act is a big part of this conversation,” Johnson also said. “And it is not just the Freedom Caucus — it is members across the conference who share the same concern that we do about this. And we believe it’s one of the — perhaps the most urgent issue, the most imminent threat facing the country, is the integrity of this election cycle.”

At the same time, however, Axios reported that Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell’s (R-Ky.) office has been privately pushing against attaching the bill to a stopgap measure next month.

Advocates of pushing the SAVE Act say the legislation would ensure that only citizens can vote in federal elections, partly by making it mandatory for states to obtain proof of citizenship to register voters and also requiring states to purge noncitizens from voter rolls.

However, most Democrats have pushed back strongly against the measure. The Biden administration vowed to veto it when the House considered it last month, noting it is already a crime for noncitizens to vote in federal elections. The White House also argued the bill would make it more difficult for eligible voters to register and increase “the risk that eligible voters are purged from voter rolls.”

The SAVE Act passed the House in a mostly partisan vote earlier this summer, with five Democrats bucking their party to back the bill.

“We’re talking about a simple concept that only citizens should vote, in a world in which they’ve opened up our country to noncitizens,” Roy said, touting the bill this week. 

There is also recognition among him and other right-wing proponents that coupling the SAVE Act with a stopgap can be leverage for a bigger priority: extending current government funding into 2025, with the intention of avoiding a sprawling, 12-bill omnibus funding package at the end of the year.

“We can always figure out an off-ramp,” Roy said, if Republicans can initially unite behind a CR that includes the SAVE Act. “Is that a one-year CR? A CR into March? But it sure as hell shouldn’t be a CR into December.”

But it’s not just McConnell who is skeptical. There are plenty of House Republicans who are opposed to attaching conservative policy riders to a CR that would be dead in the Senate.

“Obviously, I support House Republican policy. But I think, at this point, attaching it to the CR is not the right thing to do. … I’m not supportive of that. Of course, I would vote for it if they did,” Rep. Larry Bucshon (R-Ind.) said.

“I’m hopeful on the first week back that we’ll get an agreement on a CR, probably through the election,” the Indiana Republican, who is retiring at the end of the year, also said.

Republicans in both chambers have also been skeptical about the strategy of extending the government funding deadline into next year as a means to provide more leverage to a Republican president, should former President Trump win back the Oval Office. 

“I think a lot of people on both sides would like to get it done,” Sen. John Boozman (R-Ark.), top Republican on the appropriations subcommittee that crafts annual funding for the Veterans Affairs Department, told reporters shortly before the Senate left town last month.

“We need to get it done this year, regardless of who wins the election,” Boozman said.

It’s unclear how the SAVE Act would fare on the House floor next month if attached to a measure to keep the government funded at current levels, which have already drawn sharp criticism from hard-line conservatives.

“Look, my problem is a CR just keeps the same spending in place. You either end up with an omnibus. Some people want to do a full-year CR,” Rep. Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.) said. “Why don’t we just actually do the budget bills? … The whole thing is so convoluted, messed up and crazy.”

House GOP leadership previously aimed to vote on all 12 of the party’s annual funding proposals for fiscal 2025 last month, before leaving for August recess. But the lower chamber ended up heading out early after failing to clear half of them, amid intrapary rifts over spending and policy.

Pressed on whether he thinks Johnson would wind up attaching the SAVE Act to a stopgap bill next month, Biggs, who previously backed the voting bill back in July, responded, “I think he actually might do it.”

“The question really would be, does it get out of the House?” he added. “And I don’t know.”

Mychael Schnell contributed.