Joseph Zambon
On the evening of September 18, 2024, Representatives Langworthy (R-NY23), Tenney (R-NY24), and Williams (R-NY22) cast votes assaulting Americans’ right to vote. These representatives voted in favor of H.R.9494, the “Continuing Appropriations and Other Matters Act, 2025.” Buried within this bill’s deceptively labeled “Other Matters” was the SAVE Act, a piece of legislation designed to impose unnecessarily burdensome voter registration requirements.
Had the “Continuing Appropriations and Other Matters Act, 2025” been enacted, it would have significantly complicated voter registration for countless Americans, introducing mandatory proof of citizenship requirements for those wishing to participate in federal elections. This needless barrier would have placed an additional burden on eligible voters, making it harder for many to exercise their right to vote. Although the “Continuing Appropriations and Other Matters Act, 2025” ultimately failed to pass, the fact that Representatives Langworthy, Tenney, and Williams supported such a measure is a glaring indictment of their willingness to undermine the principles of free and fair elections.
Republican Representatives Langworthy, Tenney, and Williams claim that this new requirement is essential to “bolstering election integrity,” with Langworthy even saying that it would “make elections as perfect as they can be.” They continue to perpetuate the unfounded Republican narrative of widespread voter fraud, arguing that such fraud was the reason behind Trump’s 2020 election loss.
Republicans Tactics to Limit Voting
This push for additional federal laws is part of a broader Republican strategy to reshape the electorate to their advantage. Their approach includes tactics such as voter intimidation, interference, suppression, and systematically purging eligible voters from the rolls. It’s a deliberate effort to manipulate future elections by restricting access to voting, all while claiming to protect “election integrity.” As South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham candidly admitted, “If Republicans don’t challenge and change the US election system, there will never be another Republican president elected again.”
Senator Graham recently returned from Nebraska, where he attempted to influence a last-minute change in the state’s electoral vote allocation. In Nebraska, electoral votes are traditionally distributed by congressional district rather than on a statewide basis. Republicans made an attempt—fifty days before the election—to alter the rules to award Nebraska’s electoral votes based on the statewide vote rather than by district. This blatant attempt to manipulate the system ultimately failed by one vote.
Across the country, Republican-controlled state legislatures have aggressively promoted laws designed to suppress the vote. In Texas, Republican legislators have advanced measures that would prohibit county election officials from encouraging mail-in voting and make it more difficult for people with disabilities to cast their ballots. Arizona and Pennsylvania also pursued efforts to restrict mail-in voting, even at the height of the COVID-19 pandemic when standing in line at polling places posed a life-threatening risk. These actions are part of a concerted effort to restrict voter participation and tip the electoral scales in favor of Republicans, undermining the democratic process in the process.
Voting Systems Are Secure
Contrary to the claims made by Representatives Langworthy, Tenney, and Williams, U.S. elections are already secure, and the narrative of widespread election fraud propagated by Republicans is simply false. The 2020 presidential election was, in fact, the most secure in American history. In their attempts to overturn the results, former President Trump and his MAGA Republicans filed more than sixty legal challenges to the 2020 election outcome. All save one were dismissed, many by Republican-appointed judges, including those appointed by Trump himself.
Furthermore, a federal law already prohibits noncitizens from voting in federal elections. The Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 makes it illegal for noncitizens to participate in federal elections. Despite the extensive scrutiny conducted by Republicans over a decade, violations have been exceedingly rare. Out of the hundreds of millions of votes cast in federal elections over a decade, there have been just 1465 proven cases of election fraud. This demonstrates that the so-called threats to election integrity are not based on fact but are instead part of a broader effort to mislead the public and suppress the vote.
Langworthy, Tenney, and Williams Are Election Deniers
Representatives Langworthy, Tenney, and Williams are election deniers, rejecting the legitimacy of the 2020 presidential election and the Biden presidency. Alongside House Speaker Michael Johnson, another prominent election denier, they perpetuate baseless allegations that Democrats cheated in 2020 and are currently orchestrating efforts to register hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants to vote in the upcoming election. These claims are unfounded and lack credible evidence; they are fabrications intended to sow distrust in the democratic process.
Arizona Illegal Voting
In reality, the opposite is occurring. It’s not Democrats who are enabling illegal voter registration; it’s Republicans. Arizona Republicans are facilitating illicit voter registration for the 2024 presidential election in contravention of their state laws. This hypocritical stance exposes the true intentions of Langworthy, Tenney, Williams, and their allies, who are more focused on undermining democratic institutions than upholding them.
In 2004, Arizona voters approved Proposition 200, which required documentary proof of citizenship (DPOC) for participation in state and local elections. Under this law, acceptable evidence of citizenship includes, among other forms, the number of a driver’s license issued after October 1, 1996, by the Department of Transportation, provided the agency has verified the individual’s U.S. citizenship status. However, enforcing this DPOC requirement is prohibited for federal elections due to a 2013 United States Supreme Court decision, resulting in a bifurcated voter registration system within the state.
Bifurcated Voter Registration
Several states, including Arizona and Texas, have implemented bifurcated systems. Arizona’s specific structure functions as follows:
- Federal Only Voters: Individuals who complete a voter registration form and affirm under penalty of perjury that they are U.S. citizens yet do not provide documentary proof of citizenship are categorized as “federal only” voters. These individuals can vote in federal elections but are barred from participating in state and local elections.
- Full Ballot Voters: Those who complete the voter registration form, affirm under penalty of perjury that they are U.S. citizens, and provide the necessary documentary proof of citizenship are classified as “full ballot” voters. These voters can participate in federal, state, and local elections.
This system reflects an attempt to navigate the varying requirements of federal and state election laws, creating a dual pathway for voter eligibility depending on the provision of citizenship documentation.
Arizona Voters Without DPOC
97,928 registered Arizona voters were issued Arizona driver’s licenses before the October 1, 1996 cutoff date, as established by the 2004 Arizona law. Over time, many of these individuals received duplicate or updated licenses, leading to a misconception that they had complied with the 2004 law by providing documentary proof of citizenship when, in fact, they had not.
Democratic Arizona Secretary of State Adrian Fontes intervened, ruling that county election officials should not disqualify these voters from participating in state and local elections. He instructed that these voters be permitted to cast full ballots in the upcoming 2024 General Election. However, in an effort to preempt potential legal challenges, Republican Stephen Richer, the Maricopa County Recorder, filed an emergency petition with the Arizona Supreme Court seeking clarification on the status of these voters.
The Arizona Supreme Court
It’s crucial to note that Republicans dominate the Arizona Supreme Court. Although justices are officially “unaffiliated,” all seven members were appointed by Republican governors. These appointments are guided by recommendations from a commission in which the governor selects the majority of members, making it a Republican-dominated process.
Among the 97,928 affected Arizonans deemed ineligible to receive a state and local ballot due to the 2004 law, there are approximately 10,000 more registered Republicans than Democrats. Had the Arizona Supreme Court upheld the 2004 law, these individuals would have been restricted to voting on federal-only ballots, potentially discouraging them from turning out at the polls. In a state as closely contested as Arizona, which could be decisive in the upcoming presidential election, this outcome could have discouraged more Republican than Democratic voters—an outcome Arizona Republicans are desperate to avoid.
Voter Advantage to the Republicans
Unsurprisingly, the Arizona Supreme Court ruled, “We are unwilling on these facts to disenfranchise voters en masse from participating in state contests.” The court determined that county recorders do not have the authority to remove these voters from participating in the upcoming 2024 General Election for federal and Arizona ballot matters. It concluded that local election officials lack the jurisdiction to enforce legal voter requirements in this context.
In a striking piece of irony, the Arizona Supreme Court cited provisions of the Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 to justify its ruling. This federal law requires voters to swear, under penalty of law, that they are citizens. The Arizona Supreme Court wrote in its ruling, “[t]he Recorder and Secretary of State believe that most of the Affected Voters likely are citizens’ and that ‘all of the Affected Voters have attested under penalty of perjury to being United States citizens…”. Arizona’s Proposition 200, requiring documented proof of citizenship, was promoted to address a federal standard deemed not rigorous enough except when it conveniently serves its purpose. As the Court wrote, “…likely are citizens…” is good enough.
In effect, a Republican-dominated Arizona Supreme Court, addressing a case brought forth by a Republican county election official, chose to bypass a twenty-year-old law and, in doing so, granted a significant advantage to Republicans in the 2024 General Election.