Echoing the Trump Administration’s false claims about election security, and seizing on a new revelation that a New Jersey computer glitch allowed 400 non-citizens to vote in that state, top Republican officials in New York have called for legislation that requires certain forms of identification when registering to vote and claimed that Democrats would “steal” the election for governor.

“Stealing” an election is, of course, a criminal act, and there is no evidence to support the claim. Campaign rhetoric aside, what is the debate about and what would it mean to voters?

The first argument is that there is widespread voter fraud occurring now. As a result, the President is pushing for Congress to approve the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act, which, if it were to become law, would require proof of citizenship for people to register to vote at a state level for federal elections and mandate that voters show a form of photo ID when voting on election day or when requesting a mail-in ballot.

While most Americans think that’s a good idea in the abstract, the actual details and likely impacts of the legislation have not been adequately aired or debated. For example, according to the Bipartisan Policy Center “birth certificates often lack information that matches a person’s current identity. For instance, someone who has changed their name through marriage or court order may need to present a third document (such as a marriage certificate) to join their proof of citizenship…Even if voters were to provide documentary proof of citizenship, verifying the authenticity of those documents is an inherently complex task, one that election officials and motor vehicle departments often do not have the resources or training to perform.”

The “problem” that the SAVE America Act is supposed to “solve” is the demonstrably false claim that there is widespread voter fraud in the nation. Report after report have shown that it is simply not true that there is a significant problem with fraudulent voting and that it alters the results of elections. In fact, leading experts have argued that the nation’s elections are secure. Requiring voters to jump through verification “hoops” does nothing more than deter citizens from voting during a time when increased voter turnout should be encouraged. 

That said, the New Jersey revelation deserves attention. Here’s the background: A week ago, New Jersey Governor Mikie Sherrill disclosed that a “software error” at the Motor Vehicles Commission led to roughly 6,600 noncitizens getting added to the state’s voter rolls. About 400 of them voted, she said. The “software” error was in New Jersey’s “motor voter” system, which allows individuals to register to vote while they are signing up for state services (like getting a driver’s license.). Governor Sherrill said that the non-citizens didn’t intend to register to vote and there’s no indication the votes affected the outcome of an election. Without getting too deep into the weeds, the “software” error in the program doesn’t exist in New York since our system is run differently.

While there has been no evidence that the problem identified in New Jersey is found anywhere else in the nation, humans, and software, make mistakes, so programs should be run with oversight and auditing that minimizes the impact of those errors.

Another of the arguments for the Voter ID requirement is that “You need an ID to open a bank account, board a plane or buy alcohol.” While this argument may also sound appealing, there is a vast difference between opening a bank account and New Yorkers’ right to vote.

The New York Constitution clearly states that there is a right to vote; it is a “right,” not a privilege. There is no such provision stating that there is a right to open a bank account, or to buy alcohol. As with any other “right,” policymakers must, from time to time, ensure that obstacles to the exercise of that right are as few as possible to guarantee that right is realized and isn’t being infringed upon by outdated laws and/or the failure to implement technologies that could better enfranchise voters.

The nation deserves free and fair elections in 2026, not one that has been undermined by our elected officials in Washington or in Albany. If we remain vigilant, we can continue to have free and fair elections without creating barriers to voting that turn a fundamental right into a privilege enjoyed by far fewer Americans.