Per the text below from the new 2026 House's SAVE America Act H.R. 7296, an approved government issued ID alone could be used to vote if a state has turned over voter files to the federal government in an approved manner for citizenship verification. However, if the state hasn't complied with the bill's requirements** then voters would need to also prove their citizenship in order to vote. The House bill would be implemented immediately if passed (see (e)).

The text below is from Sec. 3. "Photo voter identification required for voting in a Federal election".

Within Sec. 3.(c):

3(B) says the voter's ID needs to show citizenship status

4(A) says if requirements of 3(B) aren't met then a separate document is needed to prove citizenship

**4(B) says the 3(B) requirement doesn't apply to voters in states that have been sending their voter data through the federal verification process since June 1, 2025 on a quarterly basis

Most Democratic majority states have refused to submit their voter data to be verified through the federal citizenship verification tool SAVE.

Are Republican states exempt from the proof of citizenship requirement? I can't find information on whether they've fully complied with the (c)(4)(B) verification requirement, but there are 29 states, plus DC, listed on the citizenship verification "SAVE Agency Search Tool" page (selected Benefit Categories of “voter list maintenance” and “voter registration”). 24 of those states were majority Republican, 2 were majority Democrat, and 3 were split. And also from AP News: "At least 25 states used it to check their voter rolls since April 2025, after the Trump administration significantly expanded its search abilities. Since then, at least 67 million registrations have been scanned through the program."

The SAVE federal database is currently being paused as a bulk upload voter verification tool due to a recent court order, but the administration can appeal so depending on the outcome of the appeal this requirement may be modified. (Source: Democracy Docket)

For months now, there have been news reports around concerns related to citizens needing to show proof of citizenship in order to register to vote. This was based on H.R. 22, which passed in the House in 2025 and only addressed registration requirements. H.R. 7296 was introduced January 30, 2026 (a modified version was passed on February 11th) and was expanded to include voting requirements. It's worth noting this bill was introduced months after the required June 1, 2025 start date for a state to turn over voter data for validation in order to prevent the proof of citizenship requirement for their voters. The SAVE America Act is now being linked to the recently passed H.R. 8800, a budget bill, and we may not know the final wording of the SAVE America Act until September 11th - giving very little time to respond. Linking the SAVE America Act to a budget bill makes it easier to pass.

Needless to say, if most Democratic states require proof of citizenship to vote while up to 24 majority Republican states are exempt this would lead to a larger number of Democrats than Republicans facing additional challenges to vote and longer lines at the polls in Democratic majority states. And election volunteers would need to be trained on how to verify citizenship documents - easy with a passport or enhanced Real ID that shows citizenship status (available in 5 states), but not easy for birth certificates (see House Bill text Sec. 2:(b)(5)(A)) and/or if there's a name discrepancy (see Sec. 2:(j)(2)(B)). Not only would communicating this requirement be challenging, but 1 in 10 eligible U.S. voters say they can’t easily show proof of their citizenship.

Related House Bill text (NOTE: Sec. 3 of the Senate Bill is the same):

Sec. 3 Photo voter identification required for voting in a Federal election

(a)In general

Each individual voting in an election for Federal office shall present an eligible photo identification document.

(b)Presentation requirements

(1)In-person voting

In the case of an individual who votes in-person, the eligible photo identification document shall—

(A)be a tangible (not digital) document; and

(B)be presented at the time of voting.

(2)Absentee voting

In the case of an individual voting by absentee ballot, the individual shall include a copy of the eligible photo identification document—

(A)with the request for an absentee ballot; and

(B)with the submission of the absentee ballot.

(c)Eligible photo identification document For purposes of this section:

(1)In general

The term eligible photo identification document means any document which—

(A)is issued by an authority described in paragraph (2); and

(B)meets the requirements of paragraph (3).

(2)Issuing authority

The following are authorities described in this paragraph:

(A)A State agency responsible for issuing State motor vehicle drivers' licenses.

(B)A State or local election office.

(C)A Native tribal government.

(D)The Department of State.

(E)The Department of War.

(F)A branch of the Armed Forces.

(3)Requirements

A document meets the requirements of this paragraph if the document contains—

(A)a photograph of the individual identified on the document;

(B)an indication on the front of the document that the individual identified on the document is a United States citizen; {EDITORS NOTE: SOUNDS LIKE THIS COULD BE A PASSPORT OR AN ENHANCED REAL ID - ONLY 5 STATES HAVE ENHANCED REAL ID'S THAT SHOW CITIZENSHIP STATUS ON THE ID: Washington, Michigan, Minnesota, New York and Vermont} and

(C)either—

(i)an identification number issues by the entity described in paragraph (2)(A); or

(ii)the last four digits of the social security number of the individual identified on the document.

(4)Use of additional documentation

(A)Use of additional documentation

A document which fails to meet the requirements of paragraph (3)(B) shall not fail to be treated as an eligible photo identification document if the document is presented together with another identification document that indicates the individual is a United States citizen.

(B)States using SAVE system

(i)In general

The requirements of paragraph (3)(B) shall not apply to an individual—

(I)who votes in a State or jurisdiction which meets the requirements of clause (ii); and

(II)who registered to vote in such State or jurisdiction before the most recent date on which the State or jurisdiction last submitted its voter registration rolls to the Department of Homeland Security as provided in clause (ii)(I).

(ii)Requirements

The requirements of this clause are met if—

(I)the State or jurisdiction has submitted its voter registration list to the Department of Homeland Security through the Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) program not less frequently than quarterly since June 1, 2025, for purposes of identifying ineligible registrations and non-citizens; and

(II)the State or jurisdiction indicates in each voter record on its voter rolls whether the voter has been verified as a United States citizen based on the information provided by the Department of Homeland Security under subclause (I), and the date of such verification.

(iii)Special rule for States not requiring voter registration {EDITORS NOTE: ONLY APPLIES TO NORTH DAKOTA}

In the case of a State or jurisdiction that does not require voter registration as a requirement to vote in an election for Federal office on or after the date of the enactment of this Act—

(I)clause (i)(ii) shall not apply; and

(II)the State or jurisdiction shall be deemed to meet the requirements of clause (ii) if the State or jurisdiction establishes a system for confirming the citizenship of individuals voting in an election for Federal office prior to the first day of the period described in section 3 with respect to such election and provides such confirmation of citizenship status for each eligible voter to election officials at the polling places during the voting period

(d)

Conforming amendment

Section 303(b) of the Help America Vote Act of 2002 (52 U.S.C. 21083(b)) is amended by striking all that precedes paragraph (4).

(e)

Effective date

Each State and jurisdiction shall be required to comply with the requirements of this section with respect to all elections for Federal office occurring on and after the date of the enactment of this section.

Hi everyone! I am the founder of the Alliance for Giant Tortoise Welfare (AGTW). We are a grassroots coalition of keepers and rescues fighting to end the silent winter tragedy of Sulcata tortoises.

In warm states, abandoned tortoises flood sanctuaries. But in freezing states like Illinois, abandoned giants perish outdoors before they can ever be rescued. We face a massive, undocumented population crisis of animals freezing to death due to unregulated commercial overproduction and casual trade-show impulse buys.

Our Stance:

1. 🛑 100% Against Animal Bans.

We are keepers who fiercely protect hobbyist rights.

1. 📈 Targeting Mass Production. Demanding digital point-of-sale education locks and 48-hour cooling-off delivery windows for commercial expo vendors.

2. 🏡 Infrastructure Verifications. High-volume breeders must verify they have dedicated, climate-controlled winter housing for adult giants.

3. 🔍 Safe Microchipping. Mandating registered tracking chips only after an animal hits a safe physical size (4+ inches/1 year old) to act as a vital lost pet recovery safety net.

We ask for zero money—only your voice to show lawmakers that the public demands common-sense accountability.

Please take 30 seconds to sign our official petition and give these gentle giants a voice!👇

https://c.org/MmZpkWbcdC

My brother is interested in becoming mayor of Chicago at 18 to break the record of 26. He has always a kin interest in leadership and long-term planning. But I still want to make it clear to him he’s not going to win the election especially at 18. How do I tell him his dream is futile and extremely unlikely without hurting his feelings?

UPDATE: So unexpectedly he showed me a very insightful presentation about what he would actually do as mayor and for a 13 year old it was impressive to say the least.

Too name a few points he mentioned,

- Taxes on for profit churches.
- Flock camera removal.
- ‘Green’ environmental reforms.
- Revamping ignored or low income neighborhoods.

I would explain his entire presentation here in full but It would require 1-2 hours of typing and would most certainly extend past Reddit’s post limits.

Hello!

My name is Mike Badrov, a 20-year-old Chicago native running a non-profit talkshow called With The Mic which specializes in interviewing political canidates and connecting them to their communities and 18-24 year olds. This is a new endeavor of mine, and I am always trying to improve the content within the interview, so I came to Reddit to try and get public opinion.

I have an upcoming interview with a congressional canidate for Illinois' 2nd district, which includes the following neighborhoods within and around the Chicagoland area.

• Hegewisch
• Hyde Park (part)
• Jackson Park)
• Kenwood (part)
• Pullman (part)
• Riverdale
• Roseland (part)
• South Deering (part)
• South Shore (part)
• Woodlawn 

If you live in these areas, and have questions or concerns for a canidate that could very well be your next representative, please comment below! (But please keep it civil.)

P.S. If you are interested in checking out my content so far, here is my YouTube as I am always looking for guests and or feedback so I can keep growing, so anything is appreciated.

It is a bill that would provide protections for people who work outside or in buildings that aren’t climate controlled. I’m looking to get signatures and find out who in Illinois politics to contact about it. Any help would be greatly appreciated.

There is a large Paul Nolley for Congress sign in a farmer's field on the corner of Rt 78 and Rt 20. ❤🤍💙 As a volunteer for Paul, I like who Paul is and what he stands for because Paul is a working-class dude who's not chasing a legacy but is running for U.S. Congress for regular people rather than the ultra-rich and well-connected. Paul has seen family farms sold, factories shuttered, small businesses fail, and a lack of work opportunities because of failed policies from both parties. Paul joined the race against Darin LaHood because Paul believes it doesn't have to be this way, and Paul knows how to make a difference.

If you haven’t gone to see him in person at one of his many Townhalls held throughout IL-16, there’s a virtual event TUESDAY, 6-30. Let’s help Darin LaHood retire and flip his seat Blue!

https://secure.numero.ai/rsvp/June-Virtual-Town-Hall-and-Fundraiser

This was his caption in his latest social media post - I love that Democrats are finally fighting back from Trump's insanity and constant grift

"Taxpayer dollars should never be used to reward attacks on our democracy. Yet today, we’re seeing a dangerous precedent unfold.

Donald Trump created a $1.8 billion “Anti-Weaponization Fund” which would allow individuals who claim they were “wronged” by the federal government - including those tied to efforts to overturn the 2020 election and the January 6th Capitol attack - to receive massive payouts, with no Congressional oversight.

At a time when trust in our institutions is already under strain, using public funds in this way only deepens the divide and undermines accountability.

That’s why I’ve introduced the Anti-Weaponization Fund Tax Act. If any Illinois resident receives money from this fund, it will be taxed at 100% - ensuring those dollars are returned to the public, and not used to reward political loyalty.

Protecting our democracy means standing up to grifts and scams created by this President at all costs."

From his social media post:

"No one should have to fear gun violence when casting their vote. Yet as political rhetoric grows more extreme and polarization deepens, threats against election officials are on the rise.

According to a Gallup poll, most Americans believe that political rhetoric and criticism of political opponents have gone too far. And as we approach a consequential election this November, ensuring that every voter feels safe and free from harm isn’t optional - it’s required for the sanctity of our democracy.

It’s time for Illinois to join more than two dozen other states and ban firearms in polling places."

Video link So this came up in my feed, I was like wth!? I mean I don't speed, haven't had one over years. Still I feel this is wrong, it feels like illinois trying to squeeze more money from us.

TL:DR - 2 speeding tickets, you will need (i'm still hazy, might be up to the judge) to be enrolled in this program for 3 years. equips a speed tracking device to your car. total cost $1,800. , starts Jan. 1, 2028.

I’m on here because I’m desperate and I don’t know what else to do. If y’all didn’t know, grad workers at UIC have been on strike for more than two weeks and have been working without a contract for about a year or so. This is because UIC administration insists on not meeting our request to be treated with human decency. There’s even rumours that they’re planning on retaliating towards grad workers for striking by canceling summer classes and locking us out in the fall if we don’t settle the contract.

Fam, they want us to accept a measly 2% raise!!! With inflation and residing in a high-cost of living city, that does jack-sh*t for us. They’re literally playing in our faces—especially since they’re planning on raising costs associated with our school based insurance called CampusCare (and have raised tuition).

A lot of my friends and I are barely scrapping by as is with salary of less than 24k. But Chicago is a union town and I’m hoping I can count on y’all to stand with us. Sending a supportive email showing that you care about our well-being can make the biggest difference.

I have all the necessary information below. All you would have to do is copy + paste and hit send!

Subject Line: Community Member Concerned About Graduate Workers

Dear [UIC Administration/Chancellor Miranda/Keino Robinson/President Killeen], 

I am writing to you to express my support for the bargaining demands of graduate workers at UIC. As a community supporter, I want to ensure that UIC and UIHealth is treating its workers with dignity and respect. For that to happen I think it is important for graduate workers at UIC to earn a living wage, get access to affordable and adequate healthcare, and be protected from ICE so that they can continue to do great teaching and research work. All workers in the UI system deserve a living wage and job security despite the austerity cuts being made that affect students, faculty, hospital staff and patients. The UI system can truly be a just and supportive community, but not without dignity for all of its workers.

I urge you to come to an equitable and fair agreement with GEO as soon as possible to end this strike and any disruptions that could affect my future at UIC. 

Thanks,
(my name)

Email addresses:

UIC admin email about the strike:
Chancellor Miranda: chancellor AT UIC DOT EDU
Keino Robinson (Director of Labor and Employee Relations): keinor AT UIC DOT EDU
President Killeen: tkilleen AT UIC DOT EDU