Senator Kelly Denies Evidence of Illegal Immigrant Voting, Opposes Citizenship Proof Requirement

Senator Mark Kelly, a Democrat representing Arizona, has firmly denied any evidence of illegal immigrants casting votes in U.S. elections. His statement came in response to a question about the SAVE Act, legislation backed by Republicans that aims to mandate proof of citizenship when registering to vote.

Senator Kelly, who represents a border state and was previously considered as a potential running mate for Vice President Kamala Harris, expressed his opposition to the SAVE Act, labeling it a ‘solution looking for a problem.’ He emphasized that ‘the problem doesn’t exist,’ referring to the alleged issue of illegal immigrant voting.

The senator’s stance comes amidst growing Republican efforts to bolster election security measures, particularly in the lead-up to the crucial November elections. This push includes initiatives to remove noncitizens from voter rolls nationwide. Recent instances of noncitizen voters being found in Ohio and other states have fueled these concerns. However, it remains unclear whether these noncitizens were in the United States illegally.

While Senator Kelly asserts that there’s no evidence of widespread illegal immigrant voting, Republicans have pointed to instances like the one in Texas, where over 6,500 noncitizens were reportedly registered to vote. Similar findings have emerged in Alabama, Virginia, and Georgia.

Despite the absence of a direct link between these instances and illegal immigration, Republican lawmakers have intensified their efforts to include the SAVE Act in a must-pass spending bill at the end of September. The bill, which passed the Republican-controlled House earlier this summer, has yet to be scheduled for a Senate vote by Majority Leader Chuck Schumer.

Senator Kelly, however, maintains that the SAVE Act is unnecessary, arguing that ‘it’s hard enough to get citizens to vote’ and that the legislation would create an unwarranted and complicated new system. He believes that the act’s proposed requirements are unjustified and would complicate the voting process for all.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top