Brace yourselves, everyone. Wednesday is set to be a day of significant letdown. The SAVE Act, which has been prioritized by President Trump to the point of threatening Congress to withhold any further signings until it’s ratified, is expected to fail spectacularly.
Four individuals share the responsibility: Senators Mitch McConnell (R-KY), John Curtis (R-UT), Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), and Thom Tillis (R-NC). I almost overlooked Curtis, the so-called Republican who took the place of the equally ineffective and bland Mitt Romney, who has thankfully been sidelined. Once again, it’s a case of a deep red state opting for a candidate who is, quite frankly, awful.
Here’s the situation: the votes aren’t there (I know – what’s the point of having a Republican majority?). Thus, the GOP strategy, or at least the one that should gain support, is to initiate a talking filibuster, reminiscent of the classic moment in Mr. Smith Goes to Washington. This tactic places the onus on the feeble Democrats to maintain their obstruction, and if it fails, the bill can be passed with a simple majority. Senators who oppose a bill are allowed two opportunities to speak endlessly about anything to disrupt the proceedings. During this time, various proposals can be introduced and included in the bill, which creates chaos, but one thing is certain: invoking cloture, as it stands now, won’t be successful, so an extended effort may be necessary:
There are two ways the Senate can end debate and break a filibuster on a bill: cloture and the talking filibuster. The talking filibuster was the way the Senate had ended debate before the Senate cloture mechanism became a chamber rule.
Essentially, the ‘talking filibuster’ sets up a marathon of speeches from the lawmakers opposing the bill, in which a senator cannot sit down, leave for the bathroom, or stop talking. Each senator opposing the bill has two chances to speak indefinitely about their opposition to the proposed legislation. Once each opposition Senator speaks twice and all proposed amendments and motions on separately debatable questions are voted on, then the chamber would only need a simple-majority vote to advance legislation.
This allows the Senate to buck the 60-vote threshold needed under the cloture rule and requires the opposition to put up a significant physical fight to voice their opinions on the bill.
The opposition’s ability to speak indefinitely and propose as many motions or amendments as they can could make the process difficult for the Republican majority as well. The majority party needs 51 Senators ready to be in the chamber to vote on motions and amendments as they arise.
This ready attendance — for what could be weeks on end — combined with the GOP leadership’s need to maintain unity within the Republican caucus, has made leaders like Thune skeptical of invoking the talking filibuster. Thune has also voiced his concern over the large amount of floor time that could be spent on the talking filibuster.
“We don’t have the votes either to proceed, get on a talking filibuster, nor to sustain one if we got on it,” Thune said Tuesday.
There are drawbacks to this. To begin with, it immediately halts all activities on the Senate floor. Meanwhile, Congress needs to find a solution to pass a funding bill for the Department of Homeland Security, which has been inactive for 30 days. Operational funding lapsed over Presidents’ Day weekend, resulting in TSA agents suffering from the Democrats’ misguided anti-Trump strategies. This is happening due to the deportation agenda that has already secured funding through the large, comprehensive bill until 2029. All this does is increase the strain on federal employees who are once again not receiving their pay. And the Democrats would do this while an elevated terror threat looms over Operation Epic Fury in Iran. Additionally, we are facing a series of severe weather events, with hurricane season approaching: FEMA continues to be inactive.
Pass the SAVE America Act!pic.twitter.com/AifAaXKJQr
— Karoline Leavitt (@PressSec) March 16, 2026
It’s chaotic.
On our part, we begin with four fewer votes and cannot reach a consensus on how to hold Democrats accountable for their position on a bill that will safeguard the future integrity of our electoral system: only Americans should be permitted to vote. Remarkably, this is a policy disagreement where liberals are willing to jeopardize their position in opposition.
If you oppose it, it signifies you endorse fraud, plain and simple. It also brings an end to the transgender lunacy that has overtaken sports and healthcare as well.
The most maddening part? This is a thorough, sensible bill that enjoys broad support – overwhelming support – from both Democrat and Republican voters.
Let the Democrats go on record arguing that non-white voters and women are too incompetent to update their records. This is an ideal opportunity for a total takedown, yet panic, a losing GOP mentality, and an overall lack of fight are undermining us here.
Senate Majority Leader John Thune is doing his utmost. We do not hesitate to criticize the leadership when justified. In the past, we have praised McConnell and kept him informed, but the criticisms directed at Thune right now are misplaced animosity. I disapprove of it. You should detest it. The GOP is poised to jeopardize the SAVE Act, while Democrats can easily navigate through weak talking points and continue their fraudulent practices.
How is that a victory? What exactly are we accomplishing here?
And what about the funding for DHS? There are some fissures, but not sufficient to make a difference, so we find ourselves in a bind. I would prefer to reopen DHS now and finalize this later, but that’s not how things have turned out. This vote will reveal who our allies are.
Also, Lisa, you had previously supported these measures in the SAVE Act, so what gives, woman?
Q: “Do you support getting the Save America Act passed to protect elections?”
Murkowski: “Not as drafted, no. In a rural state like Alaska, it’s going to disenfranchise a majority. I support citizenship voting and ID, but I want it to be implementable.” pic.twitter.com/RZH1WgKke2
— TheBlaze (@theblaze) March 11, 2026
Murkowski forgets the Internet is forever:
When Democrats attempted to advance sweeping election reform legislation in 2021, Republicans were unanimous in opposition because it would have federalized elections, something we have long opposed. Now, I’m seeing proposals such as the SAVE Act and MEGA that would effectively…
— Sen. Lisa Murkowski (@lisamurkowski) February 10, 2026
