MaddowBlog-DHS's 'SAVE program' doesn't work nearly as well as Republicans like to pretend

[LetMyPeopleVote]

Two reliably red states — Texas and Missouri — were out in front in embracing the SAVE tool, which in hindsight, probably wasn’t a great idea.

DHS’s ‘SAVE program’ doesn’t work nearly as well as Republicans like to pretend - MS NOW

apple.news/A3_nvq5cuRCy...

— (@oc88.bsky.social) 2026-02-16T21:08:39.869Z

https://www.ms.now/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/dhss-save-program-doesnt-work-nearly-as-well-as-republicans-like-to-pretend

The system is technically called Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements, but it’s better known for its acronym: SAVE. The point of the Department of Homeland Security’s program is straightforward: The Cabinet agency claims it’s created a comprehensive federal database of eligible voters, which can and should be used to confirm the legitimacy of voter rolls.

Republican officials appear quite excited about its potential. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, for example, boasted about the “SAVE Program” during an event in Arizona last week.

Q: Do you worry emphasizing election security threats without evidence could undermine public confidence?

NOEM: We have a Save Program that is available to Arizona that the state could ensure that every county has access to and allow them to verify those individuals that are on the voter rolls

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar.com) 2026-02-13T19:22:39.362Z

.....ProPublica reported that SAVE used to exist to check immigrants’ eligibility for public benefits, but at the president’s insistence, it’s been rapidly and dramatically expanded. The resulting flaws appear systemic. From the report:

An examination of SAVE’s rollout by ProPublica and The Texas Tribune reveals that DHS rushed the revamped tool into use while it was still adding data and before it could discern voters’ most up-to-date citizenship information.

As a result, SAVE has made persistent mistakes, particularly in assessing the status of people born outside the U.S., data gathered from local election administrators, interviews and emails obtained via public records requests show. Some of those people subsequently become U.S. citizens, a step that the system doesn’t always pick up.

Two reliably red states — Texas and Missouri — were out in front in embracing SAVE, which in hindsight, probably wasn’t a great idea.

ProPublica reported that SAVE used to exist to check immigrants’ eligibility for public benefits, but at the president’s insistence, it’s been rapidly and dramatically expanded. The resulting flaws appear systemic. From the report:

[A]n examination of SAVE’s rollout by ProPublica and The Texas Tribune reveals that DHS rushed the revamped tool into use while it was still adding data and before it could discern voters’ most up-to-date citizenship information.

As a result, SAVE has made persistent mistakes, particularly in assessing the status of people born outside the U.S., data gathered from local election administrators, interviews and emails obtained via public records requests show. Some of those people subsequently become U.S. citizens, a step that the system doesn’t always pick up.

Two reliably red states — Texas and Missouri — were out in front in embracing SAVE, which in hindsight, probably wasn’t a great idea.