Vice President JD Vance says he and President Donald Trump have examined procedural strategies in detail for overcoming Senate resistance to the SAVE America Act, including changing filibuster precedent and challenging the parliamentarian, but concluded they currently lack enough Republican votes.
By yourNEWS Media Newsroom
Vice President JD Vance said he and President Donald Trump have repeatedly examined ways to overcome opposition in the Senate and pass the SAVE America Act, including scenarios involving the vice president taking the presiding officer’s chair, challenging Senate procedural rulings and eliminating the legislative filibuster.
Vance described the discussions during an interview with Vince Coglianese released Tuesday, saying he and Trump had “war-gamed” possible Senate maneuvers in detail before ultimately deciding the votes were not there to succeed.
WATCH:
The Trump-backed election legislation would require documentary proof of U.S. citizenship for federal voter registration and impose voter-identification requirements. The White House has also pushed restrictions on mail-in voting, with exceptions including illness, disability, military service and travel.
Vance said the central obstacle is not the Senate parliamentarian but Republican senators unwilling to join Trump and the administration in changing Senate procedure.
“There is no shortcut, I think our people want to think the parliamentarian is the problem … the parliamentarian is a bureaucrat … the problem is we have a number of Republican senators who vote more with Democrats than their own party, and that is the issue,” Vance declared.
Vance said one scenario considered by the administration involved him presiding over the Senate and attempting to remove or override the parliamentarian.
“First of all, could I assume the chair of the Senate and fire the parliamentarian? Yes, I could. If you have to ask the question, what does that give you? So let’s just play this out,” Vance said.
“Trust me, we have played it out internally with a lot of great people, including the president of the United States. So I take over the chair, I fire the parliamentarian, and what happens? Four or five Republicans, at least, and maybe 10 Republicans, they join the Democrats to then overrule the new chair, which is the Vice President of the United States.”
His comments describe his interpretation of how the Senate confrontation could unfold rather than an action that has actually occurred. Changing Senate precedent to weaken or eliminate the filibuster would ultimately require sufficient senators to support the procedural move.
Vance argued that if 50 Republican senators remained united with him as the tie-breaking vice president, they could establish new Senate precedent and advance legislation without the 60 votes normally required to overcome a filibuster.
“The problem is not who’s in the chair, the problem is four or five Republicans who are going to stand with the Democrats. We have wargamed this to every detail and I wanted to do this a few months ago, and we ultimately decided it doesn’t make sense because it’s not going to go anywhere,” Vance explained.
The vice president then identified four Republican senators whom he said would prevent the strategy from succeeding: Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, John Cornyn of Texas, Thom Tillis of North Carolina and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska.
“We have obsessively thought through how to get Save America passed, and how do you how do you blow up the filibuster? So you have 47 Democratic senators. If I overrule the parliamentarian, they need four because if they get to 50, I break the tie and we win. 47 Democrats plus four Republicans: Mitch McConnell, John Cornyn, Tom Tillis, Lisa Murkowski. There’s your four. They overrule the vice president,” Vance said.
Vance’s statement reflected his expectation of how those senators would vote in such a procedural confrontation. The four senators were not quoted in the interview responding to his characterization.
The SAVE America Act has remained stalled in the Senate despite months of pressure from Trump and his allies. The House advanced citizenship-verification legislation earlier in the year, while the administration has sought additional election provisions as part of its broader SAVE America initiative.
The White House describes the proposal as requiring valid identification and proof of citizenship while directing states to remove verified noncitizens from voter rolls. It has also called for sharply limiting mail ballots to specified circumstances.
Federal law already prohibits noncitizens from voting in federal elections. Supporters of the legislation argue documentary verification is necessary to prevent ineligible registrations, while opponents argue the requirements could create additional barriers for eligible citizens who do not readily possess the required documents.
Mail voting has become another major point of contention.
Trump has sought to end broad no-excuse and universal mail voting in federal elections while retaining exceptions for voters unable to appear in person because of illness, disability, military obligations or travel. Most states currently provide broader access to absentee or mail voting than the administration’s proposal would allow.
The legislation has been one of Trump’s major election-policy priorities during his second term, but its path through the Senate has exposed divisions within the Republican conference over both the substance of the measure and whether longstanding Senate rules should be changed to enact it.
Vance said that reality led him and Trump to reject a procedural showdown that would make a public statement but ultimately fail.
“You have a fun little ceremonial battle that you lose. We’re actually interested in winning the battle, which means replacing mediocre Republican senators with good Republican senators,” Vance said.
His remarks put the administration’s focus on the composition of the Senate rather than solely on its rules.
With Democrats holding 47 seats, Vance’s calculation is that the administration would need virtually complete Republican unity to prevail through a majority-based procedural strategy. Losing four or more Republicans, he said, would allow Democrats and those GOP senators to defeat the effort.
The vice president has publicly advocated passage of the legislation for months.
“Election integrity is not a partisan issue, it is an AMERICAN ISSUE. Let us unite and pass the SAVE America Act and ensure every American’s right to vote in a free and fair election is protected,” Vance wrote on X over the summer.
Trump has likewise repeatedly urged Congress to enact the measure, and the White House continues to list the SAVE America Act among the administration’s major legislative priorities.
Vance’s latest comments provide a more detailed account of the discussions occurring behind that public campaign.
Rather than simply waiting for the legislation to gain enough votes under the Senate’s existing rules, Vance said he and Trump considered whether the vice president could use his position as president of the Senate in combination with a unified Republican majority to alter the procedural landscape.
For now, Vance said they have concluded that the obstacle is mathematical rather than procedural.
The administration could attempt a confrontation with the parliamentarian or the filibuster, according to Vance, but without enough Republican senators willing to support the maneuver, the effort would still fail on the Senate floor.
That calculation has shifted the administration’s attention toward changing the Republican conference itself.
“We’re interested in winning the battle and that means replacing mediocre Republican senators with good Republican senators,” Vance said.
His remarks make clear that Trump and Vance have not abandoned the SAVE America Act. Instead, they have concluded that passing it through extraordinary Senate maneuvering would first require something they currently do not believe they have: 50 Republican senators prepared to act together.
Original article
Comments