• Welcome to the New Conservative Angle!

    We're excited to introduce a new era for our readership.

    For years, Conservative Angle has served as a clearinghouse for news, commentary, and analysis from across the conservative movement. Thousands of readers have visited these pages to stay informed, discover new voices, and keep pace with the stories shaping our nation and our world.

    Today, we are building on that foundation.

    The new Conservative Angle is more than a news aggregator. It is a community.

    Our mission remains the same: to provide access to important stories, encourage informed discussion, and promote the free exchange of ideas. But now, readers have a place to participate, share perspectives, ask questions, and openly and respectfully engage directly with fellow conservatives and independent thinkers.

    As Conservative Angle grows, we will continue adding new features, new content, and new ways for readers to participate. The site will evolve over time based on the interests, ideas, and contributions from the community.

    Whether you are a longtime visitor or discovering Conservative Angle for the first time, we invite you to become part of the conversation.

    Register for an account, introduce yourself to the community, and join the discussions that matter most to you. Together, we can create a place where news is not merely consumed, but examined, debated, and understood.

    Thank you for your patience during our transition and for your continued support.

    Welcome to the new Conservative Angle.

    — The Conservative Angle Team

GOP Senator Comes Out Firmly Against The SAVE Act

John_Thune_53300489527-scaled-e1774407340466.jpg

Senator Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) confirmed that she is firmly opposed to the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act — a landmark election integrity bill that has become President Donald Trump’s top legislative priority — in a recent opinion piece published in the Wall Street Journal.

The SAVE America Act would require individuals registering to vote in federal elections to provide documentary proof of U.S. citizenship, such as a passport or certified birth certificate, presented in person to an election official. It would also mandate photo identification when voting.

The bill aims to ensure that only U.S. citizens participate in federal elections.

“While I support the bill’s core tenets — ensuring that only American citizens vote and requiring identification when voting — I remain opposed to it,” Murkowski wrote.

“Why? Because it would have serious negative effects in Alaska, and the current text doesn’t allow for the time and resources needed for proper implementation.”

Murkowski has pointed to the U.S. Constitution’s assignment of responsibility for election administration to the states in voicing her opposition. She has also stated that states are best positioned to address local conditions, including geographic and infrastructure differences.

“The Constitution largely entrusts states with the administration and oversight of elections, providing authority to hold them at the ‘times, places, and manner’ of their choosing. This was deliberate because states are best positioned to understand local conditions ranging from geographic constraints to technological infrastructure,” she wrote in a previous opinion piece with the Anchorage Daily News.

Alaska’s geography also forms a central part of her objections. The state is more than twice the size of Texas, with only six regional election offices capable of handling in-person documentation requirements under the bill.

Roughly 80 percent of Alaska’s communities and about 20 percent of its population are not connected by road, requiring air or ferry travel for many residents.

Murkowski has, however, raised concerns about mail-in voting. Alaska allows no-excuse absentee voting by mail, with more than 50,000 Alaskans using this method in the 2024 general election.

The legislation includes strict identification requirements for mail ballots, and further changes proposed by supporters could limit mail voting except in narrow cases.

Continue reading...

[ H/T Trending Politics ]
  • Reading time 2 min read
  • Reading time 2 min read
  • Views5
  • Reading time 2 min read
  • Views5
  • Reading time 4 min read
  • Views8
  • Reading time 3 min read
  • Views6

Comments

There are no comments to display
Back
Top