Purpose of the SAVE Act
Even when a few officials are willing to look at the evidence, it is often dismissed because the investigators cannot demonstrate they have been personally harmed, so they lack standing in court. The court of public opinion, though, is taking notice, and public support for the SAVE Act is one result. Official claims that elections are honest and secure no longer hold water.
That brings us to the final possibility that fraud is simply so difficult to prove that officials don't even bother trying. There is some justification for this. Our current system of anonymous voting coupled with on-line registration, motor voter registration, near universal absentee voting, aka voting by mail, poor checking of voter registrations, widespread internet connectivity, and several other factors all conspire to make it very difficult to determine if a ballot was cast by a legal citizen voter, or by someone not legally entitled to vote, or even by a person at all.
Once a ballot enters the system, it cannot be traced back to an individual voter, so it becomes nearly impossible to determine if it is fraudulent or not. Only by intercepting fraud attempts at the source before the ballot is accepted is there any real hope of ensuring the election is fair, honest, and trustworthy. That, after all, is the purpose of the SAVE Act.
What, though, makes our elections so untrustworthy? Are the problems minor, or are there real exploitable flaws in our systems. The Carter-Baker Commission on Federal Election Reform was released in 2005. Former President Carter took the lead in commissioning investigations into election issues that could compromise the integrity of our elections.