After Trump’s push, Senate debates the ‘SAVE America Act,’ but can it pass?

Summary

Podcast Summary: The NPR Politics Podcast

Episode: After Trump’s push, Senate debates the ‘SAVE America Act,’ but can it pass?
Date: March 18, 2026
Hosts: Tamara Keith (White House), Myles Parks (Voting), Barbara Sprunt (Congress)

---

Episode Overview

This episode dives into the Senate’s debate over the highly contested ‘SAVE America Act’—President Trump’s flagship legislative push targeting election law changes. Central to the discussion: the bill’s prospects in the Senate, what’s actually in the bill, and the broader political and procedural stakes. The conversation explores why the act matters, who it affects, Republican divisions, the popular perceptions fueling the push, and the longer-term risks for Trump and the GOP.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. What’s in the ‘SAVE America Act’?

• Key Provisions
  • Mandates photo ID for all voters nationally
  • Requires documentary proof of citizenship to register to vote (passport/birth certificate)
  • Outlaws mail-in voting
  • Does not currently include President Trump’s publicly mentioned provisions about transgender athletes or other broader “culture war” items ([01:06]-[01:59])
• Potential Impacts
  • Large numbers of eligible Americans (~millions) lack the required documents, which can be expensive and hard to obtain
  • Rural voters would be hit especially hard, as registration would have to be completed in-person, ending online and mail-in voter registration ([02:21]-[03:24])

Quote:

"But research has shown that millions of Americans did not easily have access to the documents that this bill would require to register to vote, notably a passport or a birth certificate. And those things can be pretty expensive to acquire."
— Myles Parks [01:18]

---

2. Senate Debate: Political and Procedural Landscape

• Current Status:
  • Senate has voted to open debate; prospects for passage are “extremely slim”
  • Republican Senator Lisa Murkowski joined Democrats in opposition over rural access concerns ([02:21]-[04:53])
• Unusual Procedure:
  • Senate typically doesn’t spend prolonged time debating doomed bills; ongoing pressure from the White House makes this an atypical, high-profile fight ([04:53]-[05:42])
• Internal GOP Tensions:
  • Some Republicans traditionally oppose nationalizing elections—states customarily run their own
  • The act would mark "the broadest nationalization of elections in American history" ([05:42]-[06:24]), per legal experts

Quote:

“If the Save America act passed, it would be the broadest nationalization of elections in American history.”
— Myles Parks, quoting Prof. Derek Mueller [05:53]

---

3. The Filibuster: Can Republicans Override Democratic Opposition?

• Trump Calls for Filibuster Overhaul:
  • He wants to scrap the standard 60-vote threshold or use the “talking filibuster” to exhaust opposition ([06:52]-[08:24])
• Why It’s Unlikely:
  • “Talking filibuster” requires Republicans to keep 51 members on the floor continuously, which is operationally unrealistic
  • Eliminating the filibuster (“nuclear option”) would weaken minority party power—and Republicans are wary, fearing Democratic control in the future ([08:24]-[10:14])

Memorable Moment:

"It goes around to this, you know, what goes around comes around kind of idea. It would dilute the power of the minority... they often call it, like, the nuclear, nuclear option, because it really does blow things up."
— Barbara Sprunt [08:58]

---

4. Why Push a Likely-to-Fail Bill?

• Trump’s Electoral Strategy:
  • Has highlighted “illegal voting” as a talking point since 2015
  • White House sees the bill as both policy and campaign tool—believes it resonates with base, can pressure Congress, and serves as a campaign issue ([10:52]-[13:12])
• Undermining Faith in Elections?
  • Experts fear the bill is groundwork for claims of a “rigged” election in case of future GOP losses
  • Repeated, unsupported claims of widespread noncitizen voting—“never been proof of that” ([11:53]-[13:12])

Quote:

“President Trump, I mean, he said it at the State of the Union... Democrats cannot win elections unless they cheat and that the only reason they oppose these sorts of policies is because they want to cheat.”
— Myles Parks [11:38]

---

5. Do Restrictive Voting Laws Really Help Republicans?

• Research & Demographics:
  • Tight voter ID/citizenship laws may disproportionately affect low-income, low-education voters
  • Many of Trump’s key 2024 supporters fall into these groups
  • Academic experts predict these efforts could backfire and hurt GOP turnout over time ([13:41]-[15:52])
• Democratic Response:
  • Despite potential indirect advantage, Democrats oppose these measures on principle and precedent

Quote:

“A well educated, higher income voter can overcome a lot of hurdles and it's like the political leaders haven't learned that yet.”
— Myles Parks (summarizing Paul Gronke) [14:25]

---

6. Public Popularity vs. Political Reality

• Most Popular Provisions:
  • Photo ID: Overwhelmingly popular; could draw Democratic votes if considered alone
  • Proof of Citizenship: Public supports general idea, but less so when they realize what’s actually required (passport, birth certificate) ([16:47]-[18:05])
• Trump’s Strategy:
  • Demanding all “five points” of his plan, refusing compromise, driven significantly by base and high-profile Republican activists ([18:05]-[19:58])

Quote:

"This is essentially how the President has approached his relationship with Congress since returning to office, which is most of the time he doesn't even feel like he needs Congress at all. And if he does, then he demands that they do exactly what he wants in the way that he wants it."
— Tamara Keith [18:44]

---

7. The “Evidence Problem” and Political Risks

• No Actual Evidence for Mass Noncitizen Voting:
  • DOJ, DHS, and state GOPs have found no significant cases despite years of searching ([19:58]-[20:42])
• Risk of Depressing GOP Turnout:
  • If bill fails and Trump keeps claiming elections are rigged, it may demoralize his own supporters (echoes of Georgia Senate runoffs in 2020) ([20:42]-[22:01])
• Trump Can Shift Blame:
  • If act fails, can blame courts, Senate Republicans; preserves his outsider narrative ([22:01]-[22:26])

Quote:

“There is a risk of depressing your own voters if you take a stand on this thing and then say, well, then it's going to be rigged.”
— Tamara Keith [20:53]

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• [01:18] “Millions of Americans did not easily have access to the documents that this bill would require … and those things can be pretty expensive to acquire.” — Myles Parks
• [05:53] “If the Save America act passed, it would be the broadest nationalization of elections in American history.” — Myles Parks (quoting Prof. Derek Mueller)
• [08:58] "It goes around to this, you know, what goes around comes around kind of idea. It would dilute the power of the minority... they often call it, like, the nuclear, nuclear option..." — Barbara Sprunt
• [11:38] “Democrats cannot win elections unless they cheat and that the only reason they oppose these sorts of policies is because they want to cheat.” — Myles Parks (citing Trump’s rhetoric)
• [14:25] “A well educated, higher income voter can overcome a lot of hurdles and it's like the political leaders haven't learned that yet.” — Myles Parks, relaying Paul Gronke
• [18:44] “This is essentially how the President has approached his relationship with Congress...if he does [need them], then he demands that they do exactly what he wants in the way that he wants it.” — Tamara Keith
• [20:53] “There is a risk of depressing your own voters if you take a stand on this thing and then say, well, then it's going to be rigged.” — Tamara Keith

---

Important Timestamps

• [00:43]—Bill overview and Trump’s priorities
• [01:06]—Detailed breakdown of ‘SAVE America Act’ provisions
• [02:21]—Senate debate status and Murkowski’s opposition
• [03:24]—Rural and logistical complications for voters
• [05:42]—Nationalization of elections; GOP divisions
• [06:52]—Filibuster strategies and feasibility
• [10:52]—Trump’s messaging strategy and its purpose
• [13:52]—Do restrictive voting policies actually benefit GOP?
• [16:47]—Public polling on bill’s provisions
• [18:05]—Why Trump refuses to compromise on the bill
• [19:58]—The lack of evidence for mass noncitizen voting
• [20:42]—Risks to GOP turnout and internal party fractures

---

Overall Tone & Takeaways

• Analytical, Cautious, Insightful: The hosts keep a sharply analytical tone, emphasizing the lack of evidence behind the bill’s claims, the practical and political hurdles, and the potential for Trump’s focus to backfire both legislatively and electorally.
• Strategic Stakes: The act is as much about campaign positioning as about real policy, with long-term risks for both the President and the GOP—especially in alienating or discouraging their own voters.
• Senate Unlikely to Pass: Both procedural and political barriers make passage very unlikely, but the debate serves to energize Trump’s base and provide talking points for future political battles.

---

This episode offers an in-depth, accessible breakdown of the ‘SAVE America Act’ fight—making it clear why the legislation matters, why it’s unlikely to pass, and how it fits into the wider conflicts over voting, legitimacy, and party strategy in 2026.

Transcript

[Commercial Announcer]

This message comes from Intuit. TurboTax with TurboTax Expert. Full service match with a dedicated expert who will do your taxes for you from start to finish, getting you every dollar you deserve. It's that easy. Visit turbotax.com to match with an expert today.

[Tamara Keith]

Hey there. It's the NPR Politics Podcast. I'm Tamara Keith. I cover the White House.

[Myles Parks]

I'm Myles Parks. I cover voting.

[Barbara Sprunt]

And I'm Barbara Sprent. I cover Congress.

[Tamara Keith]

Today. On the show, President Trump says he won't sign any legislation until Congress passes the Save America Act. The biggest thing coming up is the Save America act in the Senate.

[Myles Parks]

That's voter ID and proof of citizenship and no mail in ballots, you know,

[Tamara Keith]

corrupt mail in ballots. Senate Republicans narrowly voted yesterday to start debate on the bill, but its prospects for actually passing aren't great. Before we get to that, though, Miles, remind us what is in this bill.

[Myles Parks]

It's really an overall Republican election overhaul. I mean, it would require photo ID for all voters across the country to vote. But the biggest thing is that it would mandate that voters who want to register to vote need to provide documentary proof of citizenship, which may not sound like a big deal. The vast majority of Americans think only US Citizens should vote in American elections. But research has shown that millions of Americans did not easily have access to the documents that this bill would require to register to vote, notably a passport or a birth certificate. And those things can be pretty expensive to acquire.

[Tamara Keith]

And the president mentioned no mail in ballots. This is a thing he talks about all the time. Also on his list for the bill is some stuff related to transgender athletes playing in sports and other issues related to the transgender community. Is that actually in the bill?

[Myles Parks]

It's not currently. It's something that he's been pushing for. There's a bunch of other provisions, I should say. But in the version that was passed in the House of Representatives and is currently on schedule to be discussed by the Senate, it does not include any ban, nationwide ban on male voting or any of the transgender stuff he's mentioned.

[Tamara Keith]

Barbara, what is the current state of this legislation?

[Barbara Sprunt]

Well, the Senate is in its second day of debate on the Save America act, and as you said yesterday, the chamber voted to take up the bill, bring it to debate. That only needed a simple majority. Republican Senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska joined Democrats in voting against it. She has several concerns, including how to implement those ID requirements that Miles was talking about, particularly in rural communities. And there are things that we don't yet know about about this process, like how Long debate will go, what exactly it will look like, but all signs point to a lot of it.

[Myles Parks]

Well, and that's on the rural part of this, I think that's been something that's been not really talked about that much, is that one of the aspects of this bill, what it would do, would mean that people who register to vote need to provide this proof of citizenship in person. So it would essentially mean no more registering to vote by mail or no more online voter registration. You would need to. Actually, even if you fill out the form online, you would need to go in person to provide that, which would be. Experts think it would really impact rural voters the most.

[Tamara Keith]

Yeah. And as you said that, I was thinking about how for years there has been an effort at the state level to make voting easier, to make access to voting easier. In. In many different ways this would make voting harder, though supporters say it would make voting safer.

[Myles Parks]

Absolutely. And I think that's kind of the balancing act that we're talking about here, is if there was some sort of nationwide election fraud, a bill like this might make a lot more sense and might have Democratic support, might have universal Republican support, might have public support, but there's just never been shown to be anything more than a tiny, tiny, tiny amount of election fraud in American elections, specifically by non citizens, which is kind of the target of this bill and something that President Trump has pushed over and over again. This idea that noncitizens are voting en masse and influencing American elections, there's just never been proof of that. So then when you think about the idea of disenfranchising or making voting even marginally harder for thousands or potentially millions of people versus the sort of handful of instances of election fraud that happen every cycle. I think experts kind of look at that as being a solution to a problem that doesn't really exist.

[Tamara Keith]

Barbara, I mentioned at the top that the chances of this thing ultimately passing in the Senate aren't that great. Can you explain why? I mean, this is a key agenda item of the President of the United States, and his party controls the House

[Barbara Sprunt]

and the Senate, certainly. I mean, this is a top priority for the president. He's said that he doesn't want to sign most other bills unless this thing pass. But as you said, the chances of this passing are extremely slim. Democrats are opposed. As Miles alluded to, not every Republican supports it. And one thing that I think is interesting and worth noting in this is this is fairly atypical in the Senate to potentially spend a week or maybe more talking about a bill that is expected to fail isn't usually how the Senate operates. And the fact that that's what's happening now, I think speaks to this larger pressure campaign from the White House and, to some degree, other parts of the Republican conference to show that they're in this fight, as Miles was describing, you know, for election integrity as sort of a party platform agenda item.

[Myles Parks]

Oh, and there's kind of two parts of this. There's a debate over what the policy says about, you know, this documentary proof of citizenship or voter id. But I think there's a bigger picture issue for a lot of Republicans, which is that this bill would nationalize elections in a way they just aren't currently nationalized, that states generally control their own elections. I mean, University of Notre Dame law professor Derek Mueller wrote this week that if the Save America act passed, it would be the broadest nationalization of elections in American history. And so that is something that traditionally Republicans, people like Mitch McConnell, have been vehemently opposed to in the past. So it's kind of like there's policy issues, and then there's like, these bigger macro questions that this bill presents.

[Tamara Keith]

What do you mean when you say nationalize? And, like, why would that be a problem for some Republicans?

[Myles Parks]

I mean, the Constitution says that states and localities run their own elections with oversight from Congress. The Save America act, if it were passed, would be probably, almost certainly be considered legal, but I think it would be many Republicans, based on what they've said in the past, it would be antithetical to what the Constitution envisioned for who should run voting in America.

[Tamara Keith]

So, Barbara, let us talk about Senate procedure for a moment.

[Barbara Sprunt]

Oh, let us.

[Tamara Keith]

Because President Trump has called on the Senate to overturn the filibuster so that this could pass without the 60 votes needed, so that they could blow past Democratic opposition, which is unified. And then he's been talking about something called the talking filibuster. So what is this, and is it gonna happen?

[Barbara Sprunt]

So many filibusters, Right? Let's talk talking filibuster first. At its core, the talking filibuster is a technique to try to wear down the opposition. In a talking filibuster, lawmakers opposed to a certain bill can bring in amendments, each one with its own debate, period. Essentially, this can just make it take forever. And if the party pushing the bill can basically wear out their opponents, theoretically, it can move forward and pass on a simple majority. The Senate can't move forward on other business during this period. And there's other provisions that make it complicated for Lawmakers, for example, it requires 51, in this case, Republican senators in or near the chamber at all times, whereas Democrats would just need one person to hold the floor to keep the filibuster going and then rotate off. And Senate Majority Leader Thune has repeatedly said that in this instance, Republicans just can't sustain that. The math isn't there. But for a talking filibuster to succeed, they barely got 51 votes to get this thing started on debate.

[Tamara Keith]

So that's the talking filibuster. What about the big one? What about the filibuster? Because, like, people in both parties over time have been critical of the filibuster.

[Barbara Sprunt]

Yes. I mean, the filibuster is a tool. It halts action on Most bills until 60 senators vote to move it forward. And as you said, at times, it has prevented policy priorities from succeeding for both parties. Getting rid of it would allow, in this case, Republican victories with a narrow margin. So why do people oppose it? I mean, it goes around to this, you know, what goes around comes around kind of idea. It would dilute the power of the minority, which has for a long time been protected to a degree within the Senate. And this is why, when you hear people refer to it, they often call it, like, the nuclear, nuclear option, because it really does blow things up. And we might remember that in 2013, then Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, a Democrat, eliminated the filibuster requirement for all nominations except for candidates to the supreme court, something Mitch McConnell at the time said Democrats would regret. And I think that was a fairly prescient statement. I think they certainly did come to regret that in 2017, Republicans voted to get rid of the filibuster for Supreme Court nominees, which allowed President Trump's pick of Neil Gorsuch to be confirmed. And then again, about four years ago, Democrats tried to get rid of the filibuster to advance voting rights legislation. So it's sort of interesting and ironic that both parties are coming to this place over things like election and voting rights legislation. And in that case, they were thwarted by a few Democratic senators who said that the change would haunt them down the road when, once again, they inevitably come to be in the minority.

[Myles Parks]

Well, and Republicans can read the polls, too, right? I mean, it's looking more and more likely that Democrats will have a really good shot at retaking the House and potentially even having a shot at retaking the Senate. And so I think many Republican lawmakers are probably looking at that and thinking maybe this isn't the best time to get rid of you know, the best tool for minority power that we have. Which kind of brings up this other interesting point. Tim, I'm curious for your perspective on why President Trump has made this such a giant priority, considering it has always seemed like a very big long shot for it to have a real possibility of passing.

[Tamara Keith]

So I would like to remind you that he has been talking about the idea of illegal voting since 2015. He's been talking about it and then he won. And he said he would have won the popular vote if not for all the illegal voting. This is something he has come back to again and again. The same with absentee voting, which he doesn't like and has had a almost single minded focus on just wanting to get rid of that in a broad way. And, you know, I did talk to a White House official about this. He said that this is a key part of the President's domestic policy agenda right now and they believe that it is an issue that they can run on, that it's popular. But Miles, there is a very real concern that this could just be part of an effort to undermine faith in elections.

[Myles Parks]

I mean, that's how it feels to a lot of people. I think election officials I've talked to over the last couple years have never realistically thought that the Save America act was going to be law. It would go into effect immediately. It would throw chaos into the midterms. Just to be very clear, election officials lives would be turned upside down like tomorrow if it passed. They've never really thought that seemed likely. President Trump, I mean, he said it at the State of the Union, he said it out loud that Democrats cannot win elections unless they cheat and that the only reason they oppose these sorts of policies is because they want to cheat. What, what they read from that is that if Republicans lose in the midterms, that the President will point back to this moment as saying this is proof that the reason they oppose these sorts of protections is because they wanted to cheat and look at the outcome. So I think there just seems to be a pretty clear line for a lot of the people I talk to of what's coming down the pike in the next six months.

[Tamara Keith]

Yeah, and the White House official I talked to, I asked about that, he insisted, no, this is not them laying the groundwork for an excuse later if they lose. But it's just hard to look at the things the President has said after every single other past election, especially 2020, and not see this as part of that pattern.

[Myles Parks]

Exactly.

[Tamara Keith]

All right, we're going to take a quick break and we'll have more in a moment.

[Myles Parks]

This message comes from NPR sponsor Focus Features. On March 27, Focus Features presents the AI doc or how I Became an Apocalyptomist, an explosive new motion picture event being called the most urgent movie of our time. The AI doc or How I Became an Apocalyptomist, rated PG13 only in theaters March 27th.

[Tamara Keith]

And we're back. And President Trump frequently suggests these changes would benefit Republican candidates. Miles, does that align with what experts are telling you?

[Myles Parks]

This is where we get into the good stuff. I feel like this is not being talked about enough. I feel I've been talking to experts about this a lot really, since President Trump won the 2024 election. He won that election by winning over lower educated, lower income voters. These are voters who are considered lower propensity voters, people who don't vote in every single local special election, but they come out and they came out for him in the presidential election. Research has found that restrictive voting policies affect these voters the most. That's what I was talking about recently with Paul Gronke is a political scientist at Reed College. Some of these efforts to restrict eligibility and make it more difficult to get to the polling place may actually hurt Republicans more than Democrats. A well educated, higher income voter can overcome a lot of hurdles and it's like the political leaders haven't learned that yet. So Gronke expressed some optimism that basically at some point many Republicans are going to feel like it's no longer in their interest to try to put up new restrictions to voting. That doesn't seem to be happening right now. Even at the state level. We're seeing a number of Republican controlled states put forward their own versions of the Save America Act. But over time, he's optimistic that this, this kind of changing in demographics could change the incentive structure too.

[Tamara Keith]

Democrats are overwhelmingly opposed to this, though what you're saying is in theory they could benefit from it.

[Myles Parks]

I mean, I think maybe we don't follow exactly. No, that's basically that's kind of what I asked Gronke and he was like, I don't want to go down that path. I don't anyone to get excited about restricting access to the vote in the way that it could help them. Also, it's hard to extrapolate based on one election. I will also note that, that you can't just base all of your political wisdom based on the results of the 2024 election. I think all that I'm saying is that as demographics shift, it just becomes a little less clear who these sort of policies advantage or whether there is a partisan advantage at all.

[Barbara Sprunt]

And, Miles, what I think is so interesting about what you're saying is that this is about the Save America act, but it's also about other elements within the Trump administration and the policies and politics that they are pushing because the Trump campaign made historic inroads with the Latino community, a support that's like, eroding, which we've seen in polling over the last few months, in large part because of the policies of the administration. But in some ways, this idea of, like, the lessons learned and who is within the tent of the Republican Party, it almost feels counterproductive, you know, to what they're hoping to sort of replicate in the midterms. You know, they've had Republican members talk about how the US Is not a pluralistic society. But, you know, experts point out that Republicans have made such inroads in large part because they are trying to expand the tent. And so this does seem a little

[Tamara Keith]

ironic, Miles, how popular are the provisions in the Save America Act? Because to hear President Trump describe it, they are extremely popular.

[Myles Parks]

Voter ID is extremely popular. There is no if, ands and buts about it. And so that's one of the political interesting things about this debate right now, is if Republicans had put forward just that issue, as I think Senate Democrats would have felt a lot of pressure to support it, even though they still have misgivings about the people that that could exclude. There are still people who do not have access to government issued photo IDs, but the vast majority of Americans feel like it should be mandated. The other issue that has mass appeal is that only American citizens should vote in federal elections. It's a little harder to get data on. People have polled on the proof of citizenship question, for instance. And the majority of people do feel like people should have to provide proof of citizenship. In the polling I've seen, they never explain exactly what that means. They just ask, do you think people should have to prove their citizenship? My sense, and when I talk to experts, is that the average person may think a driver's license qualifies as that, when in fact it does not. And so I think if you tell people, birth certificate or passport, you know, roughly half of Americans don't have a passport. So I think you would see those numbers drop off. It's a little bit less clear there.

[Tamara Keith]

Yeah. I actually asked this White House official I was talking to about whether, like, hey, would you be willing to compromise, maybe get rid of the passport? Yeah, proof of citizenship requirement. But Require photo id. Would you be open to changing this bill to try to get it passed? And the answer was no.

[Barbara Sprunt]

I mean, Tam, I'm curious. It seems like the President is kind of actively making it harder for Republicans who may have gotten on board with a more narrow version of this. Do you have a sense of his thinking there?

[Tamara Keith]

Their thinking is he wants his five points, take it or leave it. Well, he doesn't want them to leave it. He wants them to take it. And this is essentially how the President has approached his relationship with Congress since returning to office, which is most of the time he doesn't even feel like he needs Congress at all. And if he does, then he demands that they do exactly what he wants in the way that he wants it. And in a couple of key cases, he has gotten what he wants. This is a little different. He does have a lot of outside backing. People like Scott Pressler, who's an activist on the Republican side, very involved in voting related issues. And Senator Mike Lee from Utah is one of the biggest proponents of this in the Senate. And he has said that he has just gotten bombarded with people who really passionately support this in a way that he has not experienced with other issues. So the President has some active and loud element of the MAGA base pushing this. And the President has really described this in existential terms by rebranding it as the Save America Act. This isn't just save an acronym for something related to voting. It is now about saving the Republic.

[Myles Parks]

But it's only becoming more and more clear. I feel like that he has an evidence problem because he controls the Department of Justice, he controls the Department of Homeland Security. Republicans control numerous state houses that have spent a lot of resources, a lot of money and time and energy looking for non citizens voting. And no one has been able to find this massive non citizen illegal voting that he's been promising for 10 years. And I guess I just wonder ahead of this year's midterms, considering all of the resources he has at his disposal, are voters going to start asking if this is the case, why haven't we seen more than a handful here, a couple dozen here, as opposed to being able to come up with these millions of people you've been promising us?

[Tamara Keith]

I think there's actually a large political risk for the President and his party, which is, it seems pretty likely this isn't going to pass. This isn't going to be in place in time for the midterms. I will remind you that after he lost in 2020, he went around saying that the election had been rigged. In particular that it had been rigged in Georgia, where there was a runoff election for two Senate seats, U.S. senate seats. And Republicans in the state said that all of his talk of it being rigged really suppressed the vote among the people who could have helped Republicans win. And in fact, Republicans lost. And so there is a risk of depressing your own voters if you take a stand on this thing and then say, well, then it's going to be rigged. This is a fascinating situation because rather than backing down or giving the Senate an exit ramp or taking the advice of Leader Thune, who Trump supporters online are absolutely targeting as weak and standing in his way, but instead of looking for an exit ramp, the president is sort of demanding this public fight that could very easily most likely be a public failure.

[Myles Parks]

Yeah, but the failure's not at his doorstep. Right? I mean, it's always something that he can then point to Senate Republicans as the reason something didn't get done where the same thing is with his executive action on elections. I mean, he tried to pass an executive order mandating proof of citizenship last March. The court stopped it. He can now point to and say, well, the courts didn't let me do this. Senate Republicans couldn't get it done. I tried to get this done. And that to his supporters, I think they probably buy it.

[Tamara Keith]

Yeah. All right. Well, we're going to leave it there for today. I'm Tamara Keith. I cover the White House.

[Myles Parks]

I'm Myles Parks. I cover voting.

[Barbara Sprunt]

And I'm Barbara Sprunt. I cover Congress.

[Tamara Keith]

And thank you for listening to the NPR Politics podcast.

[Commercial Announcer]

This message comes from Mint Mobile. If you're tired of spending hundreds on big wireless bills, bogus fees and free perks, Mint Mobile might be right for you with plans starting from 15 bucks a month. Shop plans [e-mail] Switch upfront payment of 45 dollars for 3 month 5 gigabyte plan required. New customer offer for first 3 months only. Then full price plan options available, taxes and fees extra. See Mint Mobile for details.

[Myles Parks]

This message comes from KeyBank. Scaling a successful business takes more than just grit. It takes the right relationship. KeyBank pairs the right strategy with the right financial tools to keep your business moving forward. KeyBank opens doors [e-mail] B2B support for

[Commercial Announcer]

NPR and the following message come from Rula. Looking for a therapist? Rula makes it easy to connect with a therapist who takes your insurance. Get personalized cost estimates upfront with no hidden fees. Head to r u l a.com to find a therapist the easy way.