REPORTING

The Price of Belonging

Tech Equity and the SAVE Act

Anushka Verma

April 27, 2025

REPORTING

The Price of Belonging

Tech Equity and the SAVE Act

Anushka Verma

April 27, 2025

Illustration by Sudeepti Tammana

Passports and IDs — two documents you may rarely think about, unless you are scrambling to leave for the airport or waiting in line at the DMV. For most, they are mundane parts of adulthood, stored away inside a drawer, only to be begrudgingly retrieved when required — whether to pass through airport security, buy alcohol, or provide identification when pulled over by an officer. But have you ever stopped to consider the true weight of these documents? They are more than just paperwork that we unearth on occasion, they are technologies — tools that grant us access to the systems, opportunities, and rights that shape our lives. As emphasized by the recent passing of the SAVE Act, like any technology, they also come with their own set of inequalities, creating a larger divide between those who have tools to navigate the world and those who do not.

Though the definition of ‘technology’ is far from settled, Merriam-Webster succinctly describes it as “a manner of accomplishing a task, especially using technical processes, methods, or knowledge”. To some of our surprise, technology is not limited to gadgets or electronics — it also includes tools and systems that allow us to complete everyday tasks (who would have thought that a pencil counted as technology?). In that sense, passports and IDs are undeniably technological tools. They serve as interfaces between individuals and the institutions that structure society– airports, banks, governments officers, hospitals, to name a few. Originally just paper certificates, these documents evolved into chip-embedded, scannable tools in 2005, when the United States (U.S.) State Department issued that all new and renewed passports will contain radio frequency identification chips. Similar to the phones in our pockets, they carry sensitive information and determine what we can and cannot do. They may not look like technology in the traditional sense, but their function is no less powerful — and as we are about to see — no less exclusive.

On April 10th, 2025, U.S. Congress passed the SAVE (Safeguard American Voter Eligibility) Act, the purported purpose of which is to ensure that only American citizens are able to vote in federal elections. To enforce this, Americans must present proof of citizenship — a passport or birth certificate. Sounds great, right? Not much different from the 15th and 19th amendments to the Constitution, both of which expanded voting rights to previously excluded American citizens. But unlike those amendments, which dismantled barriers, this bill introduces a new one: a technological checkpoint. The issue is, not everyone has the privilege to pass through it.

In a perfectly equitable society, the SAVE Act would fulfill its intended purpose: guaranteeing that only American citizens are influencing the outcome of federal elections. In actuality, this legislation limits American citizens from exercising their right to vote, as it assumes– incorrectly– that all US citizens have equal access to documents like a passport or birth certificate.

According to the Center for American Progress,  an estimated “146 million American citizens do not possess a valid passport”. That is nearly half of the U.S. population — people who, despite their citizenship, may be barred from voting simply because they lack a specific form of documentation. Requiring such documents may seem like a small ask, until you consider the time and resources it takes to obtain them. A U.S. passport costs $130, excluding the $35 ‘acceptance’ or execution fee. Suddenly, access to the ballot becomes contingent not only on your citizenship, but on your ability to pay for the technologies that prove your belonging.

Critics of the SAVE Act are often met with accusations of “opposing legislation to secure our elections and protect Americans’ constitutional right to vote,” as stated by Georgia Congressman Rick W. Allen, a vocal supporter of the bill. However, concerns extend beyond partisan lines — it is worth arguing that many who oppose it do so out of a commitment to preserve the voting rights of the American public. This narrative is not about rejecting election security, but rather about questioning a system that equates citizenship with access to often inaccessible documentation.

This burden is not distributed equally. Low-income Americans, rural communities, the elderly, and people of color are less likely to possess a valid passport or birth certificate. Does this make them any less American? Certainly not. Yet, under this legislation, their right to vote could be suppressed simply because they lack a specific form of technological access.

The SAVE Act underscores the negative repercussions of treating technology — traditional or not– as something universally accessible. Just as access to technology varies based on income and geography, known as the digital divide, so too does access to identification. The same structural barriers that prevent rural or low-income communities from accessing the internet or owning laptops can also prevent them from obtaining government-issued documents. ID access is not just a bureaucratic or immigration issue; it is a matter of tech equity, and must be recognized as such by our government officials and policymakers.

What steps can we take to expand access to ID technology? How can we simultaneously balance the need for election security with addressing disparities in access to documentation? These are questions we must answer to ensure we do not encroach on the rights of some Americans in our pursuit of betterment for all.

iJournal is the UW iSchool’s student-led publication. Find us on Instagram or email us. ©2025.

iJournal is the UW iSchool’s student-led publication. Find us on Instagram or email us. ©2025.

iJournal is the UW iSchool’s student-led publication. Find us on Instagram or email us. ©2025.