There's About to Be Some Prime GOP Betrayal on the SAVE Act
Murkowski said she supports citizenship voting and ID but opposes the act as drafted because she believes it could disenfranchise Alaskans.

SOURCE CHECK
TAP FOR WHYCredibility rates WCBM News-Talk Radio, which republished this story. The other scores rate the article itself.
WCBM is a local radio outlet, but this page has no named author and is written as strongly partisan commentary rather than transparently sourced local reporting. The article attributes an excerpt to another outlet, but provides limited independent sourcing for its central claims.
- Source type — Local radio publisher; the page is presented as national political commentary.
- Author attribution — No author is identified, limiting accountability and transparency.
- Editorial standards — The piece uses advocacy-style language and makes broad claims with little supporting evidence.
- Source selection — It attributes an explanatory excerpt to the Washington Examiner and includes quoted public statements, but offers little independent sourcing.
The article includes a relevant quotation from Thune, a detailed explanation attributed to the Washington Examiner, and Murkowski’s stated position. Its argument relies heavily on partisan assertions and provides little evidence or opposing perspective beyond the quoted statements.
HOW WE SCORE ↗The piece is an openly one-sided argument for the bill, uses loaded language, and characterizes opponents’ motives rather than presenting their case in a balanced way. Murkowski’s stated objection is included but is immediately framed critically.
- Loaded language — Repeatedly uses pejorative labels and asserts that opponents support cheating.
- Counterarguments presented — Murkowski’s concern that the bill could disenfranchise Alaskans is quoted, but not explored on its merits.
- Source diversity — The article mainly presents the writer’s view, with limited attributed statements and no developed range of perspectives.
- Opinion vs reporting — The piece is clearly commentary and advances a persuasive position rather than neutral reporting.
The article openly advocates for passage of the SAVE Act and uses partisan, approving language about Republican efforts while disparaging Democrats and several Republican senators. Its framing and word choice strongly favor the conservative position.
- Language tone — Uses insults and pejorative descriptions of lawmakers and Democrats, while calling the bill common-sense.
- Framing — Frames opposition to the bill as support for cheating and presents passage as necessary to protect elections.
- Source selection — Includes statements supporting the bill and a critical quote about Murkowski, with little substantive presentation of the opposing case.
Republished
Republished from townhall.com. The relationship between the two publishers has not been determined.
1,276 stories · 43–44 · updated Oct 9, 2026
This is townhall.com's own score, and this article is credited to townhall.com. The host score in the Source Check is WCBM News-Talk Radio's.
The article argues that the SAVE Act may fail in the Senate, blaming several Republican senators while discussing Majority Leader John Thune’s doubts about a talking filibuster. It also criticizes Lisa Murkowski for opposing the bill as drafted, despite her support for citizenship voting and voter ID.
The writer says the SAVE Act lacks enough votes and argues Republicans should use a talking filibuster to try to advance it. The article explains that the approach could require extended speeches and votes on amendments, while tying up Senate floor business; John Thune said there were not enough votes to begin or sustain one. The writer also cites the need to address Department of Homeland Security funding and other pressures.
The writer criticizes Mitch McConnell, John Curtis, Lisa Murkowski and Thom Tillis, but defends Thune’s handling of the situation. Murkowski said she opposed the SAVE America Act as drafted because it could disenfranchise many Alaskans, while supporting citizenship voting and ID if the requirements were implementable. The article also recalls criticism of her past vote on Democratic election-reform legislation.
Community verdict
9 VOTESPeople in this story
SWIPE →Senator criticized for opposing the SAVE America Act as drafted
Senate majority leader discussing whether Republicans have the votes to use a talking filibuster
Thune's version of this story ↗Former senator mentioned as Curtis’s predecessor
President who made the SAVE Act a legislative priority
Senator named among those the writer blames for the bill’s likely failure
Senator named among those the writer blames for the bill’s likely failure
White House press secretary whose post urged passage of the SAVE America Act
Senator named among those the writer blames for the bill’s likely failure
Discussion · 0
Loading comments…







