Sen. Susan Collins just handed Senate Republicans the votes they need to move forward on the SAVE America Act — the House-passed bill that would establish voter ID requirements for federal elections. The Maine Republican announced her support in a statement first reported by the Maine Wire, and with her on board, the GOP has at least a slim majority behind the legislation.

Sen. Mike Lee, who has led a relentless campaign to push the bill through the upper chamber, wasted no time declaring what Collins' support means in practice. He posted on X:

"We now have enough votes to pass a motion to proceed to the House-passed bill — even without any additional votes — with Vice President JD Vance breaking the tie."

That's the math. Collins gets them to the procedural starting line. Vance gets them over it.

But Collins came with a condition — and it shapes the entire fight ahead.

The filibuster stays

Collins made clear that her vote for the SAVE America Act does not extend to blowing up the legislative filibuster. Her support for the bill and her support for the 60-vote threshold are, in her telling, perfectly compatible.

"I oppose eliminating the legislative filibuster. The filibuster is an important protection for the rights of the minority party that requires Senators to work together in the best interest of the country."

She then offered the argument that institutional conservatives have made for years — and that Democrats conveniently forget whenever they hold the majority:

"Removing that protection would, for example, allow a future Congress controlled by Democrats to pass provisions on anything they want — DC statehood, open borders, or packing the Supreme Court — with just a simple majority of Senators."

Collins isn't wrong on the logic. Senate Majority Leader John Thune reiterated earlier this week that the GOP doesn't have the votes to eliminate the filibuster anyway. Several other Senate Republicans share that position. The 60-vote threshold isn't going anywhere — which means Democrats can still block the bill from reaching a final vote even if Republicans have a simple majority behind it. The New York Post reported.

This is where things get interesting.

Lee's standing filibuster gambit

Lee and a trio of lawmakers have been working social media and closed-door meetings to build support for the SAVE America Act — but they've also been pushing a procedural alternative. Rather than accept the current "zombie filibuster," where senators can block legislation without ever actually holding the floor, Lee has advocated for restoring the standing, or talking, filibuster.

The theory is straightforward: force Democrats to actually stand up and talk if they want to block voter ID. Make them explain, on camera, for hours on end, why requiring identification to vote in a federal election is somehow an unacceptable burden — while every American already needs an ID to board a plane, check into a hotel, or buy a drink.

Collins made that very point:

"Having people provide an ID at the polls, just as they have to do before boarding an airplane, checking into a hotel, or buying an alcoholic beverage, is a simple reform that will improve the security of our federal elections and will help give people more confidence in the results."

It's a devastatingly simple argument, and Democrats know it. Polling has consistently shown that voter ID is popular across party lines. The left's opposition to it has always been more about institutional habit than public sentiment. Forcing a talking filibuster would turn that disconnect into a spectacle — Democrats filibustering a common-sense measure that most of their own voters support.

Some fear that using the standing filibuster could paralyze the Senate floor for weeks or even months. That's a real concern. But there's a political calculation behind it too: the longer Democrats stand at a podium arguing against voter ID, the worse it looks for them.

Two holdouts remain

Only two Senate Republicans have not pledged support for the SAVE America Act: Sens. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska. Neither has made a public statement explaining their position, at least not in the current reporting.

McConnell's silence is notable but not surprising. Murkowski's is expected. Neither holdout changes the immediate math — Lee says the votes are there to proceed, and Collins just confirmed it.

Collins did note that she opposed a previous version of the bill, known as the SAVE Act, because it would have required citizens to prove their citizenship every single time they voted. The current version, which passed the House, apparently resolved that concern.

The real question

The procedural path is clearer than it was a week ago. Republicans can begin debate on the bill. What they can't do — yet — is guarantee 60 votes for final passage.

That puts the burden squarely on Senate Democrats. They'll need to decide whether they want to be the party that filibustered voter ID — a measure supported by a majority of Americans and grounded in the basic principle that only American citizens vote in American elections.

As Collins put it plainly:

"The law is clear that in this country only American citizens are eligible to vote in federal elections."

The law is clear. The question is whether the Senate will be.