Nevada Republican Gov. Joe Lombardo unexpectedly vetoed a bill on Thursday that would have required voters in the swing state to show a photo ID at the polls — a conservative priority across the country and something that has long been on the governor’s legislative wish list.
The move brings a dramatic end to one of the legislative session’s most surprising outcomes: A bipartisan deal that combined the requirement for voter identification with a Democratic-backed measure to add more drop boxes for mail ballots that Lombardo had initially vetoed.
The bill came together in the final days of the session and passed mere minutes before the Democratic-controlled Legislature adjourned just after midnight on June 3. Lombardo had been expected to sign it.
In his veto message, Lombardo said he “wholeheartedly” supports voter ID laws but that he felt the bill fell short on addressing his concerns about ballots cast by mail, because such ballots could still be accepted “solely on the basis of a signature match” under the bill….
Category Archives: voter id
“Bipartisan deals on voting and election changes are rare. It just happened in one swing state”
Facing a legislature dominated by Democrats, Republican Gov. Joe Lombardo stood before Nevada lawmakers earlier this year with a message that some did not expect to go far: “Set aside partisan politics.”
It was a plea that might have seemed more aspirational than realistic, given the country’s deep polarization. Yet it set the stage for one of the session’s most unexpected outcomes — a bipartisan agreement to bring voter ID requirements to the perennial battleground state by next year’s midterm elections.
In a deal that came together in the waning days of the session, the Democratic-controlled Legislature approved a bill that combined a requirement for voter ID — a conservative priority across the country and something that has been on Lombardo’s legislative wish list — with a Democratic-backed measure to add more drop boxes for mailed ballots in the state’s most populous counties.
Lombardo is expected to sign the bill.
“What the REAL ID delay tells us about implementing proof-of-citizenship laws”
That’s the subject line of this week’s Votebeat newsletter, covering a bunch of reporting from a bunch of states that it’s been less straightforward for people to get the right kind of ID than it might at first seem.
“The Pa. House is set to approve new voter ID rules, reversing years of Democratic opposition”
fter years of opposing such a measure, Pennsylvania Democrats are poised on Tuesday to allow a vote in the state House on a bill that, if passed, would create new ID requirements to vote in the commonwealth, alongside long-sought election law reforms.
The vote is the first step towards breaking a yearslong stalemate over election law in Pennsylvania, as House Democrats show a willingness to negotiate on a top GOP priority — in exchange for a wide range of reforms aimed at expanding ballot access and streamlining election administration.
Lawmakers in the state House of Representatives will take separate votes Tuesday on measures split across two bills: one sponsored by Rep. Tom Mehaffie (R., Cumberland) with the proposed voter ID provisions and another sweeping bill authored by House Speaker Joanna McClinton (D., Philadelphia) to establish early in-person voting in the state, allow counties to process mail ballots before election day, eliminate the date requirement for mail-in ballots, among other changes.
Under the proposal expected to come before lawmakers Tuesday, Pennsylvania voters would be required to show ID every time they cast a ballot. The bill includes a wide-ranging list ofaccepted forms of voter ID, from photo identification to state-issued voter registration cards and utility bills.
If voters do not have an approved form of identification when voting, they would have the option to sign an affidavit attesting to their identity or ask a friend or relative to sign paperwork vouching for them, according to the bill, House Bill 771.
Pennsylvania voters are currently required to show ID only the first time they cast a ballot at a polling location, and present proof of ID every time they apply for a mail ballot.
If approved, both the bills would head to the GOP-controlled Senate. New voter ID provisions are still a several steps away from becoming law in Pennsylvania, and if passed in the current form, would not take effect until the 2027 elections. The legislation will not impact the upcoming May 20 primary election.
However, a top Senate Republican leader said that if Democrats are willing to negotiate on voter ID, it “unlocks the opportunity to have discussion on a number of issues that have not been able to advance over the last two years.” (Republicans prefer a constitutional change over a statutory change like the one expected to pass Tuesday, since voter ID statutory changes have previously been struck down by the courts.)…
Thad Hall, the election director in Mercer County, said significant changes would be needed to make the bill work for small counties.
Some of the policies, he said, appeared written for Pennsylvania’s larger counties with dozens or hundreds of staff members. The bill requires early voting be available on the weekend and that counties have two drop boxes, checked daily by two workers. While a big county may manage this easily, Hall said it would be burdensome for counties with just one or two election workers.
“It doesn’t help your cause if you don’t consult smaller counties and you put things in there that legitimately would undermine our ability to do our work,” he said.
But the concepts were on the right track, Hall said, noting that he was bracing for a “s— show” in 2026 if early in-person voting is not approved by then.
“I am grateful that somebody in leadership took the time to actually put together a bill that, even if it’s not perfect, at least it has the good moving parts in it that could be fixed,” he added.
“Democrat is nearly boo’ed out of hour-long town hall as voters bash her for supporting SAVE voting rights act”
A Washington state Democrat came under fire during a town hall after backing a bill that would require voters to prove their citizenship when casting a ballot.
On Thursday, U.S. Representative Marie Gluesenkamp Perez walked into a town hall attended by hundreds of her constituents in Vancouver and was met with resounding boos.
Voters were upset she’d voted for the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act and other pieces of legislation.
“NC voters wait while a battle over ballots they cast six months ago rages”
Chris Marshall took care to cast a ballot last fall while in France tending to his business, and was surprised to find months after the 2024 election that Judge Jefferson Griffin wanted his vote thrown out.
Griffin challenged Marshall and thousands of other military and overseas absentee voters who did not provide photo ID with their ballots. The State Board of Elections did not require it. Most military and civilian overseas voters cast ballots using a special portal that does not provide a way to include a photo.
Griffin worked to have their votes in the Supreme Court race tossed, but the state Supreme Court said they should have a chance to submit IDs.
Now back home in Durham, Marshall and his wife Moira Smullen tried to address the problem by checking to see if they could submit photos using the same electronic portal they used to vote. They couldn’t.
“Right now, it’s just wait and see what happens,” he said.
“These states want to adopt the SAVE Act: How could some married women be impacted?”
Dozens of states across the country are considering their own versions of a federal voting bill critics say could disenfranchise millions of Americans, including many married women.
Republican lawmakers in 24 states introduced measures requiring people to prove their citizenship, using documents such as birth certificates or passports, when they register to vote, according to the nonpartisan Voting Rights Lab. Three other states – Louisiana, New Hampshire and Wyoming – have enacted similar laws in recent months.
Supporters call the efforts a security measure and say they’re trying to reinforce laws barring noncitizens from voting. But voting rights advocates argue it’s already exceedingly rare for noncitizens to vote – and the laws could make it more difficult for millions of Americans to cast a ballot.
Opponents are particularly concerned the requirements will hit rural communities, military personnel and married women. About 83% of married women changed their name, and for many that means their birth certificates don’t match their current ID.
Round-Up: Partial Injunction Against Trump Elections Executive Order
“Indiana Republicans Move to Ban Student IDs for Voting”
Daniel Jenkins has volunteered to boost voter turnout on Indiana University’s Bloomington campus since becoming a student there in 2022. Jenkins, now a junior studying political science, has spent years helping other students fill out voter registration forms and walking them through information about polling places and hours. He also reminds them they’ll need to bring an ID to vote. That last part, he reassures them, should be easy, since Indiana’s voter ID law allows state university students to present their campus IDs at the polls.
“That’s good enough for most people,” he says. “A lot of them will just happen to have it on them anyway.”
But Indiana may soon make voting much tougher for college students: Legislation banning the use of student IDs for voting passed the state Senate with near unanimous Republican support in early February and now sits with the GOP-run House.
Jenkins, who led voter registration efforts for IU Bloomington’s College Democrats during the 2024 elections, told Bolts that banning student IDs at the polls would add a significant barrier for many students who want to vote. If a student who just moved to campus before a fall election can’t vote with their university ID, and doesn’t already have another ID issued by the state of Indiana, they’d then need to trek to the closest BMV office miles from campus and supply documents that can be tricky for students to obtain—all during a busy season of classes and midterms.
Students are eligible to vote in Bloomington regardless of where they’re from. But in practice, “the passing of this bill would just make it almost impossible for out-of-state students to do so, especially if they don’t have a car,” Jenkins said. “And it’s definitely an issue for in-state students, too. Not all of us have driver’s licenses.”
Kylie Farris, the election supervisor in Monroe County, where IU Bloomington is located, confirmed that many local students rely on these IDs to vote. She told Bolts that her office doesn’t record what type of ID voters show, but she still estimated that two-thirds of people who cast ballots at the only on-campus polling place this November used a student ID.
Jenkins shared his concerns with lawmakers in late January by testifying against Senate Bill 10 in a committee hearing. Days later, the Senate passed SB 10 on a vote of 39 to 11. Every Republican supported it except Senator Greg Walker, who joined Democrats in opposing it.
“I think at best, it’s a misguided policy that is building on anti-student sentiment, and at worst, it’s a targeted form of voter suppression to try to make it harder for students to vote,” Jenkins told Bolts after the Senate passed the bill.
Voting rights advocates have now shifted their focus to the House, which reconvenes next week for the second half of the state’s legislative session. “I am hopeful that with continued grassroots pressure we will be able to kill SB 10,” said Julia Vaughn, executive director of Common Cause Indiana, “but it’s going to take a lot of work and some luck.” She hopes to persuade the House Speaker Todd Huston, who indicated some broad reluctance to overhaul election laws in early February. (Huston did not return a request for comment from Bolts.)…
“Donald Trump Announces Plan to Change Elections”
Sort of. The Newsweek headline should really read “Donald Trump Announces Policy Goals” for elections, since all of what he’s proposing would require legislation: “We’re gonna do things that have been really needed for a long time,” he said. “And we are gonna look at elections. We want to have paper ballots, one day voting, voter ID, and proof of citizenship.”
“The Surprising Impact of North Carolina’s New Voter ID Law”
NY Times: 2024 is the first general election under the state’s new voter ID law. Overall, the new voter ID law did not result in many votes being rejected. That said, the current law is significantly more voter-friendly than the original, which drew the legal challenge. North Carolina’s law is still stricter than most because it requires both mail and in-person voters to show proof of identity.
“But unlike the 2013 law, it offers voters an array of acceptable ID cards, from drivers licenses to student IDs to free state ID cards. If voters have no ID — older people who do not have a driver’s license and mail voters who do not have printers to copy their IDs, among many others — they can ensure their ballots count with the affidavit of explanation, or can show an ID later at a local elections office.”
Lots of interesting facts in this article:
- “November’s election offered some evidence that the voter ID law disproportionately hindered Democrats. Of the 2,169 provisional ballots involving ID problems, registered Democrats cast 42 percent, registered unaffiliated voters 30 percent and registered Republicans 26 percent, said Michael Bitzer, an expert on North Carolina politics at Catawba College.”
- Even a small impact might matter, as in the tight race for the judicial seat in NC this cycle.
- “Today, however, at least 35 states have ID requirements, a prerequisite that has become broadly popular among voters across party lines who see it as a common-sense precaution.”
Given the complete lack of evidence of in-person voter fraud, the popularity of these last still baffles me!!
Report: About 252,000 Texans Lack Voter ID and Would Need to Fill Out a Reasonable Impediment Declaration to Vote (and More Stats on Georgia)
“Republicans Ask US Supreme Court To Reinstate Arizona Voter Suppression Laws”
The Democracy Docket: The Republican National Committee and Arizona Republicans applied to the Supreme Court for emergency relief to reinstate Arizona’s strict proof of citizenship law.
“Republicans ask the Supreme Court to reject state voter registration forms if the voter did not provide documentary proof of citizenship with their application and block voters who have not provided documentary proof of citizenship from voting by mail or casting votes for president.”
Currently, because the law which governs state forms is blocked, “Arizona voters who register using a state voter registration form and have documentary proof of citizenship on file at the DMV will be fully registered,” even if they did not provide provide citizenship proof with their application to register. Meanwhile, the lower court has ensured that Arizona voters, who register using the state form, will not be barred from voting in federal elections even if they are have not provided documentary proof of citizenship because such proof is not required by federal law.
“Transgender voters say they face photo ID barrier”
Photo ID concerns across the pond.