Voter identification; signed statement in lieu of required form of identification, penalty. (HB19)

Introduced By

Del. Joe Lindsey (D-Norfolk) with support from co-patron Sen. Jennifer McClellan (D-Richmond)

Progress

Introduced
Passed Committee
Passed House
Passed Senate
Signed by Governor
Became Law

Description

Voter identification; signed statement in lieu of required form of identification; penalty. Permits a voter who does not show one of the required forms of identification when offering to vote to sign a statement that he is the named registered voter he claims to be in order to be permitted to cast a ballot. Such statement is signed subject to felony penalties for making false statements, punishable as a Class 5 felony. A voter who does not show one of the required forms of identification and does not complete or sign the statement shall be offered a provisional ballot according to the provisions of current law. The bill adds language regarding identification requirements for certain voters subject to the federal Help America Vote Act of 2002. The bill incorporates HB 190 and HB 878. Read the Bill »

Status

02/18/2020: passed committee

History

DateAction
11/19/2019Prefiled and ordered printed; offered 01/08/20 20100460D
11/19/2019Committee
11/19/2019Referred to Committee on Privileges and Elections
01/13/2020Assigned P & E sub: Elections
01/23/2020Impact statement from DPB (HB19)
02/04/2020Subcommittee recommends reporting with substitute (5-Y 1-N)
02/07/2020Reported from Privileges and Elections with substitute (14-Y 8-N) (see vote tally)
02/07/2020Committee substitute printed 20107618D-H1
02/07/2020Incorporates HB190 (Levine)
02/07/2020Incorporates HB878 (Sickles)
02/09/2020Read first time
02/10/2020Impact statement from VCSC (HB19H1)
02/10/2020Read second time
02/10/2020Committee substitute agreed to 20107618D-H1
02/10/2020Pending question ordered
02/10/2020Engrossed by House - committee substitute HB19H1
02/10/2020Impact statement from DPB (HB19H1)
02/11/2020Read third time and passed House (57-Y 43-N)
02/11/2020VOTE: Passage (57-Y 43-N) (see vote tally)
02/12/2020Constitutional reading dispensed
02/12/2020Referred to Committee on Privileges and Elections
02/18/2020Reported from Privileges and Elections with substitute (10-Y 3-N 1-A) (see vote tally)
02/18/2020Committee substitute printed 20108329D-S1
02/20/2020Impact statement from VCSC (HB19S1)
02/20/2020Constitutional reading dispensed (40-Y 0-N)
02/21/2020Passed by for the day

Comments

Ron Q writes:

Why should anyone be allowed to vote who doesn't have a valid photo id?
No reason.

Anthony Ricciotti writes:

Valid state ID is easy to procure. A voter should provide indisputable evidence of their identification and residence to ensure they are in fact the person voting. Valid government issued photo ID should be required.

Robert Tate writes:

All people voting should have to show proper identification with photo to prevent fraud at the polls, it's not like it is hard to obtain. Especially since everyone is crying about interference in elections these days.

Michele N Schumacher writes:

Opposed to this change. We are required to show our Id's when purchasing alcohol, certain prescription drugs, etc. To require a photo to vote is not onerous and same cab be easily acquired.

John Q Public writes:

Why on earth is it an onerous burden to provide a simple photo ID to vote? The only reason I can see for passing this bill is to enable voter fraud. I have to have an ID to drive, buy a gun, or even get liquor. Why would we lower the bar for something as important as voting?

Randy Bubb writes:

Everyone who votes should be required to present a valid photo id. Photo id's really aren't that difficult to get. And with the amount of "interference in elections", one would think it would be a good idea to require photo id. And in HB567, the only way the few people that would be able to use an indoor shooting range can get in, is to present a valid gov't issued photo id, along with photo and address verification. Why would you make it a requirement for a limited number of people, but not for the majority of people. Especially for something as important as voting? You all need to get on the same page as to what really requires elevated identification.

Waldo Jaquith writes:

And with the amount of "interference in elections", one would think it would be a good idea to require photo id.

There is no systemic interference in elections that voter ID addresses.

Mary Jones writes:

Accuracy method - use fingerprint method.

Post a Public Comment About this Bill



if you have one


(Limited HTML is OK: <a>, <em>, <strong>, <s>)