House Committee on Elections will come to order. I want to welcome our Sergeants at Arm and our Pages here today. Glad to have you. We have one bill on today’s committee. Of course that is the VIVA, Voter Identification Verification Act. That is sponsored by Representatives Warren, Murray, myself and Samuelson. There, I believe, is a PCS. There is a PCS that’s before the committee members. You should have that in your packet. Recognize Representative [??] moves that the PCS be before the committee for discussion. All those in favor please say Aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] AYE [SPEAKER CHANGES] All opposed No. The ayes have it, the PCS is in force. What we’re going to do, members, is where we’ve had quite a bit of public hearing and discussion on this bill, today is the day when the Elections Committee will take this bill up and it is the Chair’s intent that we will vote on this bill prior to 2:45 today. Out of the Elections Committee. Without further ado I would like to invite the other 3 sponsors to come to the, to come here to the front to present the bill and we will go ahead and start our deliberations. So I’ll let you guys pick in which order you want to start off. The floor is yours Representative Warren. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Chair. Ladies and Gentlemen, we had the bill out last week for discussion so we’re gonna run through it fairly quickly today. Go through the different parts, give y’all an opportunity to ask questions. Part 1, of course, refers to VIVA, the Voter Information Agency. This is a board of 3-5 members that will be assigned to advise the State board on a bunch of different outreach-type programs to, over a 2-year period, of outreach and voter registration, voter education, to bring the program and the provisions of the bill to fruition. On Section 3b, the Executive Director of the State Board of Election, he shall assign staff to support the voter information verification advisory board and to fulfill the different duties and responsibilities of that, of this act. Those responsibilities again include working with the local communities, the registered political parties in each county, and volunteers to organize and campaign of voter education and voter registration throughout the counties and to assist in the procurement of acceptable photo IDs as per outlined in this bill. Representative Tom Murray is going to go over the photo identifications requirements on all 3 forms of balloting. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Representative Warren, thank you Mr. Chairman. Beginning in Part 2 in Section 4, we [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Murray, if you would suspend just a minute. There’s a problem with the recorder. If you would just be at ease. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Committee will stand at ease for just a few moments. We’re recording the committee and apparently the recorder’s not working well at the moment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Testing, testing, yep. [SPEAKER CHANGES] All right, we’re back up and running, members. Representative Murray, go ahead, the floor is yours sir. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Beginning in Part 2 entitled Photo Identification in Section 4, this begins the language for requiring photo identification for voting in person. For registered voters voting curbside we have made some changes to account for persons with disabilities that are covered later in the document. But this is the section that requires the photo identification in order to vote. Photo identification definition starts at the bottom of the page. Part E, Subsection 1. And it details any expirat, any identification with a photo that is not more than 10 years expired from the date of issuance or the expiration date, issued by branch department agency of any entity of the United States, which is beyond just the state of North Carolina, so a driver’s license from another state would qualify under this subsection. And then in parts A through I we’ve got various forms of identification which will meet this threshold. Part 2 will have, we’re actually going to offer an amendment
Move E2, the tribal identification card. There's concern over some language that we're working through the tribal identification card to try to get that right. So we're going to remove that section in this committee today via amendment. We also added a veterans identification card in part three, issued by the US department of veterans affairs for use at VA medical facilities and we also continue to in part four, persons over the age of 70, if they had a valid ID on the date which they turned 70, it will always be able to used for a photo identification in order to vote. Section five deals with the evaluation of determination of non reasonable resemblance. A photo identification, there's a process that we have established if the pole worker or the elections official, when the person presents an identification, if they determine that it doesn't bare reasonable resemblance, there is a process. But this is construed in a light most favorable to the voter. And so that's section five deals with that situation. Section six deals with the religious objections to photograph and I believe Representative Samelson is going to address that. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Representative, thank you committee. There is a lot to this bill. On section six, which is page 4, we recognize there maybe people who for religious reasons, do not want to have their picture taken. And so we made an allowance by that by basically saying they will sign an affidavit that says that they have a religious objection to having their photo taken then they would not have to have it done. They can do that either at the time that they register, or they can do it later, if that religious objection through conversion or something else comes up later in their life. They can go in and add it. Or if they later decide that they no longer have a religious objection, they can go have it removed. But it's to recognize that people may have a reason not to want to have their picture taken for faith reasons and to recognize that. And then I think we've got Representative Murray coming back on some more pieces. We're going to bounce around on here between us. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes we are employing the division labor process on this legislation. So continuing in the legislation, section seven deals just as a section where we add the voter shall present the photo identification in addition to the signature attestation process that we have in current laws. So this is, that's what section seven is about. Section eight, additionally, when presenting a photo ID, is required and when the a person's seeking a vote, should need to present a photo ID in section eight. That's also addressed there. Section nine deals with curbside voting. So the original PCS we dealt with, special considerations for individuals with disabilities, and so if we wanted to address individuals that have a physical disability that prevents them from being able to physically walk into the poling location. That this is addressed at curbside voting, where they don't have to present a photo ID at curbside in order to vote because of their physical disability. And so that's where this section in, deals with that situation. And it includes documents that verify the address and the name of the individual to prevent. So to make sure that individual is able to vote at curbside without a photograph ID because of their physical disability. Section eleven deals with the counting of provisional ballots. If a voter comes to vote on election day and they don't have a photo ID, they will be offered the opportunity to cast a provisional ballot. And this is the, section eleven details the process by which that provisional ballot is counted in some exceptions to if, for example, an individual is unable to obtain a photo ID because of a natural disaster on or around election day within 60 days. If that prevented them from obtaining an ID they'd be able to have their provisional vote counted. That's all detailed in section eleven. Section twelve deals with how
Challenges, and it adds a section if the voter does not present a photo-identification then any other registered voter in that precinct can challenge that vote on election day. And part three deals with, starts the implementation discussion where we deal with fee. I believe Representative Samuelson is going to deal with the implementation, part of the implementation pieces. [SPEAKER CHANGES] And I was reminded to add something on the religious objection, that a religious rejection form needs to be signed at least 25 days before the election. if someone shows up to vote and says I've got a religious objection, did not sign it 25 days beforehand then they will go through the provisional ballot process and all of that the same way they would otherwise. I forgot to add that part. On the fees, the short version on the fees is if you do not have a photo ID and you need help securing one that we will cover the cost of doing that. We will reimburse the clerks, the court if they have a cost involved in doing a birth certificate or marriage certificate. The idea is the fee itself will not be an obstacle to someone getting a voter ID card. There are already some, you'll notice in section 13 some issues where we just clarified about how the homeless go about getting one, and then on E is where it talks about if they do not have other photo identification the division shall verify that the registration on the special identification card, that they just signed that they don't have anything else that they can use and they want the help for a free one. And that's basic it on the fees. The bottom line for us to remember is the idea is to make it as easy as possible for people to get this either if they don't have a drivers license this non operator photo ID card and to not have to carry an unburdened expense for it. So we're trying to make that as easy as possible. And I think that's the only part I had on the fees. Sorry, we kind of organized some of it so we're still getting it back on there. I think now it's Harry [??]. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Okay, so under the implantation pieces we also make some changes to the way that absentee ballots are requested. 16A, this is the application on container return envelope, when you need to return an absentee ballot there's an envelope that you're provided with. The signature of the voter is required under this legislation, a space for two witnesses and a space for any if the individual can't sign on their behalf a verifiable legal guardian can sign on behalf of the voter as well. Additionally we are on the envelope. there will be a prominent display of the unlawful acts for the violation if they violate any of the laws regarding voting in [??] or improper voting. Section16B, the issuance of absentee ballot with an application. It details that a request form is to be developed by the state board of elections if you decide to vote by absentee. There will be a list of information that's required and continuing that section continues to page 10. 16c is the method of requesting absentee ballots, this details all the information that's required on the form and subsection A one through six. So that's all the information that's going to be required on this form in order to request an absentee ballot. And this will include the either drivers license number, a non-operators number, the last four digits of the social security number will be required on the absentee request form. Section16D deals with how the absentee ballots are represented back to the board of elections for accounting. 16E defines the term verifiable legal guardian. Section 17 starts the education and publicity...
?? 18,19 and 20 all deal with State Board of Elections and how they will reimburse back to the DMV and register these, any direct costs from this. Section 19 deals with the, all the forms will require this, a prominent statement dealing with the Class I felony for improper voting. And this Section 20 is where we require into this election that the State Board of Elections report back to the Joint Legislative Elections Oversight Committee on how they are going to go digital and implement electronic and digital information in all polling locations and address facial recognition technology and potentially obtaining digital photographs of voters to help verify the identity. This is the direction that we would really like to go to help establish a technology based process so that voters can vote, even if they have a valid ID, they just don't have it with them. This is the process that we are asking the Board of Elections to come up with a plan and report back to the Joint Elections Oversight Committee. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Part 22, Section 22 covers the phase in of the different parts of the bill. Part 1 becomes effective July 1, 2013 and would expire on December 31, 2016. And if you recall, that's the part that refers to the Voter Information Verification Agency and the field operatives there in the outreach program. Part 2 becomes effective on January 1, 2016, and that's the hard fast date for the photo requirement. Sections 13 and 14 become effective October 1, 2013. Section 16 becomes effective on January 1, 2014 and applies to the primaries and the elections held on or after that date. Any election now between October 1, 2013 and January 1,2016, a registered voter may be asked if they have a photo identification at the polls but may not be required to do so. It's just kind of a dry run for getting folks oriented to the fact that the voter ID is going to be put in place and getting them use to that procedure. And also helps the poll workers get accustomed to asking for it. So it is another advantage for having the phase in. The remainder of the act becomes effective when it becomes law. And our current schedule - and again, the act will become effective only when the General Assembly appropriates funds in the Current Operations Appropriations Act of 2013, in order to implement it. Our schedule for the bill today is to hopefully answer your questions and take a vote on the bill today. Tomorrow we would turn the bill over to Finance and present it there. And next week we'd hope to have it through any other committee that needs to hear it and then also get it on the floor on Wednesday and Thursday next week. At that point, I think we are all ready to take some questions from you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] All right at this time -- [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Chair [SPEAKER CHANGES] -- we are going to open the floor to questions. I would ask, I heard somebody speak. Representative Ford, state your purpose please. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Inquiry to Chair. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman may state his inquiry. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I know you indicate that we would like to vote by 2:45, and there is a lot of amendments that may be sent forward. Are you prepared, are we prepared to give each person an opportunity to present his or her amendment, even if it requires us to return back, since the vote is going to be quite, to be taken today? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I've concurred with the Speaker on this, and if necessary, it's the Chair's intention that we would, if we are not done with our business in the committee, that we would adjourn or recess at 2:45 and come back after session just to try to see where we are on things. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Follow up Mr. Chair? [SPEAKER CHANGES] You may. Yes sir [SPEAKER CHANGES] In order to be fair to all persons who want to present amendments and want to speak,we would allow the person to present his or her, and then go forward. And then before we go back to that particular person, everyone would have an opportunity to speak, prior to that person speaking a second time. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The chair will monitor the flow of debate and will make sure the rules are applied. But i think your point is well taken. That is, and I think that's probably an admonition to the members of the committee to try to be respectful to other members.
?? so everybody can have their say. What's the old saying sometime everything gets said but not everybody says it. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes sir. We're now gonna open the floor to questions of the bills sponsors. Representative Iler I believe you'd indicated previously you had a question Sir. You may state that inquiry. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes Mr. Chair. Thank you. Question Representative Warren. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes sir. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Section 12 on page 7 is on the day of primary election or election any other registered voter of the precinct may challenge a person for one or more of the following reasons. Then it gives the fact that the photo id is one of those reasons. My question goes back to maybe existing statute on day of election is that interpreted to mean early voting day included in that early voting days or however many there may be. On the second question is about any other registered voter of the precinct frequently poll observers are assigned to places other than their own precinct not only for early voting which they have a limited number of sights, but also between precincts within the same county. So is this going to cover all those situations where a legitimate poll observer can do this? Does it have to be a person on election day only from that precinct. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I believe that this is existing and I'll let staff correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe this is existing language and the only thing we change here is one of the challenges item #5 on that but I'll defer to staff if I'm incorrect on that. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Are you asking staff to comment on that? [SPEAKER CHANGES] If I'm correct, yes sir. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Warren this is existing ?? is simply adding one more list of reasons that could be challenged on the day of election or primary. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Follow-up Mr. Chair. [SPEAKER CHANGES] You may. [SPEAKER CHANGES] This must be a question for the staff but is that generally interpreted to include early voting days and people from other precincts or is it not, because that's what's existing, that's what's happening now. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The law is drafted for the challenges allowed on the day of the primary election would not apply to the early bidding bacause that is an absentee vote rather than a vote cast on election day. The statute does ssy that it has to be any other registered voter of the precinct who can make the challenge on election day. There is a seperate process set out on the statute for election challenges that are not on election day and those are not polled into this because this is addressing the election day challenges. [SPEAKER CHANGES] One last follow-up. [SPEAKER CHANGES] One last question. [SPEAKER CHANGES] So I understand that is addressed elsewhere in the statute? [SPEAKER CHANGES] That's correct. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Alright next question I have is from Representative Harrison and then I have Fisher and Ross. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. Chair. I have three quick questions of the bills sponsors. I did not hear this articulated but is there a photo id requirement for absentee ballots? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Absentee ballots you can submit a copy of your photo id, you can also use a have ADOT commit, you can include your last four digits of your social security number or your drivers license number. I believe on the drivers license number we're requesting the state of issuance on the drivers license so there's no confusion between a North Carolina's license and an out of state license. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you for that. The in here you're permitting the use of id card for the UNC and north community colleges, but not private colleges. Is that accurate? Could you just explain the rationale for that please. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Sure. Well the Univeristy systems are a government issued card and we're trying to stay within the confines of the government issued card and obviously the private universities wouldn't fall into that category. In quite, that's one of the issues that's coming up with the tribal cards that we hope to address today. That is we only have one favorably recognized tribe here in North Carolina. The other seven tribes that are state recognized would not be getting a government issued card. There's some other things that are problematic with the tribal cards. They don't, a lot of them don't fit into the photo id requirement and dates of issuance, and things like that. Those are some things we're looking to take back out of the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you and just one last follow-up. [SPEAKER CHANGES] You may state your final question. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, thank you Mr. Chair. I just, do you all have an anticipation of the cost of this implementation either both for setting up this new bureaucracy and also for the education of the citizen reel on this new photo requirement?
Is it is not physical in your head and use this is also here to answer it when I went to an interest in the today fact that DLE window really didn't mismatch on paper 29 different factors between what important elections at the DMV had a number hang down for more like 300 and 318,008 is it that I can match and knowledge and data management with 100 hundred hundred hundred 15 on the happen of them not cited in the last 10 years which leads you roughly 200,000) even bring up certain Amax's that Sally Hemmings on the fiscal note on nobody really nice we would think that's a nice part of the nice it would cost advantages emaciated would be less happy counseling not reluctantly experienced in the United States and things are matching issues week it had dramatically fewer people requesting the car and let it appear instead of 2197 views 97% of voters without question have some fun and I basically 3% or even wondering about this question was coming from represented Fisher as you message require you to Canon and on terms that are thinking I might here I intended I can keep adding and I can't bat the plan election has to have a witness to a send the absentee document by mail to the person is requesting at the address I have been and where the person who is battling absentee Hannah when I so much as we were suggesting in this bill is that currently occurred while you can write and you wanted Esquivel and that is your request the beer he has a format like this and this is the official forms of the handwritten note will be to request this form this form be modified so has room for a person the site and attestation that they've assisted in the completion of this form you under penalty of perjury and other changes to the the process for Esquivel includes the return envelope which will have room for three signatures there say anything is assisting your a basically FF two witnesses for the absentee ballot if you castanet yourself and if someone else's actually assisting in filling out the ballot there's room for them to sign others well so there's some security measures are put into that's an issue I Kyla you message follow my hat if you have frontline helically entering you want to And an absentee ballot that person is in a country where there are other people here are registered voters in United States of America and that their absentee ballot in at least anyway same influence need that sort of leave and not as sexy regarding from from other places you are thinking of us didn't say he living are studying the bride or whenever I wanted that I another online person what will it staff take the question care representatives are they uniformed military have received letters I will cover those individuals living ever see and they would not need a witness and they could email their ballot thank you and then he pretended he has that ever been in and take him him us at the end of the something! So in everything I was confusing for me and using me AEA's two requests out the request form is really getting messier information to verify that you are legitimately making the pancake and request one for a child in Canada instead on and it's not the one it requires the extra signatures requires extra signatures is that when you guys submit your actual ballot incidentally I can get the information requested to a ballot is slightly different in the information required to basically cast your ballot Fen/Phen and will address the issue she had it for I receive in the next accompanying the underdog to suggest for local people requesting and thinking
[Speaker changes.] Our next question's gonna come from Representative Ross. [Speaker changes.] Thank you, Mister Chairman. I just have some documentation that I'd like to submit for the record and have handed out to the members. Can I just give it to the Sargent-at-Arms? [Speaker changes.] That can be done now...that's fine. [Speaker changes.] Thank you. [Speaker changes.] The next...further questions...I think Representative Michaux, you had your hand raised? [Speaker changes.] Yes, sir, Mister Chairman. On the matter...let me be clear, you do NOT have to have a photo ID in order to cast an absentee ballot. Is that correct? [Speaker changes.] Correct. [Speaker changes.] But in order to qualify to vote, you must have a voter ID under normal circumstances. Is that correct? [Speaker changes.] I wanna make...in order to vote, [Speaker changes.] In order to qualify to vote... [Speaker changes.] In order to qualify to vote...are you talkin' bout to qualify to register to vote? [Speaker changes.] No, Ma'am. I'm saying to qualify to vote. [Speaker changes.] To qualify to vote, if you're voting absentee, you provide the documents that we mentioned. If you are qualified to vote in person, then you bring a photo ID. [Speaker changes.] Mister Chairman, may I follow up? [Speaker changes.] You may. [Speaker changes.] My question is...the only way that you can be qualified to vote when you go to the polls, is by showing an ID, a photo ID. Is that correct? [Speaker changes.] This legislation does not add any new qualifications to voting. It only...simply requires that the voter have a photographic identification to help identify themselves when they present themselves to vote. It does not add a new qualification...the qualifications to vote are clearly listed in statute and that deal with registration. In order to vote, this is just a presentment...this is just, just a...showing up with a photo identification, it is not a qualification. [Speaker changes.] May I follow up, Mister Chairman? [Speaker changes.] You may. [Speaker changes.] Then, by you saying that, can I show up at the polls and not show an ID and vote? [Speaker changes.] Yes, you can. You'll be offered a provisional ballot. [Speaker changes.] Second question is with that provisional ballot, if I don't come back and show that photo ID, will that ballot be counted? [Speaker changes.] It will not be counted but you will be offered the opportunity to vote a provisional ballot. But it does not add a qualification to vote. [Speaker changes.] Further questions from members of the committee? I understand that Representative Floyd was next. [Speaker changes.] Mister Chair, I just want to advance the conversation at the appropriate time, how will we be recognized to send forth amendments? [Speaker changes.] You will. Representative Cunningham, you have a question, Ma'am? [Speaker changes.] Yes, I do. [Speaker changes.] You may state it. [Speaker changes.] I see that on the religious objections, we're only requiring 25 days in advance but for, if I am the guardian, I'm required to have additional signatures. I think that's a conflict. If we gonna do it for one, let's do it for all. [Speaker changes.] Do we have any other questions of the bills sponsors. Representative Ross. [Speaker changes.] Thank you, Mister Chairman, I only had a question based on the response to Representative Michaux' question so this is for Representative Murry. [Speaker changes.] I yield. [Speaker changes.] Representative Murry, if you get a chance to vote but your vote isn't counted, how does that comply with the constitutional requirement that you can't have any additional qualifications to vote? [Speaker changes.] In the India...when the Indiana Voter ID Law was challenged in the US Supreme Court, I quote from the decision by the US Supreme Court with regards to the Indiana Voter ID Law..."the voter ID requirement does not add a qualification to vote, it is merely regulatory in nature." And so that's what this law does and we think it complies with the US Constitution and the North Carolina Constitution based on US Supreme Court decisions. [Speaker changes.] Mister Chairman, follow up? [Speaker changes.] You may state your follow up. [Speaker changes.] But Representative Murry, the North Carolina Constitution has its own qualifications so the US Constitution, the US Supreme Court is not permitted to interpret the North Carolina Constitution and our North Carolina Constitution has been interpreted to say that you cannot add qualifications to vote in the past and it has been interpreted that you can't add qualifications for office in the past and so the Indiana Supreme Court opinion... [Speaker changes.] It's the US Supreme Court...apologize...the United States Supreme Court made a decision based on the Indiana Voter ID Law. [Speaker changes.] Right. Well, but Representative Murry, [Speaker changes.] Mister Chairman, may I continue cause I don't wanna not go through the chair? [Speaker changes.] Representative Murry, were you finished answering the question at that point? [Speaker changes.] Certainly. [Speaker changes.] The United States Supreme Court.... [Speaker changes.]
Does not have the authority to interpret what the North Carolina constitution has to say about its citizens. It can only interpret the North Carolina constitution as it may conflict with the U.S. Constitution, but Federalism, which this body loves, says that only the North Carolina Supreme Court can interpret the North Carolina Constitution as it applies in North Carolina. Therefore, my question is the same as Representative ???: is letting somebody vote but not counting their ballot sufficient to say that you're staying within the constitution for who has a right to vote? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Ms. Chairman, the Georgia voter ID laws.. Georgia has a supreme court, Georgia has a constitutional clause very similar to the state of North Carolina's, and the Georgia Supreme Court interpreted the challenge by the Democratic Party of Georgia to the Georgia voter ID law, the Georgia Supreme Court interpreted the Georgia provision of the Georgia constitution, which is very similar to North Carolina's, to allow the legislature to proscribe reasonable regulations as to how these qualifications shall be determined. It is completely within the authority of the legislature to determine what voters have in order to present themselves to vote. Just like signatures ??? in North Carolina. We had a supreme court case dealing with a situation where a couple Nightindale town council members wanted to run for mayor, and the Supreme Court clearly demonstrated in its 70 year old opinion, that so long as there's no unjust discrimination, the state might exercise our police powers to suppress whatever evils or incident or primary or convention for the designation of candidates for election to public office. And so statutes proscribing these rules and regulations are constitutional. If we can do it, if we can set up reasonable regulations on who can run for office, we can do the same thing for people who are voting for those offices. And so our North Carolina Supreme Court has interpreted our constitution in the very same way. The legislature can, within a reasonable basis, have regulations for voting that help improve the voting process. We have the ability to do this in the legislature. It's been upheld by two state supreme court decision--one in Georgia, one in North Carolina--and the U.S. Supreme Court has done the same, so it doesn't violate either the North Carolina or the U.S. Constitution. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Chairman, just a final comment on that? [SPEAKER CHANGES] You may state your comment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Georgia is not North Carolina, and last year seven of this body's acts were declared unconstitutional. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative ???, do you have a question for the bill sponsors? [SPEAKER CHANGES] What I'd like, I have another question, but I'd like to follow up on that question of what just transpired, if you don't mind. My question is, somebody who ever has this, there is a private college that issues and ID to a North Carolina student. That ID will not be available to that student to use to vote? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Correct. We were using government issued IDs. Part of the question you get with expanding to other private colleges and universities is keeping track of which ones qualify, which ones don't. Then you raise the question of should you use employers. Once you go out of the government-issued into private-issued, there's no clear line, so we made it on government-issued IDs. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Chairman? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further questions to the sponsors. Do you have a question for the sponsors? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I have a statement I'd like to make in terms of what transpired a few minutes ago, in terms of constitutionality. [SPEAKER CHANGES] You may debate.. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, sir. Mr. Chairman, one of the problems that I'm having with this bill is the constitutional provisions in the North Carolina state constitution which sets up the qualification for voters. Now in going back and looking at it, for instance, in the constitution of 1868, we thought the qualification for voting and office-holding were abolished in that particular constitution. In the constitution of 1875, they disqualified for voting purposes persons guilty of certain crimes. If you go look at today's version of the constitution,
Section six of our constitution. There were several things that are very significant about that and one of them is, I'd just like to let you know what section six says so you can make up your own mind ?? at least let the court decide what's going to be there. Section six of our constitution, which is the suffrage and eligibility to hold office. Section one of the constitution states that every person born in the United States, and every person who has been naturalized, 18 years of age, and possessing the qualifications sent out in this article shall be entitled to vote at any election by the people of the State except, except as herein otherwise prohibited. And then the qualifications for voters are set out in our constitution, that constitution that we swore to uphold as long as it was not inconsistent with the constitution of the United States. Qualification is the residence period for state elections. The second qualification is the residence period for presidential election. Now, what the constitution does give this body the authority to do is to enact laws, general laws, governing the registration of voters. The registration of voters. So if you want to require a voter, a potential voter, to have a photo ID for their registration you might be able to do that. If you want to require, as a qualification of voting, that a photo ID be used, that is not a qualification set out in the constitution of North Carolina, and I just want to be, to let you... that that's what it is, and let me just add this to you, because the reason I have so much... I was a part of a group. I was a part of a group in the 1960's that were reviled for trying to get voting rights for a group of people that had been denied those voting rights over the years, and since the time, since we have had the Voting Rights Act, and all of the others that gave us the opportunity to cast that ballot, we have had no problems with going to the polls and casting a vote. You raise a specter of fraud where it has been shown, even your speaker has said that fraud is not in question. But the integrity of the vote is in question. No one has questioned the integrity of that vote even since we had to fight to get that integrity. We had to fight to get that vote. I'm here to tell you that I will fight till the death, because a lot of folks that I know died for that right to vote without being hampered, without it being fettered at all. And I will fight to the end to make sure that every vote that is cast is a vote that was cast free... and free of any type of... whatever you want to put on it. If you want to suppress it that's another question, because we're going to argue that one too. But this is the first step in suppressing a vote for people who have fought, and died, to have that vote given to them. We know that you have the power to do it and you're going to do it whether it's good, bad, or indifferent. So, that's ?? Mr. Chairman and I have a couple of amendments that you can take for whatever they are worth. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further question of the bill's sponsors, Dr. Foldsen did you have a question of the bill's sponsors? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. Chairman. I have a question about the number of people that will actually be effected by the requirement. It seems to exempt people curbside voting, and people who vote by absentee ballot. Now it won't stop people voting people... people who are classified voting absentee, although they may physically go to a poll. In the listing of the requirements for being exempted for having to have a voter ID you list several exceptions that could be use like documents, utility bills, etc. My question is how many people do we know are going to be effected by these exemptions? Either by absentee ballot either by mail, or by one-stop voting, or by curbside voting? My numbers show about 42%...
-people classified as absentee voters in the last election, are we including them as people not having had voter IDs? Just the curbside people, can you give me some numbers on that? Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I want to make sure I got all your questions. If you go one stop in person, you will show a photo ID. Even if it's classified as a type of absentee ballot, you will show a photo ID. If you go and do the paper absentee, the mailed-in, maybe we should call it the mail-in absentee ballot, then you do have to provide to have the documents and the extra signatures. If you do curbside, there are also extra standards on the curbside for someone who has to have someone else who has a photo ID to verify that you are who you say you are. So there is a back up on that. In terms of the numbers, I don't think we have the numbers because it varies by election and it's one of those things we won't know until we begin to implement it, whether it will change the number of people who vote absentee or the number of people who do curbside. But there are, in each of those areas, increased evidences of, and again, not qualifications for voting, but evidence that you already meet the existing qualifications, that you are who you say you are, that you live where you say you live. And so those three- and I'm not sure if we got all your questions or not, I think there was another question at the end. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Might you follow up, please? [SPEAKER CHANGES] You may state you state your follow up. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Essentially, is there a system here to pick up anomalies that develop as a result of people, if we think that they may, in fact, be distorting the requirements of voter ID by mailing in an absentee ballot, in the cases in which they'll have a document, it's the only thing required. Or more curbside voting where you really are required to present a person, the person with you, they have an ID, but they're not the one voting. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The person on- well, yes. Question A, could you catch anomalies later? Yes, future legislative bodies could certainly do that, and part of having the Viva group is that they will be helping to educate people and letting that education works both ways. They will be educating people to vote, but also, if they start to see something they certainly have an avenue to tell the board of election that they perceive a problem. Don't forget that on all those other ones, there is increased identity in the people who are signing, for instance if you're curbside and you don't have an ID and you can't come in and vote and I'm driving you, I'll also sign and put my address and sign under penalty that I'm verifying that you are who you say you are. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Do you have any other questions for the bill's sponsors? If not- a question. You may state your question, Representative Richardson. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm on page nine and I'm under section 16V and then it goes all the way down to 81, line 29, line 30, 31. [SPEAKER CHANGES] We can't hear you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I'm sorry. I forgot to move my mic. Page nine, section 16V and I'm at lines 29 to possibly 33. What if I am sick, I don't have a nears relative to pick up ballot, and I don't need a legal guardian, I'm just in the hospital. So who would be able- or, I may not be able to get to the board of election to get a ballot. Who would- are you saying that no one else would pick up a sign for me to get an absentee ballot in this situation? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Are you talking about on election day or before election day? [SPEAKER CHANGES] It is simultaneously issues of absentee ballots who have application, and it's talking about the fact that it must be a nears relative or legal guardian. I could be sick and not have a nears relative living near me, or I may not need a legal guardian, so I'm saying are we not going to allow anyone else to pick up that ballot or sign for me to get that ballot? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I think I know the answer as long as it's not on election day, but I'll let staff answer that. [SPEAKER CHANGES] ?? [SPEAKER CHANGES] That is the current law on requesting ?? If you do become sick, you do have the opportunity to still request an absentee ballot up to five o'clock on the Tuesday before the election, not later than 5pm on the day- return the ballot, I'm sorry. However, it is narrow to currently your near relative or verifiable legal guardian. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Hall, did you have a question? Duane Hall, did you have a question? You had your hand raised earlier and I think I passed it. Did you have a question? [SPEAKER CHANGES] ?? support an amendment. An amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Right. If there are no other questions at this time, I think we probably ought to start taking up the amendment.
Representative Murray has an amendment to the bill, have copies of that amendment been distributed? If not Sargent Arms [??] please distribute.That's H589AST25V2. And in the interest of time if the members of - the number of members that have sent amendments if there's no objection I'm going to go ahead and direct the staff go ahead and start distributing the amendments so that folks can be reading those. Any of the amendment sponsors don't want theirs distributed? I don't hear any - all right, I'll take silence as acquiescence so we're going to do that too. Representative Murray you may explain your amendment sir. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. Chairman. On page three of the bill lines 19 through 21, this is where we're deleting the travel identification card language until we can figure out just exactly the full scope of what that entails. So we're going to delete lines 19 through 21 on page three. And then on page 13 line 15, this deals with the corporate guardianship. [SPEAKER CHANGES] You can continue, that's just... [SPEAKER CHANGES] On page 13, line 15, this deals with corporate guardianship, we're going to increase the number of names a corporation may submit from three to ten. This is a recommendation from the folks at the ark [??] of North Carolina to increase a list of named individuals from three to ten. Now I move adoption of the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion or debate on the gentleman's amendment? Seeing none, [??] favor the adoption of the amendment will please say aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Opposed no. The ayes have it, the amendment is adopted. The next amendment that we will take will be from the gentleman from Durham representative Michaux, and this would be 589ATJ17B5. This amends page three lines 18 through 19, identification card. Representative Michaux you're recognized to explain your amendment sir. It's ATJ17, this is the one that adds in the identification card issued for government program of public assistance. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes sir Mr. Chairman, I have it. What this amendment does it merely adds an identification card issued for a government program of public assistance. There are agencies of the government, any government, state, local or federal government that issue cards to people who get food stamps and this type of thing and we ask that this be put in their - one of the identification cards. [??] [SPEAKER CHANGES] Any of the bill sponsors wish to comment on the amendment? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes. This amendment is still subject to the requirements in E and 1 which requires an expiration date and a photo requirement. I think this is already included in the legislation. I have no problem with this amendment, I would call this kind of one of those belt and suspender type amendment and so I have no problem with this amendment. I would be all right with it. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion, further debate on the amendment? Seeing none, [??] favor the adoption of the amendment please signify by saying aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] As opposed no. [SPEAKER CHANGES] No. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The ayes have it, the amendment is adopted. The next amendment we'll take, we'll stay with the gentleman from Durham on another amendment. This is H589AST18, this is the one that would amendment page thee lines 36 and 37, the gentleman from Durham is recognized to explain his amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] This I think Mr. Chairman, this amendment the register voter who has a photo identification that is more than 10 years old, or beyond that expiration, if an election worker knows that voter and can independently confirm that voters identity then that photo identification can be used.
Members of the committee just make sure the amendment that is being considered is H589AST18, the members all have a copy of that amendment. Everybody clear which one we're talking about. Either of the bills sponsors wish to debate the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. Chairman, I would oppose this amendment. This allows an exception that's way too wide for requiring a photo ID. So if the intent of this general assembly is to increase integrity of the photo process and have folks that make sure the person that presents themselves to vote is the person who they say they are, this is an exception that's just a little too wide and I would ask members to oppose the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion, further debate? Representative Blust is recognized to debate the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Question for representative Michaux, what would independently confirm entail? Would that just be wave them on through, would they have to sign some sort of document or how would this independent confirmation work in practice? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Well it's like one of the registration workers at my poll whose been working there 10 years and knows me and I've got a photo ID of me that's expired and I fall into that H category, that expired 10 years ago, and it doesn't favor me right now. That judge or that person who's looking at me says yes, that's him, I remember him when he was like that, that's who he says he is. And that's what I'm talking about, I'm talking about a poll worker. I'm not talking about somebody else that's standing out there. It's an election worker that I'm talking about. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion, debate? Representative Blust you're recognized to debate the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Comment, if we were in the earlier times where most poll workers knew the voters this kind of thing might work but I would just point out for example, I go into the middle district bankruptcy court a whole lot in Greensboro, and the federal marshalls there know who I am, they know most of the other attorneys and yet I've got to have a photo ID. I've trained myself now to feel my pocket for my wallet, but even though they know me I can't get into that building without a photo ID so I really don't have a problem with the same requirement applying to everyone including voters, people are just going to have to get educated that you've got to take your photos ID or you're going to vote provisional. So I oppose the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion, further debate on the amendment? Seeing none, all those who favors the adoption of the amendment offered by the gentlemen from Durham please signify by saying aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Those oppose no. [SPEAKER CHANGES] No. [SPEAKER CHANGES] In the opinion of the Chair the no's have it, the no's do have it and the amendment fails. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Next amendment we'll take is from representative Harrison which is H589ATC26 which amends the bill on page three, lines 18 to 19. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I don't have that one. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Who all doesn't have that one? All right, it's making its way. I'm going to let her go ahead and explain the amendment, you should receive the amendment momentarily. Representative Harrison you are recognized to explain your amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. Chair, this simply adds the addition of a public or non-public high school identification card. If we were sticking with the theme of government issued ID's there are some high school students who are eligible to vote so I would urge the committees support. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Is it the bill sponsors desire to comment on the amendment? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes Mr. Chairman. The problem with this amendment is that it includes non-public high schools and the theme of the ID's that we're requiring to present for being able to vote are public government issued photo ID's so I would ask members to oppose the amendment because we don't have control over the security and confidence that we're trying to go for in this legislation and I would oppose the amendment. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Chair. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Does the lady wish to debate her amendment a second time? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I would like to offer perfecting the amendment and remove the non-public high school. [SPEAKER CHANGES] If the lady would simply withdraw the amendment and then we'll have...
[...}you are prepared, and come back to it. That amendment is withdrawn. The next amendment that we're going to take up is Representative Fisher's amendment, H589ATJ15 which amends the bill on page 2, line 13. H589ATJ15; do all members have a copy of that amendment? Alright. Representative Fisher, you are recognized to explain your amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Ladies and gentleman of the committee, this amendment just makes that section consistent in terms of disseminating in preparation for this new law. On line 13, it says, "information may be distributed," but the amendment says that it "shall be distributed," and I believe it adds some consistency to what's already been stated above there, where it says, "the State Board of Elections shall disseminate information." I think that we need to use all forms of media and information to get the word out about this new law, and so I would ask the committee to please support this amendment. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Do the bill's sponsors wish to comment on the amendment? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes. Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This makes the legislation more proscriptive on the State Board of Elections, instead of permissive, and I think we should trust the judgment and give the State Board of Elections flexibility in order to execute this education program as they see fit. Instead of restricting them to do everything in this, we want to keep it a menu of options that they may be able to choose, and so, I ask members to oppose the amendment to allow the State Board of Elections flexibility to carry out this education program as they see fit. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion on that; the lady from Buncombe may debate her amendment a second time. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. If you read the sentence that this is adding the "shall too," all it's saying is that the Board of Elections would work by using public service announcements, print, radio, television, online, and social media. It's already there; I just think that we're just opening up the possibilities for them to get the word out about this legislation. So, I would ask the body to approve the amendment. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion or debate; Representative Bell, you're recognized to debate the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It appears, reading that sentence, that you're requiring all those different media venues. It says, "and," not, "or." So, I believe that it is highly, highly proscriptive, and almost impossible to comply with. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion? Further debate? I'm seeing not. So, if any of us favor the adoption of the amendment by the lady from Buncompe please signify by saying, "aye." Those opposed, "no." In opinion of the Chair, the "no's" have it. The "no's" do have it, and the amendment fails. The next amendment we're going to take up is H589ATB13, offered by Representative Ross. The amendment's on page 6, lines 42 to 43. The lady from Wake has the floor to explain her amendment. It's ATB13, page 6, lines 42 to 43. Did someone say they didn't have it? You don't have it? ?? Make sure Representative Speciale has a copy of that. Representative Ross, the floor is yours to explain your amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you very much. This has to do with people who vote the provisional ballot because they didn't have the photo I.D. when they went to vote, and it gives them two different ways of being able to have that ballot counted. One, is by personally filing an attestation, coming back to the Board of Elections to do it, and the other one is by getting the attestation form, and then being able to mail it in, and have that postmarked within three days at the canvas. Many other states allow you to do it this way. They don't require you to physically come back with a photo I.D. in order to prove that you are who you are. So, this would be a double attestation a person would have to sign at the polls, then they'd have this separate attestation that still takes some more effort. So, I think it would show pretty securely that it's not a question of identity fraud, or anything like that. And again, it's similar to many of the other states that have required photo I.D. to allow people to do that, and I move the adoption of the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Do the bill's sponsors desire to comment on the amendment? [SPEAKER CHANGES] The major concern I have with this particular [...] END
particular minute that an individual could… This is just basically a way around the photo ID requirement of the legislation, and the individual could vote provisionally under this amendment and come back to the county board office and sign a declaration, and we would never have any idea whether the individual coming to vote was the same person who came back and signed the declaration. There’s no way to verify that. That’s one of the major problems with this amendment, and so I would oppose the amendment because it basically is a get out of jail free card for the photo ID requirement in this legislation. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion? Representative Michaux. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Murry, you just said that the person who signed the provisional ballot has to come back and file an attestation. Is that all they have to do when they come back and after they file a provisional ballot? [SPEAKER CHANGES] That’s what this amendment would allow for, and I don’t think that’s what we’re going for with this legislation. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further… [SPEAKER CHANGES] Is the gentleman wishing to debate or prepare him a question? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Well I’m trying to… I’d like to debate the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized to debate the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The amendment says that the person votes and then that vote can be challenged. It doesn’t say anything about what you just said, Representative Murry. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Ross is recognized to… Do you wish to debate your amendment a second time? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes. [SPEAKER CHANGES] You’re recognized. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. First of all, it is not any kind of get out of jail free card. You will then have two signatures from this person that will match up that will be able to be matched up to the signature files, the same way that you’re doing it with absentee votes. The person will have signed twice under penalty of perjury and have to take this extra effort. I would argue to you that it is more secure than the absentee voting. You have two opportunities, two separate felonies and two signatures. It is more secure than absentee voting and it is done in many other states that require photo ID, so I don’t… I’m having a hard time, other than trying to just keep enforcing the photo as the only way of being secure, to see where the gentleman’s objections come from. [SPEAKER CHANGES] This amendment is… If I may, Mr. Chairman, this amendment is less restrictive than the absentee process because we require HAVA documents and other identifying information as for social security number, driver’s license, non-operator ID in order to apply for an absentee ballot, so this is less secure than the absentee ballot process outlines in this law, and it’s a giant loophole that doesn’t improve voter integrity in this legislation, which is the goal. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion, further debate on the amendment from Representative Ross? Seeing not, so many as favor the adoption of the amendment, please signify by saying aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] As opposed, no. [SPEAKER CHANGES] No. [SPEAKER CHANGES] In the opinion of the Chair, the no’s have it. The no’s do have it and the amendment fails. The next amendment we’ll take up is, coming back to the gentleman from Durham, H589AST19, which amends the bill on page 2, lines 36 to 37. Representative Michaux, you’re recognized to explain your amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] what this amendment does, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, any person who does not present photo ID and the election knows that voter and independently confirms that voter’s identity, the voter shall not be required. That’s basically the same amendment we had before, so you’re going to do basically the same thing you did before, right? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Bill sponsors wish to make a comment on the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Michaux, if the election worker knows that person so well, then they should tell them that they need to get a photo ID by 2016. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion, further debate on the amendment from the gentleman from Durham? Seeing none, so many as favor the adoption of the amendment, please signify by saying aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Those opposed, no. [SPEAKER CHANGES] No. [SPEAKER CHANGES] In the opinion of the Chair, the no’s have it. The no’s do have it and the amendment fails. The next amendment we’re going to take is H589ATB12 by Representative Harrison. This is the one having to do with a private accredited college or university. The lady from Guilford is recognized to explain her amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Chair. There are 89 thousand students in North Carolina at private colleges; there are about 220 thousand in our public universities. I’ve been looking at the list of photo ID requirements for other states and I don’t see other states that make the distinction between a public university and a private college as the ones that allow student IDs
[SPEAKER CHANGES] Allow student IDs, and I think there are number that allows student IDs to be used and I think its a harsh hit not to allow those students that attend private colleges to use an ID, so I would urge the committee’s support. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The bills sponsors desire comment on the amendment. Recognized. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Chairman, we would oppose this amendment because, like I said, the goal that we’re going after are government issued photo ID’s, because we have more direct influence and control over that as the States legislature, and so we would oppose this amendment. And not every state that does require a photo ID allows for private colleges and institutions. And so we did research on this when we developing our list, and its not complete, and so we went with the list that we identified looking at other legislation from other states and we were comfortable with state universities for student IDs and we didn’t want to extend it to private colleges and universities. I’d ask that you oppose the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion, further debate on the amendment? Representative Blust, you’re recognized. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. Chairman, I just want to say something because it might pertain to other amendments to, but under this bill, if I had my way, and I drafted the bill, I think I’d leave off all student IDs on the grounds, with the belief that almost every student gets a drivers license as quickly as its possible to do and given the overriding nature of the bill in that it is very easy to go get a photo ID if you don’t have one, very easy. Its very easy to vote in this state, after this bill passes, it will still be exceedingly easy to vote. So I don’t see it as much of a problem if we didn’t even have the student IDs in the bill in the first place. Because there is a way that everyone whose eligible can vote very easily if the bill passes the way it is. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further Discussion or debate? Representative Wood. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Question for the bill sponsor. [SPEAKER CHANGES] You are recognized to state your question. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I was just sitting here thinking that one of our premier institutions would not be allowed an opportunity to vote thats due. They would not be allowed to participate in the electoral process of the state. [SPEAKER CHANGES] They would be allowed to vote, and they would be allowed to participate. They just wouldn’t be allowed to use their student ID card for their ID. They could use other forms of ID card, and if they needed help securing a non operator government issued ID, we would help them. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further Discussion further debate on the amendment? Seeing none. So many as favor the adoption of the amendment. Oh, I’m sorry. Representative McManus, you’re recognized to debate the amendment, sorry. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Oh, thats okay. Having two daughters, that neither received their drivers licenses until after they were in college, one at 19 and one at 20, and one that attended a state university and one that attended a private university. Honestly, the private university had stricter standards for replacing the student ID, and that was Elon, then the state University which was the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill. So I wish you would consider the private school student IDs. Like I said, it was harder to replace one at Elon, then it was a Chapel Hill, and my girls didn’t get their drivers licenses. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion, further debate? Seeing none. So many as favor the adoption of the amendment but the lady from Guilford please signify by saying aye. Those opposed No. [SPEAKER CHANGES] No. [SPEAKER CHANGES] In the opinion of the chair, the no’s have it. The no’s do have it, and the amendment fails. Let’s see, Representative Harrison, I believe we have one more amendment from you H589ATC28, which was the identification card, okay that was concerning the public high school. This is your amended, amendment you’ve sent, is that correct? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes, thank you Mr. Chair. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The lady is recognized to explain. [SPEAKER CHANGES] This amendment simply adds the opportunity for use of identification cards issued by public high schools in North Carolina. And again in reviewing how other states handle it, these seem to be commonly accepted, and there are a lot of high school students who are voting. So I urge the committee support. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Any sponsors desire comment on the amendment? [SPEAKER CHANGES] This falls under of government issued photo ID and so I would support this amendment, and I think you should support and vote your conscience . [SPEAKER CHANGES] Okay, Representative ??, does the gentlemen which to state inquire or debate the amendment? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Question for the bill sponsor. [SPEAKER CHANGES] You may state your inquire. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Murray, wouldn’t this apply to very few...
I mean most high school students eligible to vote? Dont you have to be eighteen to vote? [SPEAKER CHANGES] That's correct. You can vote at 17 if your turn 18 by election day. And so it could apply to some 17 year olds in a primary situation but that's still, you're still talking about just a handful of students. But at the end of the day, this is a government issued photo ID that is still subject the expiration date and photo requirements. So i still think this is subject to the additional requirements. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Follow up President Murray, are there any concerns in your research, did you find any concerns about whether a high school id be much easier to obtain than a university or drivers license. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Valor, I think the school has a legitimate interest in making sure that the folks on our campus are our students and should be there. And so i think that's a similar interest were trying to go for on improving integrity to vote. So i think the similar concerns are present in universities. At the end of the day its still a government issued photo id that's required to have an expiration date or an issuance day 10, that should be less than 10 years old. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion, further debate on the amendment. If you not so much favor the adoption of the amendment sent forth my the lady from Gilbert, please signify by saying Aye. Those opposed, "No". Chairs unable to determine whether the amendment is passed. Those in support of the amendment, if you would, raise your hands. Keep your hands up if you would. You know about my propensities with counting. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Could we rely upon the staff. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yeah, if they say something different from me, I'm going with them. Those opposed, please raise your hands. Vote is 16 in the affirmative, 16 in the negative, the chair is also going to vote no, the amendment fails. Alright, The next amendment we have is H5898TC25 which is set forth by Representative Hall of Wake. Representative Hall, you're recognized to explain your amendment which would amend on page 13 lines 41 to 42. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank your Mr. Chairman. Regardless of how we all feel about this bill, I think everybody can agree that this 22 section bill does add a lot of detail. So my very short amendment provides that the state board of elections shall provide a voters guide. Much in the same way it already does for judicial elections. And that voter guide is to explain the new voting identification procedures. And how to distribute 30 days before the election. This is something i known a lot of the proponents of this bill have already talked about and been in favor of, but the current legislation doesn't provide for it. Unlike an earlier amendment it doesn't require radio, tv, psa. It's just that general voter guide like the one that's provided for judicial candidates. And since many of the proponents of the bill talked about it, but its not really going to be a lot of hope. I hope the sponsors wont have a problem with this amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Looks like the bill sponsors are having a committee meeting really quickly. has the committee reached their decision. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes Mr Chairman. We're just curious if we pass this amendment, if Representative Holling he'll vote for the bill. We would support the amendment if we could make one change to the state board of elections. And change the 'shall' to a 'may.'Because again we don't want to dictate to the B of E where they have to spend their funds. But if we make this an alternative mode of getting the word out. So if the representative would indulge us and clarify that and that from 'shall' to 'may'.
Wherever "shall" shall be, we'd like to change it to "may". [SPEAKER CHANGES] It appears that those that I see is "shall" on line 10, and where was the next "shall"? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Line 6, sir. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Let me make sure I understand what the bill sponsors are requested. That the amendment would read that "The State Board of Elections may publish a voter guide that includes the voter identification procedures and requirements set forth in the provisions of Part 2 of this act in an easily readable and understandable form. The Board may distribute the guide to as many registered voters in the state as practical." And it continues. How about the "shall" about "State Board of Elections shall incur the cost…" "Shall" or "may" on that? Is that what you're…? It appears what the bill sponsors are asking the amendment sponsor to consider is a perfecting amendment to change the "shall" on line 3 and the "shall" on line 6 to "may" in each of those. So, I guess the chair would state an inquiry to Representative Hall: Does the gentleman wish to make a perfecting amendment to his amendment to make it "may" on those, or does he wish to continue on with the amendment as proposed? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Chairman, having spent two full days in law school begin forced to go over the difference in "shall" and "may", I would have great hesitation to completely change what this amendment does. But, if I could, first, ask one inquiry of the sponsors of the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Gentleman may state his inquiry. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Is it my understanding that if I don't offer a perfecting amendment, the sponsors don't intend to support this amendment? [SPEAKER CHANGES] That is correct, sir. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Then, Mr. Chair, I would like to offer a perfecting amendment changing "shall" to "may". [SPEAKER CHANGES] Let me add something to this. The guide may go away, and so, if we pass this amendment, it shall present a problem because we have something in the legislation that affects a voter guide that might or might not exist. There is legislation before this body, and the reason we took it out in the PCS is because we think the voter guide might be going away, so we didn't want to include something… That's why this permissive language could, should the voter guide stay around, it gives the State Board of Elections the opportunity to include voter ID information in it. That's why the permissive language would be necessary. [SPEAKER CHANGES] What he's saying is maybe it shall might happen. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I'd like to respond. [SPEAKER CHANGES] You may. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I understand, Mr. Chairman, that the point of this amendment was that they shall, regardless of the current voter guide. I just used judicial as an example, and this was to be provided regardless, but with that understanding, I would like to go forward with the perfecting amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I'm going to see how good my mind reading is. I'm assuming the gentleman wants to strike the word "shall" on line 3 and change that to "may" and the word "shall" on line 6 and change that to "may". Is that correct? [SPEAKER CHANGES] If you would change "would like to" to "intends to", then, yes, Mr. Chairman. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Members, you've heard the gentleman's perfecting amendment. Again, this is just the perfecting amendment. All those in favor of the perfecting amendment, say signify by saying aye. All opposed, no. The ayes have it. The amendment, the perfecting amendment, is adopted. We're now on the amendment as perfected. Further debate or discussion on the perfected amendment, I guess we'll say. Representative Starnes, you may debate the amendment, sir. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. My question, then, it says on line 10 the State Board of Elections shall incur the cost. Now, this cost, is that coming out of their normal operating budget? There will be a cost associated with it. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Is that question being addressed to the sponsor of the amendment? [SPEAKER CHANGES] The bill's sponsors said they feel good with the amendment, and I'm just wondering why do you feel good about it? Because it is incurring a lot of the cost. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I'll ask staff to answer. I think that we were thinking about the voter guide that's already currently done, the one that might go away, and they already pick that cost up.
This does not say that it will be incorporated in that voter guide. This could be a new voter guide. [SPEAKER CHANGE] I guess we were thinking it would [SPEAKER CHANGE] Representative Starnes the change that's made still gives the option to the BOE to do that. [SPEAKER CHANGE] He didn't change it to May on line 10. [SPEAKER CHANGE] No I'm talking about on the 3rd line. [SPEAKER CHANGE] The way it reads now is if they decide to do it then they have to incur to the cost. [SPEAKER CHANGE] I'm going to do this. I'm going to ask, because I was just having a sidebar conversation with staff about, particularly that last sentence and the other. I'd ask the staff to comment on the practical affect of this amendment and what SBOE would do verses not have to do. [SPEAKER CHANGE] I think Mr Tayor we've been conferring up here. And it might be much clearer if we pulled the amendment and reworked it. To make it clear that the cost incurred and the authority to adopt rules is contingent on the state ward actually doing this. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Does the gentleman want to withdraw his amendment to come up with something that might fly or does he want to move forward with this? [SPEAKER CHANGE] Mr Chairman although I feel it's extremely clear now as Mrs Samuelson said, if the board decides not to do it, then they don't incur the cost. If they decide to do it, then they do incur the cost. The language seems extremely clear to me as is. [SPEAKER CHANGE] So is that a yes you want to withdraw it or no? [SPEAKER CHANGE] yes Mr. Chairman [SPEAKER CHANGE] Okay the amendment has been withdrawn by the amendment sponsor. And Representative Hall if you - [SPEAKER CHANGE] we'll get it right. [SPEAKER CHANGE] want to talk to the staff. I think there may be some ways to fix it. I read it several times myself and I can see how there were some different ways to interpret it. But there's probably a way to do what you want to do and not have it unclear. The next amendment we're going to take is H589ATJ16. And I believe this is Representative Fisher's other amendment. This amends the bill on page 6 line 38. The lady from Buncombe is recognized to debate her amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Thank you Mr. Chairman. Ladies and Gentlemen, the committee, this amendment is a very simple amendment and it makes a form available at all early and election days voting in the state during the period of voting. And the form that we're talking about is the one that is in page 6 under number 2 in section 11. That form that gives proof is available to the voters to be able to say that they, because of a natural disaster, did not have an ID. And that form and all this does, it's already in the law but what this does is it makes that form available during the election process so that people who have experienced this can avail them self of that form during voting time. And I move adoption of the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Bill Sponsors desire to comment on the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGE] The only time that this form will need to be available is if there's a natural disaster within 60 days of election day. So I think this is a pretty narrow request, it's a very small ask. And so I have no problem with the amendment. I would ask the members vote their conscience on this. But I would say it might add some printing costs for our state board of elections has not provided for or county board of elections. But we're talking very very small situation here where, and I think everybody is going to know, a lot of times also I will point out natural disasters don't occur statewide. And so it could be a very narrow geographic impact as well. So I'd ask members to vote your conscience on this. I have no real issue with the amendment. Representative Samuelson. [SPEAKER CHANGE] And I guess I'd ask my other bill sponsor this question. If it is in a narrow geographic area but this amendment, the way it's worded, requires that it be at all early and election day voting sites in the state during that period, is it a bigger cost than what you were thinking if it's only, for instance, a flood in one part of the state? [SPEAKER CHANGE] I think the precondition is still the disaster area declared by the governor. So I think that's the ultimate precondition. And so I don't think this amendment would. This bill has to go to 2 other committees. If we could maybe potentially narrowly define or craft this in a way that clearly applies to the disaster areas, that might be where we end up. I don't have a problem with this amendment. But we might have to tweak this language right to get at what you're getting at.
If you hit the changes language in any way moving forward but I know if you're going for a fairly narrow on improv one of our members about your conscience for the discussion or debate on the amendment seeing this option value committee minutes is just clarifying question from a domestic check will often get what I'm reading is not is not the is not likely of Iowa and all locations in the state for this sentence summary near Hall locate I think it still read all locations that are subject to this disaster so and notice what you're intending to do for reading it incorrectly is not in a situation where one didn't work on this amendment to get it more clearly associated with what you're going for a negligent and I and finally treating in the main point in raising this is that before any available anyway to anybody who would be sent into a natural disaster and why not make it available at preventing Christ at the kind of batting entering are currently leading a classic not really anything that changes anything necessarily the form will already be available I have witnessed Jeremiah for before arisen more or less as beneficial you may you may cite the following idea until this is tweaked whatever you do to it I would recommend not adopting this is immediately recognized making in the form just be available electronically so that it held in place to fight the ticket just printed out front and I don't think so and not at the incoming so I can not every polling location has Internet access we have discovered that in our research on this legislation and so that is potential issue but I will say listening this form is only going to be available that can have to return this form at state portable to the County Board of elections Norfork interprofessional ballot counted and so on I don't know if this is a very narrow subset of the issues are going to be presented with regards to get your point gigahertz counted Is recognize to debate her member and a second time and get your cannon and everything I Wednesday is back on election personality on election day in member and I have is that are included at him and every polling place is just one item on and many IRA Hamlet and on that and I really can't see the pollinating the present into the format being required by the legislation it out and sell why not make it available on dieting and on Lebanon in original recognized making them look like Angela members I think the video the obviously this is problematic in wording I personally don't feel that the amendment is necessary personally don't like the weights written something I can endorse this time for the other sponsors feels like it's it has potential my suggestion would be a limitless work on it or voted down like a discussion for the debate on the amendment representative and was recognized making them thank you Mr. Chairman this may be a question see the bill sponsor about visiting these forms have to be available even at times only not had a natural disaster represented at lessor crimes I have a cope with the amendment itself like its statewide during early voting and is just one more thing to throw on poll workers were generally volunteers enough to do with the changes we have coming in his bill first site again if it has potential address the amendment sponsored to bluff worked with one of sponsors who feels it has potential person is Oedipal thing or the item purchased as if for the amendment smelliest I really adoption amendment to signify a psychotic personality is. Have a nice have a minimum result will try and see the clock with committees indulgence will try to do one more amendment to get through some of these in the next limit will
[0:00:00.0] …Take up is just like we have…Take Representative Ross’s amendment ATC24. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Chairman… [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Floyd please state your purpose? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Inquiry with Mr. Chairman. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Please state your inquiry? [SPEAKER CHANGES] At the beginning of this hearing I thought maybe we will sort of balance the amendments so each person can at least get an amendment in and rotated, I think I would like to see the chair to be a little bit more fair in the receiving amendments from the members of the committee. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Well, I’m not sure what the members talking about and to be frank but I think… [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Chairman may I? I’m not being in different but I think Representative Ross has submitted two or three amendments, Representative ___[00:48] three and I think Representative Fisher three and that’s my concern. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Members this committee is gonna stand and recess until 15 minutes after session. [0:01:04.9] [End of file…]