We have House Bill 589, I was waiting for folks to cease their conversations. Again, we appreciate, as always, having our Sergeant-at-Arms staffing our committee, Fred Hines, Reggie Sills, John Brandon, and Mike Clampitt. I believe we have two pages here this morning. Kathrine Haynes, and Katherine is from Cabarrus County, Representative Pittman. Katherine, would you like to stand? Thank you. And Josh Johnson is from Wake County, Representative Dollar. Thank you for being here and we hope you'll enjoy the Finance Committee. I will remind the Committee that the purpose of having the Voter Identification Verification advisory bill before us is because it does have a fee in the bill. The purpose of finance is to review that fee. If we have any amendments that folks would like to send forth, I'll ask that you send them forward now, not later than 9:00, and we do intend to vote at 9:30. So we will debate for the folks who have not had the opportunity to be in election laws, or any of the other public hearings that have not had the opportunity to hear the bill. We'll go as long as we can, but keep in mind, we will vote at 9:30. Representative Warren, and Samuelson, and Murry, and Moore, if you'd like to come forward and give a very brief explanation of the bill and then we will focus on the purpose for why we are here. Representative Warren. [SPEAKER CHANGES]. Thank you, Madam Chair. Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. The Voter Identification Verification Act has been a 10 month journey to get here, and over the last two weeks we've, actually, over the last three weeks or so, we've had hours and hours of public comment on the subject. This bill was vetted two weeks ago in the Elections Committee for a discussion for seve... for couple hours, and was in the Elections Committee yesterday and passed out to come to you today. [SPEAKER CHANGES]. Representative Warren, I believe we have a PCS before us. Representative Brawley is recognized for a motion. Have the PCS. [SPEAKER CHANGES]. Madam Chair, I move that the PCS be properly before us. [SPEAKER CHANGES]. For the purpose of discussion. [SPEAKER CHANGES]. This is a second edition. It's not a PCS. [SPEAKER CHANGES]. It's not a PCS. I'm sorry, Representative Brawley. If you'll withdrawal your motion, I believe we have the second edition before us. It is not a PCS. Representative Warren. [SPEAKER CHANGES]. Thank you, Madam Chair. So what you have before you is the latest version of the bill, and we're here today to discuss the associated fees therein. And Madam Chair, I do understand there is at least one amendment to entertain today at your pleasure. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES]. Representative Samuelson. [SPEAKER CHANGES]. That's my fault on the PCS. I forgot that we had made all the changes yesterday, and none of the changes since yesterday. So I will take responsibility for confusing the Chair. If you would, in your new version, look on page 7, line 28. It's the section that begins, it starts dealing with the fees. It's a brief overview. This whole bill is a phased-in approach, so that by 2016 we have a system whereby when someone comes in to vote they can present a photo ID that proves they are who they say they are. And we, in the process of this, also have improved some of the absentee balloting provisions, as well as making it available for people who might have disabilities or other reasons that make it difficult for them to vote. So bottom line, we're trying to make this as easy as possible for people to show up and vote and have whatever they need to prove they are who they say they are. So, in order to make it as easy as possible, we realize that the cost of providing some of these photo ID's for some people could be a hardship. So, in section, part 3, page 7, line 28, we begin a process of describing what the fees are and how we're going to waive those fees, and how we're going to make sure that the entities that normally would receive those fees are going to be made whole. So basically, under current law, you have special ID's card. We've been referring to them as non-operator's ID's. You've got, you go into the DMV, you've got your driver's license and you can get a non-operator ID card. If someone does not have a driver's license, does not have any of the other ID's that are mentioned in other places
The bill. They may then say I want to vote but the only I can vote is to get one of these non-operator photo ID cards. So if they show up they will need not only that card but they'll also potential need a copy of their birth certificate or maybe a marriage certificate which also has a fee attached to it. so what we've done is at the DMV for people who sign an affidavit that says I'm here for the purpose, I am registered voter. I do not have any other type of photo ID and I want secure a non-operators card for the purpose of voting. They sign that affidavit and them we would waive the fee at the DMV for them to get that non-operator photo ID card. If before that they need a certified birth certificate or marriage license and they show up at the court or the registrar to get that then he or she would also a form that they sign that says I am a registered voter. I do not have any photo ID. I am getting this for the purpose of obtaining a photo ID and we would waive the fee there as well. The people who receive those certificates would be responsible for varying that that person is a registered voter. So they can either do that by looking up the person online or if the person is who's presenting themselves has their voter registration card they could present that. But somehow they show they are indeed registered to vote so that they can sign that affidavit and get it free. So then the question was so how is the DMV or Clerk or registrar going to get compensated for the cost of those cards. And the cards are on the special ID depending on your age runs somewhere from 20 to 30 a piece and then of course the certified birth certificate, marriage certificates run some where between 10 and 25. So these are not large fees. So at the board of election there would be a fund they would then use the people who've collect those affidavits would then use those and of course BOA the rules and the process of how to do it. So they would be compensated for the actual cost for providing those IDs for the people who need them for the purpose of voting. And i believe I've covered all of that. Also just so you’ll know. On page 7 lines 37 through 45. That's all existing law. So there are already groups of people who would qualify for free ID cards. So the idea of a free non-operator ID card is not radical. if you are legally blind, at least 70 years old, homeless and I think there is one other and you have a driver’s license and it had been canceled under something else you can get those free already so we're just adding another way that someone can get that non-operator card free. And I believe that we do have an amendment but I didn't know if you wanted to debate it first or go ahead and take the amendment first. [Speaker Changes] ?? Send forth an amendment. [Speaker Changes] Thank you. ?? [Speaker Changes] Would you identify. [Speaker Changes] AST26 version 1. And I believe members have copies. [Speaker Changes] This is an amendment. The issue came up yesterday in election laws. What if somebody is not yet registered to vote but wants to register to vote at DMV and doesn't have a photo ID card. And could we make it so that they could register to vote. Of course 25 days before the election. This isn't registering to vote and voting. So they are doing it in plenty of time. And get their photo ID card at the same time so that they don't have to do two trips. And so the way the amendment was drafted in election laws there were some question about. Representative Samuelson and I worked on it overnight actually. We proofed it and said that we thought this got us were we are. So what this would do is say is that if there's an applicant that shows up on two DMV for the purpose of registering to vote cause we know DMV does registrations cause we have motor voters. And they don’t have some other photo ID then they can get their special identification card without paying the fee. If they sign a declaration saying that they're registering to vote and they don't have other photo ID available and obviously all that is under penalty of perjury and so I move the adoption of the amendment. [Speaker Changes] Representative Samuelson would you like to speak on the amendment? Representative Samuelson: I will thank you. We had some question when this was presented yesterday because the reality is doing this way they're two little potential glitches but I think the sponsor are, I know the sponsor are willing to live with those two potential little things. Our first thought was would
??this could increase the number of people who might be actually coming to the DMV for something for just a non-operator card for another purpose and then they can say sure do this and have more free cards we sort of decided that could be okay we didn't have any problem they're already allowed to register to vote when they get there but the affidavit they were going to sign would have had to say I'm already a registered voter and so by doing this we're allowing for someone to come and register to vote and still get the I.D. card even though at that point in time they are not a registered voter they've begun the process but they are not technically a fully registered voter because they haven't done I'm going to tell you I've learned more about the process on how they verify people when they do whether they're registered to vote so they haven't gone through that whole process and there is a chance that someone could come in and sign this and say I'm here for the purpose of registering to vote they could fill out all the paperwork they could get their free I.D. card and then somehow get disqualified later as a registered voter and we would've paid for a free I.D. card at what twenty or thirty-five dollars for somehow who turns out to be someone who's not eligible to vote we decided that risk was worth it because frankly the plus's of this bill of these I.D.cards because if you don't have a I.D. card in this society you need one and if that is a benefit someone's going to get and they tried to register to vote and for some reason or another it didn't work if what they got was a free I.D card out of it we thought that was a public benefit was worth it go ahead and have that risk and offer them the opportunity do it all in one swell sweep the amendment we support the amendment[SPEAKER CHANGES]Representative Starnes[SPEAKER CHANGES]thank you well when you go to get a drivers license they take your picture and mail you the driver's license so I assume they'll be mailing you photo I.D. later on[SPEAKER CHANGES]they do in these cases and give you a slip a receipt but in this case it will be twenty-five days before the election so a lot of that will have able to be verified and remember all this verifying that they are who they say they are it is not verifying they are a registered voter that's under the whole registered voter process[SPEAKER CHANGES]Representative Starnes[SPEAKER CHANGES]??[SPEAKER CHANGES]yes the I.D. will be mailed to them later I'm sorry[SPEAKER CHANGES]are there any questions from the committee Representative Hamilton[SPEAKER CHANGES]thank you madame chairman I'm just curious this is probably not on the amendment perhaps I should wait regarding a physical note[SPEAKER CHANGES]okay we'll get back with you we do have one questions on the amendment Representative Hagar[SPEAKER CHANGES]thank you madame chairman Representative Samuelson ignorant of the process maybe everyone knows this excuse me but when they go in for the I.D. what proof do they have to show of who they are[SPEAKER CHANGES]we got that they have to have either a I.D. someone else may actually have the list there are a variety of things which goes back to the either a valid or certified marriage certificate, birth certificate there are things they have to produce that are at the same level at what you have to produce when you get a drivers license I think it's the exact same list actually[SPEAKER CHANGES]other questions on amendment number one I see no other hands all in favor will say aye all opposed no the amendment carries Representative Ross you'll recognize for amendment number two[SPEAKER CHANGES]thank you very much madame chair and this amendment also comes from a discussion that we had during the election law committee from an different amendment that I offered it was an amendment that would let people who didn't have their I.D. either because they didn't have an I.D. or forgotten the I.D. to be able to mail back in some verification and afterwards and they were who they say they were but that verification match up with how the documents and other proof of who they are and there was some concern about that because what they would mail back in or bring to the board of elections didn't match up with what an absentee voter would do and so I asked staff to match up what these folks would have to provide to what an absentee voter would have to do which would include they can provide their drivers license number so that would be a thing where they did have a photo I.D. or they didn't have it with them their social security number, utility bill there's a whole variety of things that absentee voters are allowed to do
[Speaker changes.]...and so I wanted to make this parallel for the person who showed up and didn't have the photo ID to be able to do that. In addition, of course, to showing a photo ID later if they wanted to do that. [INAUDIBLE...adoption of amendment?] [Speaker changes.] Representative Samuelson, on the amendment two. [Speaker changes.] On this amendment, we...the sponsors of the bill do not support this amendment. There are a couple of technical reasons that had to do with the process that we're using for the absentee ballots...has a form that you use to apply for the absentee ballot and then a form that goes with the ballot itself, that shows, allows us to match the person who's casting the ballot is actually the person who applied for the form. In this particular case, there'd be no way for us to compare that the person who sends in the form is the same person who actually cast that ballot. That's one of the technical issues...but from...and we might eventually, in the future, be able to address some of that. Later in the bill, there's an issue with a study...more digital sorts of applications...and the Board of...the Board of Elections will be putting that into a possible study so I can see how, in the future, there might be a way to do a better match up where we could match those things. But the other is a more philosophical reason of why do we have absentee ballots? We have absentee ballots for people who can't get to the polls. Either they can't get to the polls on election day or they can't get to the polls during early voting. Now, you and I all know that there are people who use absentee ballots for purposes other than that but the reason absentee ballots were established was to provide an opportunity to vote for people who can't get there. And, if someone doesn't have a photo ID and that ends up being one of the reasons, they can go through the process where we'll have two forms to match. But, at this point, we feel like that absentee ballots, to the degree we can should still be offered for those who don't show up on election day, not for those that do so therefore, we would urge that you vote down this amendment. [Speaker changes.] Representative Luebke. On the amendment? [Speaker changes.] Yes, ma'am, on the amendment and I apologize to you and to Representative Samuelson for being late...but, if I just heard you explain this, Representative Samuelson, as you know I'm not on election laws, even tho' I wish to be so. I applied for it and didn't get it...didn't get in. But what I hear here is that, if I am a voter, and lack the credentials that Representative Ross just mentioned in her amendment. As a voter who shows up, I have fewer rights than a voter who does not show up at the polls? So an absentee voter has more rights, in the sense that you are rejecting the Ross Amendment [INAUDIBLE.] to the absentee voter. Is that correct? [Speaker changes.] No, I would disagree because I'd say the person who showed up on election day had all the same rights as the person who voted absentee, they just chose not to vote absentee. I mean...and also.... [Speaker changes.]Follow up... [Speaker changes.] Let me mention another thing I forgot to mention on that. Part of the reason on the absentee, which goes back to the idea of people who can't show up to vote, was with the phase into 2016, if someone's able to get to the voting booth, we would assume they would be able to get a photo ID, which is why we have the VIVA program that's at the beginning, to make sure that if those people need help getting a photo ID, we can get it for them. We also have, later in the bill, a waiver for people who, if for some reason or other have lost their ID due to natural disaster, so if someone went to vote and just forgot their ID, they can do the process that we have...file a provisional ballot and provide their ID later. [Speaker changes.] Follow up, Madame Chair..not too long. [Speaker changes.] Follow up. [Speaker changes.] Representative Samuelson, I don't know if your degree is in social science or not. I wanna say any good undergraduate social scientist, social science student could do a little study and see who votes absentee by social class, by income and education. And people who vote absentee are basically blessed with more education, they know how to work the process and you don't hafta know how to do an absentee ballot and work that process, which is easier for people with higher levels of education, to be able to vote. You shouldn't have to. Basically you're giving more rights to people who have been blessed with higher education, know how to manipulate that system. And the fact of the matter is under the constitution, you don't have to know how to work the absentee ballot system in order to vote. So, to me, you have in here..just a bias against those who really aren't aware of or don't have the skill level to easily work an absentee ballot. So, I'm just wondering whether you don't think it's really unfair not to accept the Ross Amendment? It just puts the voter and the absentee voter on the same level. [Speaker changes.] Representative Ross. On the amendment. [Speaker changes.] Yes. On the amendment. I would just say that the way that the Board of Elections deals with the absentee voters and how they verify who they are....
By comparing the signatures. And anybody who shows up at the polls to vote has to sign something at the polls, and you can take whatever they are sending back in and compare the signatures in the same way that absentee voting is done, that that verification is done. I’ve talked to the head of my Board of Elections, and she said that’s the way they do it. So that’s a legitimate way to figure out that these two people are the same person because you’ve got the same signature they are, you’ve got their Social Security number to make sure of who they are and you’ve got all of these other ways of making sure there’s no fraud involved. So I would say that the only reason to reject this would be that you want to penalize a person who lawfully should be able to vote, and I urge members to vote for this amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Representative Stone, the amendment please sir. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Yes, about this signature verification that I actually, in 2003, helped get that into law because it was the only thing we could do. One day my daughter, who was in middle school, came home crying that her teacher accused her of forging my signature. And the reason is that time I had been careful to write it legibly, and I apparently had never written it legibly before. This idea that comparing signatures is going to be sufficient is not true. [SPEAKER CHANGE] On the amendment are there questions for Representative Hager? [SPEAKER CHANGE] Thank you Madam Chairwoman. Not a question just a comment on this. I guess there’s a whole science to build off of, to determine what signature of someone is or isn’t. And there’s a lot of education that goes into it. I don’t want to turn our voter, our election supervisors into to a specialty if he or she is a specialist in signatures are not. Secondly, we have a lot of absentee ballots that are not, as Representatives Luebke said, of higher education. We have military, we have folks like were gone this time that had to be gone out of the country, that had absentee ballots so I don’t buy that at all. I think the process that the bill’s sponsors have set up is a right process. We don’t want to turn our election supervisors into specialties of signatures and all that stuff. And I don’t buy the fact that we are catering to the higher end with this bill, I think it’s a fair bill. So I would ask everyone to please reject the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Say no, to the hands, we’re getting ready to vote. All in favor of amendment number two will say Aye. All opposed, No. The no’s have it the amendment fails. Amendment number three, Representative Holley. Representative Holly you are recognized on Amendment 3 please. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Thank you Ms. Chairman. This is just a small bill, that when this amendment, when they mail out your voter registration card, it should not include any additional funds to be involved, but when they mail out the voter registration card, they also mail the form. [SPEAKER CHANGE] I’m having trouble hearing the speaker. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Representative Holley, could you move just a bit? If the folks on the wall… [SPEAKER CHANGE] Can you hear me now? This amendment is just a small little tweak, that when you mail out the voter registration cards they also mail out the form for an absentee ballots of the people than would be aware of that option, that if they’re going to be out of town, or a place than they will then have the form to apply for an absentee ballot. At that time. It shouldn’t be an additional expense as they are mailing out the vote is with voter registration at that time, it’s just something else to put in the envelope. [SPEAKER CHANGE] This essentially becomes an unfunded mandate.
[SPEAKER CHANGES]: For the amendment, Representative Kelly Alexandra. [SPEAKER CHANGES]: Thank you ?? chairman. My concern here is about people who might not be able to access these forms online. They are a considerable number of elderly people. I am thinking about my 87 year old mother, if she had to access a form online she will be ?? and a ?? of like that the homeless have hard time accessing forms online. It's intermediate this amendment is reasonable in its reach, and the argument about an ?? mandate isn't, you know if we didn't ?? like that at all time would be a very strong argument but we tend to pass things in roll down here, the responsibility for other levels of government to do things. Given that voting is a constitutional protected exercise for our citizens. That the ?? cost of mailing out of form that made allow an additional citizen to vote is something that we shouldn't, that should not be a ?? to do again. I would urge the members of the committee, in this instance, vote in favor of what is an imminently reasonable approach to this particular issue. [SPEAKER CHANGES]: Representative Jordan. [SPEAKER CHANGES]: Thank you madam. Should I have a point of inquiry, do you help me. [SPEAKER CHANGES]: You are recognized. [SPEAKER CHANGES]: Thank you, help me understand about this process a little better because this would seem to add a cost, is there any requirement for any kind of fiscal note to have ?? that process. [SPEAKER CHANGES]: It's coming Representative Jordan. [SPEAKER CHANGES]: ?? thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES]: As the bill is written on mail. [SPEAKER CHANGES]: Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES]: ?? for the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES]: ?? the fiscal note does not include the cost of adding this to it, and also because this is not in the bill so they noted that passing does not include the cost of whatever this amendment would run. [SPEAKER CHANGES]: Representative Holley. [SPEAKER CHANGES]: ?? the cost of this is the ??. What I am talking about is this they automatically putting in a envelope and mailing with a voter registration card to you, so there will be no additional mail cost involved in this. [SPEAKER CHANGES]: Representative Ross. [SPEAKER CHANGES]: Thank you very much madam ??, I was going to make the same point, there is no additional mailing cost, and the other thing is, I mean you might care about the appropriations, but this bill is going to appropriations, and so it's not like there is any concern about doing in this committee. This is exactly the right place to be able to do it and then let appropriations decide about the amount of money that's been spent on it overall. [SPEAKER CHANGES]: Representative Brawley. [SPEAKER CHANGES]: If I might ask a question. [SPEAKER CHANGES]: You have the ??. [SPEAKER CHANGES]: How often are these voter registration cards mailed out, or how often will they be mailed out. [SPEAKER CHANGES]: Well, I will let staff ?? understand this to get mailed out whenever a new voter, if you change your address, and then every now and then I know at the census we get new cards, that I got cards for the people who lived in my house several years before me because they are still apparently registered to vote in ??. So, ?? or ?? may know, but I know it's not only when you register to vote for the first time. [SPEAKER CHANGES]: There is no actual statutory ??. [SPEAKER CHANGES]: Representative Collins. [SPEAKER CHANGES]: There is no actual, thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES]: There is no actual statutory requirement the County send out voter registration cards as optional. Believe ?? one ?? doing it but that is set out most Counties they all put you ?? when you register. When you filed an address change within the same County and if this ?? updated, they will generally send a new card. It's a method usually used not to inform people about your polling places because they will require to do that, send you a letter where you have to vote. [SPEAKER CHANGES]: ?? further questions on amendment number three. Representative Collins. [SPEAKER CHANGES]: I have a question. If that's the case then these cards are not been sent out.
-necessarily at a time when there even is an election, so how are we going to follow this rule? If you're sending out the card and there's no election, how are you going to send them an empty ballot for an election that's not occurring? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Brawley. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Comment on the- [SPEAKER CHANGES] Amendment 3. [SPEAKER CHANGES] If I am correct, then as Representative Collins was pointing out, this voter registration card has nothing to do with the election itself and the timing- they aren't related. If you get an absentee ballot nine months before the election, what are they going to put on it? [SPEAKER CHANGES] For the latecomers, let me say one more time we are voting at 9:30. Representative Holley, I think this is the last amendment. Representative Holley? [SPEAKER CHANGES] What I'm talking about is the form, and the form is just letting them know that if a request for an absentee ballot is letting the registered voter who just registered to vote or whenever they send it out, or whenever the precincts(?) change in the notification, that this is also another way of voting other than going directly to the polls. [SPEAKER CHANGES] On amendment number three, seeing your other hands all in favor will say aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] All opposed no. [SPEAKER CHANGES] No. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The nos have it. The amendment fails. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Copy of the fiscal memorandum has just been handed out. Representative Hamilton, that was what you were asking about. Representative Brawley, you're recognized. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Madam Chairman, to make a motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] You're recognized for motion, Representative Brawley. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I would move that the amendment be rolled in the proposed committee substitute and that the proposed committee substitute for House Bill 589 be given a favorable report, unfavorable to the original bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I'll hold that motion. One other member, Representative Luebke. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Madam Chair. I just wanted to comment a bit on the bill. I don't know if it would be staff or Representative Samuelson that wanted to respond to some of my concerns, but we start first with my dad and this is real quick. It even may be a quick answer for staff. He moved here to be with me from Arkansas. He has a valid Arkansas driver's license. He's given up driving so he doesn't need a North Carolina driver's license. It's valid, it has not expired. Can he vote? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I can't determine whether he can vote because that's a registration question. The question is would that satisfy the- [SPEAKER CHANGES] I'm sorry, he is registered to vote. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Okay, Congressman, because people have been picking on that a little bit. It would qualify as something he could use to say that he is who he says he is, yes. And if he is over seventy and it was valid at the time when he turned seventy, he can continue to use it. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Even though it's not issued by the state of North Carolina? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Correct, as long as it is a government issued photo ID that says that he is who he says he is. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Okay, then follow up Madam Chair. I know we're in a hurry. Can you tell me the difference between a Duke student and an NCCU student in my district in terms of being able to use the student ID to vote? [SPEAKER CHANGES] That opens the ?? for a lot of jokes, but I won't go there. To answer your question- [SPEAKER CHANGES] Both my constituents, so I'm on their side. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes, they are both your constituents. One has a government issued student ID, one has a student ID issued by a private entity. The one who has the student ID issued by the government, the state of North Carolina, can use that to prove that they are who they say they are. The one who goes to the private institution would need to have some other form over government issued ID to prove that they are who they say they are. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Speak briefly. Madam Chair? [SPEAKER CHANGES] You're recognized, ?? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. I think, first of all, I'll have to tell President Brodhead they need to work on a better idea, I guess, because I really, for the life of me, I don't see the difference between the quality in the Duke ID and NCCU. I don't want to take my time to have you respond because I think that's clear on its face. There's no logical reason why Duke ID isn't as good as an NCCU one and I think you're just trying to keep people from voting. Number two, I have not seen Mr. Bartlett's report, but I understand there is a report that talks about what is now (someone correct me) 115,000 people who are expected not to have IDs. In that report, I don't know if there's an analysis of how many people in areas like Myers Park in Charlotte, Hope Valley in Durham, Hayes Barton here in Raleigh, what percentage of those folks do not have photo IDs versus certain neighborhoods particularly in counties that we know are poor counties. Halifax County, Northampton County, Bertie County. I think the point is obvious, Representative Samuelson and all supporters of this bill. The fact is that-
The not having an ID is not random. It is clearly identifiable by income. I would add I think based on Rep. Terry’s outstanding testimony yesterday, by race. I think this bill is really flawed. In all these details, whatever high minded ideals about fraud, in the details you’re undermining people’s ability to vote whether it’s private colleges students or in particular lower income communities. In my history, Hope Valley voters have, 100% of them have ID’s. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Rep. Hamilton? Pass. Rep. Stam? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Madame Chair, as a rhetorical question, would Rep. Luebke produce for the committee one (??) who doesn’t have a driver’s license and the keys to a late model car? (laughter) [SPEAKER CHANGES] Rep. Collins? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I’ll catch you later Rep. Stam. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I just going to condense from what Rep. Luebke told us. We are discriminating in this bill. We’re apparently discriminating against rich Caucasians from New Jersey. (laughter) [SPEAKER CHANGES] Rep. Jones, you are recognized sir. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Madame Chairman, I recognize everyone here was not on the elections committee. I think there were some facts that need to be shared because this is finance. We continue to hear these allegations just as they heard in other states that have passed ID laws. Somehow we’re going to have hundreds of thousands of people that do not have ID’s that are going to need state issued ID’s. I think it’s relevant to review the fact that we heard from the Secretary of State from GA, which passed their voter ID law back in 2005 I believe. Since 2006, the state of GA has issued between 29 and 30 thousand voter ID’s. They had the same allegations that there were going to be hundreds of thousands at the cost of millions of dollars to the state. I think that that is extremely relevant. GA and NC are two states of approximately the same size. GA actually has slightly larger population than NC. We also heard from the Secretary of State’s office in IN, and they reported very similar results. Back to GA, I believe they said the total cost to the state since 2006 was approximately 1.6 million dollars. That included the issuance of the ID’s and also the education that was required for the voters. I think this being the finance committee that that would be very appropriate for our members to note that those figures do exist. There are facts out there and not just rhetoric. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Rep. Hall? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Madame Chair. The fact that we’re going to disenfranchise anyone is a concern to me regardless as to what costs would be for this bill. I understand that people have said now the cost now is less than it might have thought to have been initially. The number of people that it would disenfranchised that we can certainly identify would be less than the original form of the bill. I think it’s important that we note that when the initiative first started the question was how much are we going to pay to insure that people who should not be voting do not vote. There was a question of fraud that people who should not be voting were voting. The speaker himself said it’s not a question of fraud anymore, that that’s not the issue. It’s a question of confidence in government. There’s no way we can say we’re going to spend additional money to keep people from voting so they’ll be more confident in their government that they can’t access they can’t participate in and therefore they feel they don’t have a stake in. That doesn’t make sense. Under either circumstance, I think this bill does a disservice. It does cost us money and funds at a time when we claim we don’t have it. It does cost us those funds to do something that we now say is not the objective of it. There’s something else called confidence that is now supposedly the agenda. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Rep. Samuelson? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Madame Chair. Just wanted to remind people that the reason this is in finance is that we recognize there is a cost in giving a government issued ID. When we made the decision not to accept privately issued ID’s whether they were education or corporate, we knew that there might be more people who would need a government issued ID. Therefore, we have made it as easy as possible even going so far as to waive the fee for those who need it waived. As Rep. Jones, based on the recent figures, this is certainly less than 3% ….
Currently registered voters. So I urge your support of this amendment of this Bill that would from a finance standpoint allow these people to get their cards without a fee. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Blust [SPEAKER CHANGES] Question, question for the Bill sponsor. I just heard Representative Hall say that people will be disenfranchised, there's a smaller list of people who will be disenfranchised. How are they being disenfranchised? Are people under this Bill not being permitted to vote? Is there anybody you know of, if this Bill passes who will not be allowed to vote? [SPEAKER CHANGES] No, we're spending money to make it easier for them to vote. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Hall [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes Madam Chair, I'm just calling for the Ayes and Nos on this vote. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Ayes and Nos having been called for. We have a motion on the floor. Representative Brawley your motion is to include a ?? referral to Appropriations. We're getting ready to vote now. All in favor of the House Bill as amended will say Aye. I'm sorry. The clerk will call the roll. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Alexander [SPEAKER CHANGES] No [SPEAKER CHANGES] Alexander, No. Representative Blust [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aye [SPEAKER CHANGES] Blust, Yes. Representative R. Brawley [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aye [SPEAKER CHANGES] R. Brawley, Yes. Representative Bill Brawley. Representative Burr. Representative Carney [SPEAKER CHANGES] No [SPEAKER CHANGES] Carney, No. Representative Collins [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aye [SPEAKER CHANGES] Collins, Yes. Representative Cotham. Representative Davis [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aye [SPEAKER CHANGES] Davis, Yes. Representative Dollar. Representative Hager [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes [SPEAKER CHANGES] Hager, Yes. Representative Hall [SPEAKER CHANGES] No [SPEAKER CHANGES] Hall, No. Representative Hamilton [SPEAKER CHANGES] No [SPEAKER CHANGES] Hamilton, No. Representative Hanes [SPEAKER CHANGES] No [SPEAKER CHANGES] Hanes, No. Representative Hardister [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aye [SPEAKER CHANGES] Hardister, Yes. Representative Holley [SPEAKER CHANGES] No [SPEAKER CHANGES] Holley, No. Representative Howard [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aye [SPEAKER CHANGES] Howard, Yes. Representative Johnson. Representative Jones [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aye [SPEAKER CHANGES] Jones, Yes. Representative Jordan [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aye [SPEAKER CHANGES] Jordan, Yes. Representative Lewis. Representative Luebke [SPEAKER CHANGES] No [SPEAKER CHANGES] Luebke, No. Representative McManus [SPEAKER CHANGES] No [SPEAKER CHANGES] McManus, No. Representative Moffitt [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aye [SPEAKER CHANGES] Moffitt, Yes. Representative R. Moore [SPEAKER CHANGES] No [SPEAKER CHANGES] R. Moore, No. Representative T. Moore [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aye [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative T. Moore, Yes. Representative D. Ross [SPEAKER CHANGES] No [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative D. Ross, No. Representative Samuelson [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Samuelson, Yes. Representative Schaffer. Representative Setzer [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aye [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Setzer, Yes. Representative Stam [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aye [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Stam, Yes. Representative Starnes [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aye [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Starnes, Yes. Representative Stone [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aye [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Stone, Yes. Representative Tine. Representative Waddell. Representative Warren [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aye [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Warren, Yes. Representative Wells [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aye [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Wells, Yes. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Motion passes on a vote eighteen Aye, ten No. Without further business we stand adjourned. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Madam Chair.