Often, when writing for this “bills to watch” series, I sit down and try to figure out the logic behind why the sponsor is proposing a bill. Naturally sometimes I disagree with the ideology behind it but, none the less, I can see where they are coming from. H.B. 126 as proposed by Representative Brad Daw (R – Orem, District 60) does not fall into that category.

As you may or may not have figured out by now, I am a strong supporter of voters rights; I want it to be as easy as possible for those who are legally able to vote to actually be able to do so come election day. One way we do this is by making the process as easy as possible for people who come in to vote to actually get a ballot. This bill would drastically slow down the process and have a chilling effect on voter participation.

In short this bill would cut 19 of the 25 currently accepted forms (as well as the admittedly vague section of current code that allows for “that does not contain a photograph, but establishes the name of the voter and provides evidence that the voter resides in the precinct”) of identification one can use to confirm they are who they say they are when an election judge demands proof that the voter lives in the precinct.

Now I ask you to look closely at a few of the ID’s on the chopping block: A valid identification issued by a college, university, technical school, or professional school located within the state; two forms of identification that may include: a voter ID card, utility bill, bank statement, Social Security card, checks issued by the federal government, military ID card, Utah hunters license, certified naturalization documents, court records, Bureau of Indian Affairs card, or valid Medicare or Medicaid card. Now here is what is acceptable under the bill: Utah Drivers License or state issued ID card, ID card issued by the federal government, US passport, tribal identification card, and (my personal favorite) Utah issued concealed weapon permit.

So, now you may be asking yourself “Curtis, don’t most of the things on the chopping block get covered by allowing any form of state or federal ID to be used?” Well yes and no. Indeed many of the things being cut could be classified as state or federal ID – but many are not. Remember, the second part of the list requires two forms of ID – a voter ID card and court records are currently acceptable as an example.

This bill would eliminate that by requiring just those six items I listed above; no two forms of identification allowed. Now I would wager that most of us have one of those ID’s in our wallets or purses right now, but remember that some of the poorest of the poor may not, but may have their voter ID card and a utility bill. This bill unfairly targets the bottom of the rung in society for no apparent reason. I mean, have we had a rash of voter fraud perpetuated by people using forged documents to get to the polling booth? Now the bill does make a provision to make ID’s available to all voters below the poverty line for free, but how many people are actually going to know about this fact?

I am of the opinion that it is wrong to deny even one person of the right to vote if they meet the legally required qualifications. Of course election officials should check to make sure people are who they say they are, but why do we have to throw up unnecessary barriers?