H.B. 311 Elections Study: transcript

Alright, thank you Mr. Chair. Um, as you know, I care very deeply about election integrity, and I think, uh, most Americans do. Uh, it's, it's vital to our representative democracy that, uh, we, we can as citizens regardless party, have faith in the election process. So this bill, uh, is fairly simple, but it was designed to further improve election security. Essentially. Um, the bill has zero fiscal node, and essentially what it does, uh, if you wanna look at lines 3 22 to 3 25, it modifies the type of identification that qualifies as voter id. And I'll get into more detail on that in a moment. It provides, uh, that regardless of whether the last four digits of the voter's driver's license number or Utah State Identification card or Social Security number appears on the return envelope. If a poll worker has a reason to believe that the signature on the affidavit of the return envelope is not the voter's signature, the poll worker shall compare the signatures with the voter's signature. Uh, this came about, uh, ladies and gentlemen of the committee be because one of our counties tested this and found, uh, a fair amount of what appeared to be forged signatures with the correct last four, uh, on the envelope. And so this doesn't require the county clerk or the poll worker to check the signature, but it, it tells 'em that they may, and further it tells them that, uh, if they cannot, uh, validate that signature and its faults that, that, uh, they can disavow that vote. Um, so the other part I wanted to get into a little bit of detail on was in the back of this, uh, lines, go to line 3 22. Um, we are very cognizant of federal law. We do not wanna violate federal law. We want people to vote. We're not trying to make it harder for people to vote, but it was a little concerning to us that things like utility bills and bank statements could be used to identify people. Uh, so those two items have been removed. Uh, we, we, because Utah is providing free state ID cards to anyone who, who wants or needs one, uh, again, at no cost, uh, we feel like we don't need those items in there anymore. And so that's why they were removed. Trying to be completely transparent here. So that is essentially the bill. It, it essentially says if the four numbers are right, but the signature looks, uh, suspect that can check the signature and that we don't use utility bills or bank statements anymore for identification. With that, I'll take any questions.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh, may I ask the presenter a series of questions? Yes,

We, yeah. Yeah. It'll probably be just like one, but, um, uh, my question is on this. So a lot, a lot of these poll workers are volunteers. Um, are they gonna be, my concern is, is that you're gonna have individuals that are making judgment calls that may not have the expertise in something like this. Um, have you had thoughts about like, how to address that issue?

No, that's an excellent question is, and if you'll recall, prior to last year in HB 300, the signature was, uh, what was being utilized to validate the voting materials. And so most of these, uh, workers have had some training on looking at signatures. What this requires is they simply take the signature on the envelope and go back to the, the voter's registration materials and compare the signatures. Um, essentially what we found in, in a primary election, one county tested this and, uh, they found, uh, several instances in one household where they had the right numbers, but somebody else signed the name. And so it's believed that with the voting registration materials and the comparison that, that even an average person could, could make a call on on that. Um, so that's the answer. I mean, nothing is perfect, certainly.

Marilyn. Nominee, I'm a citizen representing myself. One of the things that happens in the legislative process, and we saw it with a controversial bill like HB 300, is there's a huge amount of compromise that goes on behind the scenes. And after the whole thing passed, I was a little concerned because we were using just the number and not all the signatures that we have diligently gathered for the last 10 years. So I think this change allows the county clerks to have, if there's a question, a second way that they can verify. So I think it's a really good thing, and I would recommend that the committee, uh, favorably recommend this out to the floor. Thank you.

I, I had previously, so do you need me to sign it again? No. Okay. So I'm Helen Moser and I'm here to, uh, on behalf of the League of Women Voters. Uh, the league supports secure elections, but we are equally committed to ensuring that every eligible voter can cast a ballot and have it counted. So we applaud the sponsor for addressing issues that may have surfaced with HB 300 in bringing in the county clerks and Lieutenant Governor's office. That said, we have simply two suggestions and one concern. First, um, the term reasonably consistent related to signature verification on return ballot envelopes can feel vague and arbitrary. And even though it appears in statute and administrative rule, we know that Utah election officials take their responsibility seriously. And under current statute election, officers must ensure that every, any poll worker reviewing ballot affidavit signatures has completed the required training before conducting signature verification. In addition, when a signature issue arises, election officers are obligated to notify the voter within two days by text, phone, mail, or an email, and provide clear options to cure the issue. So the ballot can still be counted, although it's outlined later in the body of the bill. It's important to note these provisions under the highlighted provisions, uh, because these steps remain in place to ensure uniform standards and the rights are, are there and the rights of a voter to have their vote counted, are available. Uh, second, the signatures can change naturally over time. And variation is especially common under, amongst older voters, voters with disabilities, young voters whose signatures are still evolving and voters affected by illness or injury. It would be helpful for the Lieutenant Go Governor's office to educate voters about the importance of updating their voter registration in the event their signature has changed. Currently, Salt Lake County and likely other counties include that in an FAQ, and we applaud that. Uh, lastly, the Bill narrows acceptable voter identification options, and we would oppose this, these forms of Id have long held voters, particularly retired low income and rural participating in elections. So we urge just amendments to the bill. Thank you.

Certainly. Thank you. And thank you Mr. Chair.

No, I'm not saying that at all. I, I'm, I'm glad that signatures were resurrected, uh, and that we're gonna continue, uh, to enable the county clerks to appropriately validate and, um, beyond just a, a, a number, an IDDL or social social security number. So I'm not saying that at all. I, I, I, I applaud the fact that that's Sure. Uh, back in place. I just wanna make sure that it's clear that there, these individuals, the poll workers receive training so it doesn't appear kind of arbitrary and inconsistent across county clerks. Um, and that they understand in the, just in the front of the bill, under the highlight of provisions that there is a mechanism for them to be notified as voters and for them to cure their ballot within a period of time. That's all.

Of No, no. And I'm not saying that on at all. I just know, uh, looking at my, my daughter's signatures, they've changed. My mother-in-law had her, uh, her ballot had to be cured. Uh, but that just to educate voters, if you've had some disability, um, or your signature, just it's evolved, make sure so that there's no hangup in having your vote counted.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Members of the committee, Ricky Hatch. We were county clerk auditor and chair of the clerk's legislative committee representing the clerks through the state. Uh, just a couple of points of clarification in this discussion. Uh, all election workers who verify the voter's validity, uh, prior to allowing the envelope to be opened must require or must receive annual training on signature verification. That's a requirement now set forth in state law. It was done in practice before that. Uh, but we take that very seriously. So, uh, just rest assured that they are all trained annually, uh, with a, uh, a rigorous training process. Um, and the signature verification process is also audited, again, by state law, uh, every time, every election. Um, and so, uh, you can rest assured that that process, uh, we've made, uh, good improvements to an already good process. Um, uh, the clerks support house Bill three 11, we, uh, we feel that Representative Burton has done a good job at creating a reasonable process, uh, that is invoked as necessary, as deemed by the folks who have been trained to process and verify these voters. And it's a, it's a flexible, uh, process that's defined, and we really appreciate that it's not going to add a significant burden at all to our process in verifying the voters' eligibility to vote in that election. And of course, as was earlier mentioned, if a poll worker does, uh, even though the last four digits match, if the poll worker has a question, and let's say that poll, uh, that poll worker does so in error, the voter will always have the option to cure that, to fix that, uh, challenge to that voter's signature. Um, and that's an important process to give voters the chance. Just much like a provisional voter who comes in person, uh, and there's a problem with their id, we give them a chance to fix their ballot, uh, to be able to prove whatever the requirement is that they did not meet. The same thing happens with a by mail election. Uh, so the clerks support this. Thank you.

I'm Kathy Campbell. I represent myself. I live in Salt Lake City. Um, I don't know if I'm quite elderly yet, but I will tell you that my signature changes every time I use it. Um, one thing that I noticed, because this happened to me in Mexico, I'm a resident of Mexico as well. Um, my passport signature line is about this long, and I'm very loopy, whereas my resident card had a space about that long. Very different signature. When you're talking about what the length of the line is that you're signing, um, this caught me. And that's number one. The second thing is that, um, I, you know, in conjunction with several other bills and I have had the whatever, um, to sit through so many of these hearings, it still seems like we are taking away rights. I am very concerned that one of these poll watchers or whatever you call them, will look at someone and maybe not like the way they look. Maybe it's the color of their skin, their accent, or they're wearing a, a, a political shirt and decide that they don't think that their signatures match. Um, uh, I, I understand that there is a a cure period, but what if you're barely getting your vote in last minute? Polls are closed, everything's closed. Will you still have the opportunity to prove the verification of your signature thereafter?

I can answer the question.

Yeah. I'm Seth Stewart, representing myself. Um, in the spirit of, uh, accepting imperfections in any earthly system, I would like to make some recommendations. I am a handwriting recognition technologist with expertise in DeepFakes, and I do not by any means. Rest assured, with the current safeguards about signature verification, a person cannot be reliably reduced to a scribble on a page. Uh, this is a mathematical phenomenon, and, and I would recommend, as in previous settings, uh, to return to in-person voting at the precinct level. There's no substitute for in-person voting either for credentialing or for, uh, ensuring, uh, the integrity of the vote. That seems like, uh, an underlying theme that we have here. Uh, and I previously recommended that to prevent over disclosure and to fully address concerns about voter privacy and authenticity to Representative Wilcox's point about the ballot booth being sacred, we don't want technology or centralized verification gatekeeping our access to the ballot when more localized verification could be used. We've previously addressed the pattern of putting a new coat of paint on an unsound structure. It seems like we're never gonna be truly done legislating the patchwork. There's nothing wrong with refining a system, but to use machine learning parlance here, it seems we're stuck in a local minimum, and there's only so much better we can make the system as long as we're still using universal mail-in balloting. I understand that there are concerns about, uh, ensuring that people's identity is, is correct. Uh, I understand that. Uh, elections administrators have to take a position on this. They have to understand and have, have it certified that those voting in a given election are authorized to vote in it. But again, here, I I find no better system than in-person balloting and credentialing. Uh, the Lieutenant Governor's office doesn't know who you are nearly as well as your neighbors do, even though they might gather a lot of information on you that you may, neighbors might not know about you. But, uh, anyways, I recommend that we oppose the measure. Thank you very much. Thank You.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I would like to make a motion that we favorably recommend HB three 11, uh, out of this committee with a favorable recommendation.

Oh, no, sir. Please. All, but thank you Mr. Chair. I, I would just like to say we seek perfection, but we can't, uh, let perfection be enemy of good. The reason this bill's brought forward is because it was tested and this was found to be, uh, an imperfection. And so while it's not perfect, it does improve the overall security of the election process. And I would appreciate your vote. Thank you.

Representative Burton Thanks Mr. Speaker. This, uh, bill further improves election security. It does two things. It, uh, uh, modifies the, uh, identifications that qualify for voter ID. Lines 3 22 to 3 25. It just simply removes the utility bills and bank statements. Uh, it maintains what's required by the federal government and it also adds in lines four 60 and 4 27 the opportunity for a clerk. Uh, if they visually see a signature that looks like it's not accurate or correct or, or somehow tampered with that, that clerk can then check the signature and, uh, verify it. Uh, just as they've always done it kinda corrects, uh, something that was in last year's bill. Um, a couple of counties tested HB 300 and found, uh, there were some voter signatures were not accurate. And this bill corrects that. And with that, I'm open to questions.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Would the sponsor yield to a question?

I will. Yes. Representative Hansen.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Um, what would be a reason to believe that the signature of on the affidavit of the, um, return envelope is not the voter's signature,

Uh, currently, uh, under, under code that exists now, uh, on the envelope, you place the last four of a, of a government issued ID card, the last four numbers, and you also sign it. Uh, what, what, uh, was found by some of the counties is that people were forging that signature even though the numbers were correct. And so this allows a poll worker to examine that signature and cure it if need be to ensure that it's the actual person voting. Thank you, Mr. Speaker,

I'll Waive summation has been wad voting.

Yeah, so we, we've talked about elections a lot. This is, this is something we've been trying to get some consensus with the house and the substitute does an election study. Uh, we talked about having cities do it or counties and ultimately, um, what, what the house has asked. And I think, I think there's wisdom to having a good, a good party. Like, uh, you'll see it's UVU, it's the Herbert Institute. It's a study looking at logistics of, of elections. I think this is a good, good approach. Um, we, we obviously we dealt with a lot of election bills over here and there's been questions about logistics and, and enhancing our ability to run safer, safer elections. And this is just simply a study that the, that is coming from the, from the house. I think there's wisdom in doing this study, but that's what the substitute does that I'd like to adopt. Thank you. Senator. I, I see a substitute online, but I I see it in the house member's name. So I'm gonna get you to circle the bill and we'll get that substitute placed in your name.

Thank you. I'll do that. Motion to circle. Motion

Senator Vickers. Thank you Mr. President. Uh, motion to substitute.

Motion to delete and title and body second Substitute hospital 2 69. Replace it with four substitute hospital 69.

Thank you. This is just an election, election study. You'll see it'll be done at the Gary r Herbert Institute. We're gonna look at best practices, we're gonna look at security, we're gonna look at drop boxes. And this is a kind of a compromise. We've been working with the house to come up with some type of study. We had some other election bills that were logistically challenging. So we're gonna study, study the issue and consider that fiscal note is caught up. The substitute's caught up with that. I'm open for questions.

Thank you. I'd move that this bill pass.

Thank you Mr. President. Uh, sometime government processes still require individuals to appear in person to submit a form in paper, you know,

Board Ms. Speaker Motion to concur with Senate amendments.

Yes. Thank you. Uh, we simply added, um, some definitions that are found in, uh, Utah Code 53 8 that were omitted from the first substitute.