Committee advances bill to share DMV noncitizen data with Secretary of State and county election officers

The Committee on Elections voted to advance House Bill 2020 after adopting amendments and procedural language to clarify how Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) data on noncitizen applicants will be used to identify potentially ineligible registrants.

Representative Sutton moved the bill favorably; Representative Penn seconded. Committee members and witnesses negotiated changes to the bill text in a balloon amendment distributed by the reviser. The amendment clarified that the short description of the bill should match its text (quarterly rather than monthly reporting), required the DMV to include alien registration numbers where applicable, and added an investigatory step for the Secretary of State before any county-level removal of a registrant from local voter rolls.

Under the amended bill, the Secretary of State would compare DMV records to the state voter file, investigate putative matches to confirm identity, and — if the Save (Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements) check and the secretary's investigation confirm noncitizenship for a specific registered individual — direct the appropriate county election officer to remove that registrant. Testimony from Clay Barker, general counsel for the Kansas Secretary of State, explained the operational division: counties operate the voter‑management software and perform removals, while the Secretary of State’s office conducts database comparisons and Save checks and would notify counties to act. Barker told the committee that counties perform routine daily maintenance on voter rolls and that a five-business-day period for counties to act would be reasonable.

Committee members added language to require the Secretary of State to investigate identity matches (for example, confirming name, date of birth and the last four of Social Security number where available) before directing county clerks to remove a registrant. The committee also agreed to a five‑business‑day expectation for counties to complete the directed removal, and included notification provisions so a removed person receives notice and can cast a provisional ballot and show proof of eligibility during the canvass if they believe removal was in error.

After discussion and adoption of the amendment, Representative Sutton renewed his motion and the committee voted the bill out favorably as amended (voice vote; roll-call not requested). No formal roll-call tally was recorded in the hearing record.