Committee holds House Bill 254, advances updated ballot-authentication measure to second reading

The House State Affairs Committee held House Bill 254 in committee and, in the same hearing, introduced RS32460 and recommended it for the second-reading calendar. Representative Steven Tanner, who sponsored the measure, walked the committee through technical changes to how Idaho statutes identify "official election ballots" and how counties may authenticate ballots.

Representative Steven Tanner (first reference as sponsor) said the change responds to technological differences across Idaho's 44 counties and to an incident in 2023 where a ballot used in a logic-and-accuracy test was read by a scanner when a photocopy was run through because a unique identifier feature was not enabled. Tanner said the draft clarifies that where vendors and equipment can generate unique, nonsequential identifiers for ballots, counties may use that feature — but that any identifier must never be capable of identifying the voter.

"The unique identifier can never ever identify the voter," Tanner said. "No list can be maintained in the voting system that associates the unique identifier with the voters. And the unique identifier must be non sequential. It has to be randomly generated using a randomizing algorithm." Tanner said the identifier must be assigned before a ballot is submitted to the tabulator so the tabulator can reject duplicate identifiers it has already seen.

The draft also provides alternate authentication methods for counties that lack the ability to generate unique identifiers: watermarking or a unique watermark image, security paper or holograms, or stamping/printing the words "official election ballot" at time of issuance for manually counted ballots. Tanner said costs vary: he cited feedback that watermarking could cost roughly 10 cents per ballot and holograms approximately 25 cents per ballot, and he said the bill does not require counties to purchase new equipment.

County election officials who testified generally supported the changes but noted limitations. A county clerk from Nampa (who identified himself in the hearing) said the unique identifier prevents duplicated scanning on the same scanner, and that it can be detected when a duplicate serialized number is run a second time on the same device. He cautioned, however, that duplicated ballots could still be submitted to a separate, air-gapped scanner in a different location and that detection across multiple, noncommunicating scanners is more difficult.

Trent Triple, testifying in support, said the change from "two or more" to "one or more" in the RS version would save taxpayers in Ada County "millions of dollars" by avoiding unnecessary equipment purchases. Jennifer Locke, Kootenai County clerk, described routine checks used in her county: matching absentee-return counts to the voter-registration system and using poll-book check-ins to reconcile precinct totals before tabulation.

Committee action: Representative Akiles moved to hold House Bill 254 in committee; the committee adopted the motion and recorded a voice vote. Representative Scott invoked Rule 80 on the bill and RS32460 as noted in the transcript. The committee then voted to introduce RS32460 and move it to the second-reading calendar; the motion passed by voice vote.

What the bill would require if enacted: where counties have voting equipment that can generate unique, nonsequential identifiers, those identifiers must be randomly generated, assigned before tabulation, and cannot be linked to voter identities. Where that capability does not exist, counties may rely on watermarks, security paper, holograms or a printed/stamped "official election ballot" marking, with additional procedural safeguards for absentee and manual-count ballots.

The committee held HB254 and advanced RS32460 for further consideration; sponsors said clerks and the secretary of state's office will continue to refine the draft.