Committee advances Alabama Voter Integrity Database and clarifies foreign‑national ID use for voting

A legislative committee on Constitution, Campaigns and Elections moved forward two election-related measures on voice votes, adopting an amendment and advancing a bill to establish the Alabama Voter Integrity Database and later taking up a separate bill to clarify that foreign‑national driver licenses are not valid identification for voting.

Supporters said the Alabama Voter Integrity Database (AVID) is intended to bring voter‑list maintenance under direct state control, replace reliance on the Electronic Registration Information Center (ERIC), and formalize data‑sharing agreements with other states and federal data sources. A staff member from the secretary of state’s office said the office has negotiated memoranda of understanding with neighboring states and uses multiple data sources — including state driver‑license exchanges, the National Change of Address file, and the Social Security Death Index — to identify voters who have moved or died.

The staff member said AVID is intended to keep data on government servers under state control and to include safeguards in the MOUs to require partner states to delete shared data after updates. “We used several prongs,” the staff member said, describing agreements with Tennessee, Louisiana, Arkansas, Florida, Mississippi, Georgia, Kentucky and Texas. The staff member added, “It’s on our own government server” and said the office is not paying an outside vendor the $30,000‑a‑year ERIC fee cited earlier by a member.

Committee members questioned how new data sources — including a credit‑report variable used by a vendor — might flag voters incorrectly. The staff member acknowledged that some variables, such as credit‑report indicators, can generate “potential move” flags when, for example, a person cosigns a loan or refinances. The staff member said the office is tightening filters to reduce false flags and emphasized the maintenance process under federal law: the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) requires notice and a multi‑year process before a registrant is removed for inactivity. “It is a 4‑year process. So nobody is taking off the rolls,” the staff member said.

Committee members also pressed about ERIC’s operations and data retention. The staff member said ERIC’s membership had declined and described concerns the state had with ERIC, including uncertainty about server locations and retention of data. The staff member said Alabama’s MOUs require partner states to delete exchanged data after it is used to update rolls.

On a related matter, the committee considered a bill to prohibit use of foreign‑national identification documents as acceptable voter identification. Sponsors said poll workers and probate judges had reported confusion when voters presenting driver licenses issued to non‑U.S. nationals sought to vote after naturalization, because some foreign‑national licenses remain valid for a period after naturalization and can include a “foreign national” number. The sponsor said the intent is to clarify existing law and to give poll workers guidance that such documents are not acceptable for voter identification.

Several members asked whether the state had data showing how often foreign‑national IDs were used improperly; sponsors and staff said systematic federal data are not available and that most reports came as calls to probate offices and the secretary of state’s hotline. A former representative in the audience urged more emphasis on people voting in the wrong precinct after moving, saying precinct misuse is a common problem in practice.

The committee adopted a lengthy, sponsor‑described “friendly” amendment to the AVID bill and then voted to advance the bill. Members recorded two negative votes in the final voice tally on the AVID measure; a separate voice vote was taken on the foreign‑national ID clarification at the end of the hearing.

The committee’s discussion focused on balancing voter‑roll accuracy and privacy with practical questions about cost, staff workload, and how new data sources will be filtered to avoid removing eligible voters. Staff repeatedly noted that the AVID process is intended to follow federal NVRA procedures for notice and a multi‑year removal process rather than immediate purges.