Committee advances bill adding safeguards for mobile driver's licenses after Department of Safety testimony

House members advanced legislation intended to place statutory limits on data retention and sale of personal information connected to mobile driver's licenses, and to expressly prohibit using a digital driver's license for voting identification.

Representative McCallum, the bill sponsor, told the House Transportation Committee the measure clarifies that state law should prohibit retention or sale of personal information collected through mobile driver's licenses and aligns statutory drivers‑license rules with current departmental practice. "This proposal will fix that issue," McCallum said while explaining the bill.

Department of Safety testimony

Elizabeth Stroker, legislative director and assistant general counsel for the Tennessee Department of Safety, told the committee the state has already developed the mobile‑ID app within state government and that third parties would be able to make the app available as an option to users or businesses. "The app was created within the department, within state government," Stroker said. "The third party will be, it could be, you know, your cell phone carrier who you can download any app from, so it's an option for you, or any business that may want to utilize a digital driver's license. But the app itself was created within the department."

Stroker also confirmed the program is optional for individuals and businesses. "It's optional if you want to use a digital license. It's optional if a business wants to use a digital license. And, we have said that businesses cannot mandate a digital license. So it is 100% optional," she said.

Committee questions and concerns

Committee members asked whether the bill authorized third‑party vendors and whether the state could require a digital ID if the bill failed. McCallum clarified that the digital ID would exist whether or not the bill passed, and that this legislation provides statutory safeguards; department staff said the app has been created and third‑party distribution was an option, not a delegation of development.

Several members expressed privacy concerns about biometric and retention risks. One member pointed to prior federal data breaches and said even short retention windows can risk exposure; the member said he would not support the bill on philosophical grounds and said he could not vote for the state moving in a direction that collects biometric data. Another member asked how many states have implemented similar programs; Stroker answered: "I believe it's about 10. It really picked up about 2 or 3 years ago, and more and more states are about ready where they're gonna look at launching as well."

Vote and procedural status

The committee voted to advance the bill to Calendar and Rules, 16 ayes to 3 nays. Committee members emphasized that the measure, as explained, is intended to provide statutory guardrails on data retention and sale and to prevent businesses from mandating digital IDs.