Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Elections topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate considers broad election‑law revisions, including voter‑list and DNI/ID handling
Summary
The Senate discussed first substitute Senate Bill 79, a comprehensive election‑law package covering 'active' vs. 'inactive' voter designations, optional collection of driver's license/ID numbers to reduce registration 'deadwood,' electronic transfers from driver‑license offices, and procedural changes for certification and mail‑ballot precinct thresholds.
First substitute Senate Bill 79, presented Feb. 13, would make numerous changes to Utah's election statutes aimed at modernizing procedures, reducing voter‑roll 'deadwood' and clarifying certification deadlines.
Senator Evans summarized the main provisions: define active and inactive voters to help counties manage registration lists; permit (but not require) collection of driver’s license or state ID numbers on voter applications (not Social Security numbers); make county clerks’ deadlines consistent with other registration channels; require driver's‑license offices to electronically transmit registrant data (name, address, birth date, license number) to the lieutenant governor as a backup; repeal a redundant county‑clerk death‑confirmation letter; expand mail‑only precinct eligibility from 100 to 300 registered voters; and tighten deadlines for certification of candidate names and judicial‑retention candidates.
“Utah is one of the states that cannot use Social Security numbers as a requirement for voter registration,” Evans said, adding that driver’s license numbers would help maintain registration accuracy. Senators sought clarification on fiscal impact; the presenter and other senators noted the fiscal note listed no state fiscal impact but some members questioned hidden costs for clerks and county operations.
The measure passed second reading and will be placed on the third‑reading calendar; senators flagged follow‑up questions about fiscal implications and operational implementation for county clerks.
