08/12/2026
VOTER ID: LET’S DEAL WITH THE FACTS, NOT THE TALKING POINTS
By Dare2bHonest
I have been reading a lot of claims about voter ID, election security, and states that supposedly allow people to “just walk in and vote.”
As an Independent, I can discuss election policy without changing the facts to fit a political party.
So, I went to the data.
According to the National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL), 36 states have laws that request or require some form of identification for in-person voting.
The other 14 states, plus Washington, D.C., do not generally require an identification document at the polls.
Those 14 states are:
California, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, and Vermont. (NCSL)
But here is where some political talking points become misleading.
“No documentary voter ID” does NOT mean “no voter verification.”
NCSL specifically says those states use other methods to verify voters. That can include checking a signature or other information against the voter-registration record. (NCSL)
That distinction matters.
NCSL divides voter-ID laws even further. Its current state table shows:
10 states — Strict Photo ID: Arkansas, Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Mississippi, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Ohio, Tennessee, Wisconsin.
14 states — Non-Strict Photo ID: Alabama, Florida, Idaho, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, West Virginia.
3 states — Strict Non-Photo ID: Arizona, North Dakota, Wyoming.
9 states — Non-Strict Non-Photo ID: Alaska, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Iowa, Oklahoma, Utah, Virginia, Washington.
14 states — No General Documentary ID Requirement: California, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Vermont. (NCSL)
So the argument is much more complicated than saying:
“Some states require ID and other states don’t check who is voting.”
That is not what the evidence shows.
Now here is another part of this conversation that deserves attention.
The Brennan Center for Justice reports that the Trump administration’s Department of Justice has sought complete statewide voter-registration lists from nearly every state. These requests can include information that is not normally part of a public voter file, including driver’s license numbers and partial Social Security numbers. (Brennan Center for Justice)
According to the Brennan Center’s current tracker, at least 16 states have either provided or said they will provide their complete statewide voter-registration lists to the DOJ:
Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Florida, Indiana, Iowa, Louisiana, Mississippi, Nebraska, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, and Wyoming. (Brennan Center for Justice)
Read that carefully.
I am not saying all 16 had transferred the same data in the same way. The Brennan Center’s language is “provided or said they will provide.” That distinction is important if we are going to have an honest policy discussion. (Brennan Center for Justice)
And this raises a policy question that should matter to Democrats, Republicans, Independents, MAGA supporters, and everybody else:
If election security is about protecting the integrity of voter information, shouldn’t we also be asking who receives our voter data, what information they receive, how it is secured, what it will be used for, and what legal authority governs that use?
That is not a left-wing question.
That is not a right-wing question.
That is a good-government question.
I support secure elections.
I support verifying that the person voting is legally entitled to vote.
I also support protecting citizens’ personal information and requiring government agencies to explain what they are doing with it.
Those ideas do not have to fight each other.
What I challenge is the misleading political claim that states without a documentary voter-ID requirement allow unidentified people to vote.
They do not.
They use different verification systems.
You can disagree with those systems. You can argue that every state should require photo identification. You can argue that current safeguards are enough.
Those are legitimate policy debates.
But first, we have to describe the law correctly.
Political opinions are free.
Facts still require receipts.
Sources: National Conference of State Legislatures, Voter ID Laws, updated April 24, 2026. (NCSL) Brennan Center for Justice, Tracker of Justice Department Requests for Voter Information. (Brennan Center for Justice) Brennan Center for Justice, Brennan Center for Justice v. U.S. Department of Justice (2026). (Brennan Center for Justice)
SOURCE:
1. National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL) — Voter ID Lawshttps://www.ncsl.org/elections-and-campaigns/voter-id
2. NCSL — Voter Verification Without ID Documentshttps://www.ncsl.org/elections-and-campaigns/voter-verification-without-id-documents
3. NCSL — Federal Requests for Statewide Voter Listshttps://www.ncsl.org/elections-and-campaigns/federal-requests-for-statewide-voter-lists
4. Brennan Center for Justice — Tracker of Justice Department Requests for Voter Informationhttps://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/tracker-justice-department-requests-voter-information
5. U.S. Department of Justice — Justice Department Sues Four States for Failure to Produce Voter Rollshttps://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-sues-four-states-failure-produce-voter-rolls
6. Congressional Research Service — Federal Voter Eligibility and Voter Registration: Overview and Issues for Congresshttps://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R48735