Relating to requiring the Department of Public Safety to share data for the purpose of maintaining the statewide voter registration list.
Summary
SB 1470 requires the Texas Department of Public Safety to share certain driver’s license and personal identification card data with the secretary of state so the statewide voter registration list can be kept current. The secretary of state must use information about Texans who apply for a driver’s license or ID in another state to identify voters whose addresses may have changed, who may no longer be qualified under the Election Code, or who may be registered in more than one state.
The bill also authorizes the secretary of state, in consultation with DPS, to adopt rules and procedures to carry out the data-sharing process. It takes effect September 1, 2025, and is intended to support voter-roll maintenance and reduce duplicate registrations across states and jurisdictions.
Impact
The bill amends the Election Code by adding Section 18.0625 to Chapter 18, creating a new statutory duty for DPS to share relevant licensing data with the secretary of state. It expands the tools available to maintain the statewide voter registration list and may affect registered voters whose residency or eligibility status changes after obtaining out-of-state identification. The measure primarily impacts the secretary of state, DPS, county election officials, and voters whose records may be flagged for review or removal based on cross-state data matches.
Sentiment
The bill appears to have received generally favorable support, passing both chambers with clear majorities, though not unanimously. The Senate approved it 20-10 and the House approved it 118-19, indicating broad legislative backing for voter-roll maintenance and interagency data sharing. The votes suggest the measure was supported as an election administration and integrity bill, while a notable minority remained opposed.
Contention
The main point of contention is the use of driver’s license and personal identification data to identify voters for possible list maintenance, which some lawmakers likely viewed as an aggressive or privacy-sensitive approach to voter-roll cleanup. Opponents may have been concerned about mistaken matches, burdens on eligible voters, or the potential for improper removals, while supporters emphasized preventing duplicate registrations and keeping the voter list accurate. The split votes in both chambers reflect this tension between election integrity and voter access/privacy concerns.