Digital ID card, driver's license option bill narrowly passes Idaho House
The Idaho House of Representatives on Tuesday narrowly passed a bill to let Idahoans have digital identification cards.
House Bill 78, sponsored by Rep. Stephanie Mickelsen, R-Idaho Falls, would allow the Idaho Transportation Department to issue electronic driver's licenses and ID cards that people could access on their mobile phone's wallet application.
If the bill becomes law, the new digital driver's licenses would be optional, not required, and people with a mobile driver's license would still be required to have a physical driver's license.
Mickelsen said almost three-forths of states either offer an electronic driver's license, or are developing one.
'By moving to a mobile driver's license system, it actually is more secure than the current system in which your driver's license exists, because it moves it into a … trusted vault that protects your data,' Mickelsen told the House.
She added that digital driver's licenses would be 'an immigration security strategy,' and hopefully help stop fraud in Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program as 'we build out Idaho's digital wallet.'
Under the bill, digital driver's licenses or identification cards would not be allowed as proof of identification at election polls.
The Idaho House passed the bill Tuesday on a 37-33 vote. In the half-hour debate on the bill, several lawmakers raised privacy and security concerns.
The bill now heads to the Idaho Senate. To become law, Idaho bills must pass the House and Senate, and avoid the governor's veto.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Rep. Joe Alfieri, R-Coeur d'Alene, who voted against the bill, raised several privacy concerns.
'We have a much further area to be concerned about, besides our being hacked, our individual information being hacked — the possibility of creating digital citizens who can collect benefits or, by the way, vote,' he argued.
Rep. Rod Furniss, R-Rigby, who voted for the bill, called the bill 'a logical step in the right direction' and said the House's debate on the bill would be different if lawmakers were younger.
'If we had a room full of 25 year olds in this room, they would think we are old fuddy-duddies for not putting this on our phone and not making it legal and not being a step in the right direction,' Furniss told the House. 'This is going to come in the future, whether you want it or not.'
Rep. Brandon Mitchell, R–Moscow, who voted against the bill, said sheriffs in his district opposed the bill, along with several university security department heads he talked to.
''No, this is a bad idea. My students could hack into that in minutes,' is what they were telling me,' Mitchell said.
Mickelsen said the bill is supported by many sheriffs, and several cybersecurity experts at Idaho National Laboratory she consulted assured her about possible security risks.
'They all told me that these are some of the highest keys that exist out there in the cyber world. … That it's a very safe, very reliable system,' she said.
The bill's fiscal note estimates it will have no fiscal impact, since ITD has already been allocated money for similar projects.
The bill would also not automatically let law enforcement officers search people's phones if people present their digital ID cards.
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
21 minutes ago
- The Hill
Trump wants to make the census count
The 2020 U.S. census faced multiple challenges during the pandemic. A good case can be made that it should be redone — which President Trump says he will do. The problem is that Trump can be so divisive that Democrats and the media will denounce his census-retake efforts as just another partisan political ploy. On Aug. 7, Trump wrote on Truth Social that he had instructed the Department of Commerce (which oversees the census) to 'begin work on a new and highly accurate CENSUS based on modern day facts and figures and, importantly, using the results and information gained from the Presidential Election of 2024.' One key Trump change for the new census: 'People who are in our Country illegally WILL NOT BE COUNTED IN THE CENSUS.' Can the president conduct a mid-decade census? Apparently, although it's never been done. Although the Census Bureau does take other surveys, current law allows the president to conduct a mid-decade census, but only for federal funding purposes, not for reapportionment of House seats. If Trump wants to proceed with an actual recount — as opposed to a reevaluation of the 2020 count — the logistics would be extremely challenging and costly, and he may need Congress to pass enabling legislation. On the other hand, Trump is often able to move forward with his plans by keeping his detractors tied up in the courts. There were serious and well-recognized problems with the 2020 census. For example, The Government Accountability Office released a report in November 2024 stating, 'The U.S. Census Bureau's 2020 Post-Enumeration Survey estimated that two geographic regions and 14 states had statistically significant net coverage errors in the 2020 Census.' In addition, 'The survey results also showed that under- and overcounts persisted for various demographic groups.' So Trump has a point. GAO isn't alone. The Census Bureau also recognized the problem but emphasized the positive rather than the negative, pointing out that 'counts for 36 states and the District of Columbia did not have a statistically significant undercount or overcount in the 2020 Census …' And here's why Trump and Republicans might be concerned. Of the eight states with overcounts, six — Massachusetts, Rhode Island, New York, Delaware, Minnesota and Hawaii — are reliably blue states. Five of the six undercounted states — Texas, Mississippi, Arkansas, Tennessee and Florida — are reliably red states. Maybe it's a coincidence, but the fact that blue states make up 75 percent of the overcount while red states make up 83 percent of the undercount seems odd — perhaps a little too odd. There are several reasons why it's better to be overcounted than undercounted. More federal money typically flows to states with more people. But perhaps even more important, the 435 congressional districts are divvied up based on state population. If, for example, overcounted Massachusetts and New York had been accurately counted, those states might have lost a member of the House. If the five undercounted red states had been accurately counted, they might have gained a few more congressional seats. In short, it's at least possible that, had all states been accurately counted, there might be a few more Republicans and a few less Democrats in the House. And Trump might feel less pressure to initiate his redistricting efforts to hold the House. Trump also says that undocumented people will not be counted. That goes counter to the longstanding practice of counting everyone in the U.S. regardless of legal status. Defenders cite Article I, Section 2, of the Constitution, known as the Enumeration Clause. Then there's the Fourteenth Amendment, which says in part, 'Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State …' Another hurdle for Trump: The U.S. Supreme Court in 2019 blocked Trump's first effort to add a citizenship question to the census. But not asking about citizenship has led to several policy problems. Take health care, for example. Under federal law, undocumented workers are not allowed to enroll in Medicaid or receive federal subsidies under the Affordable Care Act. And yet they are counted as uninsured, even though they don't have access to government-subsidized health coverage and most couldn't afford private coverage. Counting the undocumented magnifies a problem that isn't fixable by doing a better job of enrolling. Census takers should be allowed to ask about citizenship — counting the person to get that 'whole number' but also noting if the person is undocumented. Critics claim that illegal immigrants will just avoid responding to the census. Perhaps some will, especially given the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement crackdowns. But counting the undocumented has been guesswork. It's time we had as accurate a count as possible.
NBC News
22 minutes ago
- NBC News
Texas redistricting fight provides Democratic Senate contenders with a megaphone
The Texas redistricting fight has provided the Democrats eyeing the state's Senate race with an elevated platform ahead of a potentially crowded primary clash. State Rep. James Talarico, who has been considering a bid for the seat held by GOP Sen. John Cornyn, is in the middle of the debate as one of the Democrats who are holed up in Illinois to deny Republicans the chance to move forward with a plan to net their party up to five more House seats in Washington. Former Rep. Beto O'Rourke, who hasn't ruled out a Senate run, has played a central role in helping to financially support the Democratic lawmakers who have fled Texas. That has led to clashes with state Attorney General Ken Paxton — who is challenging Cornyn in the Republican Senate primary — in court. And the top Democrat who's officially in the Senate race, former Rep. Colin Allred, has put his opposition to the GOP's plan to redraw Texas' congressional maps at the forefront of his message on the campaign trail. While the Democratic Senate primary in Texas still remains in flux, the GOP contest has already turned ugly. Democrats are hopeful that the energy around the redistricting fight, as well as fallout from the Cornyn-Paxton battle, could help them put the Senate race in the traditionally red state on the map. Matt Angle, a longtime Democratic strategist in Texas who runs the Lone Star Project, told NBC News that the redistricting battle has fired up the party's 'activist' base in the state. 'This mid-decade redistricting has really touched off a little bit of a fire that wouldn't have been there otherwise,' he said. 'It plays to all three of these guys' strengths — Beto is a really good cheerleader, for lack of a better word, in terms of getting people fired up. Talarico is a fresh face and he's interesting, and Colin also shows a resoluteness and a competence that really plays to his strength." While O'Rourke and Talarico haven't jumped into the race, their political operations have massively increased their digital spending on Meta platforms in recent days. O'Rourke — who previously ran for Senate and governor in Texas, as well as for president — has spent $380,000 since the state House Democrats announced their quorum break on Aug. 3, including $98,000 last Wednesday alone, mainly through his group Powered by People. There have only been five days within the past six years where O'Rourke has spent more than that $98,000 on Meta platforms dating back to mid-2019 — all were during the summer and fall of 2022, during his campaign against Gov. Greg Abbott. Talarico had never spent more than $1,500 in one day on Meta platforms before last month. Half of the $400,000 he's spent on Meta platforms this year came after the quorum break announcement, including pouring $78,000 into ads on Aug. 6. For his part, Allred has spent far less on Meta, and has been traveling the state as the only major candidate currently seeking the Democratic Senate nomination. O'Rourke, who has become one of the more visible Democrats in the state after three high-profile bids for office, has been blanketing the airwaves for weeks, blasting the Texas redistricting plan and calling on national Democrats to 'match fire with fire.' He's also been raising funds for the Democratic lawmakers in the hopes of offsetting the steep financial penalties and other costs they're facing. Those actions have drawn the fury of Republicans across the state, leading Paxton to successfully petition a court to halt O'Rourke's ability to raise funds for the state Democrats. 'This guy thinks, Donald Trump, that he is absolutely unstoppable, he really believes he's the king that these knee-benders tell him that he is. And so he comes to our state to grab even more power in the form of these five congressional districts,' O'Rourke said at a rally over the weekend in Fort Worth, one many he's held in recent days in Texas and around the country. 'We're going to fight these motherf-----s for as long as it takes, with everything we got. We're never giving in, we're never giving up, and we're never bending the knee,' he said. Holing up in Illinois as the quorum break hits its second week, Talarico has been publicly singled out by Paxton and Abbott. Paxton filed a lawsuit aimed at booting Talarico and a dozen other state legislators from office, while Abbott's office posted a 'wanted' poster of Talarico on its social media channels. Talarico, who had already made waves this summer with a high-profile appearance on Joe Rogan's podcast and other national interviews, has become a constant presence on television and done a slew of other media appearances since the quorum break began. Last week, Talarico reposted an aide's message on X that clipped a photo of a news story about the Democrat that rounded up the number of interviews he's done. Evoking Texas politicians over the years — like former President Lyndon B. Johnson, Gov. Ann Richards and Rep. Barbara Jordan, as well as more recent examples such as O'Rourke — Talarico said last week during an interview on The Ringer's 'Higher Learning' podcast that Democrats in the state know how to be bold. 'If you know anything about Texas history, we don't surrender easily, we don't go down without a fight. Everyone knows the Alamo, that is part of our DNA as Texans, it's fighting for what we believe in, for standing up for what we believe is right regardless of the consequences,' he said. Later, Talarico took a swipe at Paxton and said that while he's looking at the Senate race, he has been more focused on the redistricting fight and will decide 'once we get past this quorum break and hopefully beat these corrupt maps.' Still, taking the Senate plunge would be a major step for Talarico, who has never had to build out a statewide fundraising or organizing operation before. While O'Rourke and Talarico have been playing more active roles in the redistricting battle, Allred has focused heavily on the issue after officially launching his Senate campaign in July. As a former lawyer who worked on voting rights cases and a former congressman who initially defeated a Republican incumbent on his way to office, Allred has grounded much of his pitch on his own expertise. He has blasted Republicans for their comments that the redistricting plan is solely about accumulating more power in Washington and testifying against the plan in front of the state House. Evoking the late civil rights advocate and former Democratic Rep. John Lewis' advocacy for voting rights, Allred t old the state House's special redistricting committee that he believed Lewis would be 'horrified' by the GOP efforts. 'I think he would say to us: We are better than this. And I think he would say: If you do this, then we have to mobilize in a way we've never seen before,' Allred said. As Allred continues his run and Democrats wait to see what O'Rourke and Talarico decide, Angle lamented that his party may only get the chance to vote for one of these candidates in the general election. 'We're not used to Texas having this many good [Democratic] candidates ready to roll,' the strategist said. 'That's why I sure wish we could spread them out across a few races.'
San Francisco Chronicle
an hour ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Texas Republicans plan another special session to deliver Trump more GOP congressional seats
AUSTIN, Texas (AP) — Texas Republican leaders said Tuesday that they were prepared to end their stalemated special session and immediately begin another standoff with Democrats in the GOP's efforts to redraw congressional maps as directed by President Donald Trump. It's the latest indication that Trump's push to redraw congressional maps ahead of the 2026 midterm elections will become an extended standoff that promises to reach multiple statehouses controlled by both major parties. Texas House Speaker Dustin Burrows confirmed the plans during a brief session Tuesday morning that marked another failure to meet the required attendance standards to conduct official business because dozens of Democrats have left the state to stymie the GOP's partisan gerrymandering attempts ahead of the 2026 midterm elections. Burrows said from the House floor that lawmakers will not attempt to reconvene again until Friday. If Democrats are still absent — and they have given no indication that they plan to return — the speaker said Republicans will end the current session and Gov. Greg Abbott will immediately call another. The governor, a Trump ally, confirmed his intentions in a statement. 'The Special Session #2 agenda will have the exact same agenda, with the potential to add more items critical to Texans,' Abbott wrote. 'There will be no reprieve for the derelict Democrats who fled the state and abandoned their duty to the people who elected them. I will continue to call special session after special session until we get this Texas first agenda passed.' Abbott called the current session with an extensive agenda that included disaster relief for floods that killed more than 130 people. Democrats balked when Abbott added Trump's redistricting idea to the agenda. Burrows on Tuesday did not mention redistricting but chided Democrats for not showing up for debate on the flood response package. The redistricting legislation would reshape the state's congressional districts in a design aimed at sending five more Republicans to Washington. The scheme is part of Trump's push to shore up Republicans' narrow House majority and avoid a repeat of his first presidency, when the 2018 midterms restored Democrats to a House majority that blocked his agenda and twice impeached him. Current maps nationally put Democrats within three seats of retaking the House majority — with only several dozen competitive districts across 435 total seats. Texas Republicans have issued civil warrants for the absent Democrats. Because they are out of state, those lawmakers are beyond the reach of Texas authorities. Burrows said Tuesday that absent Democrats would have to pay for all state government costs for law enforcement officials attempting to track them down. Burrows has said state troopers and others have run up 'six figures in overtime costs' trying to corral Democratic legislators.
