State Representative Alexander Kolodin issued a statement following today’s stunning veto of HB 2322, a bipartisan-supported election reform bill that would codify in state law specific signature verification rules to confirm the identity of early voters – rules that were written by Governor Hobbs when she was Arizona’s Secretary of State.
“When Governor Katie Hobbs took office, she said that she’d ‘find common ground’ and work across party lines,” said Representative Kolodin. “Right now, Arizona has no laws setting any signature verification rules for early ballots, which help ensure that only lawful early voter’s vote. What ground could be more common making her own rules the law? Instead, her veto letter for HB 2322, for which 16 Democratic House members voted, indicates that instead of legally enforceable rules, she would like ‘ongoing’ signature verification ‘guidance’ that is non-binding and can be changed on a whim by a single person. That is hardly democratic – or sober and responsible governance.”
In a release issued Wednesday, Representative Kolodin noted that HB 2322 was the product of collaborative work across party lines. It had passed the House with bipartisan support and was not opposed by counties or the current Secretary of State Fontes.
How useful was this article ?
Click on a star to rate it!
1 thought on “Governor Hobbs Vetoes Her Own Signature Verification Rules – Rep Alexander Kolodin”
All of this quibbling over signature verification! Using a signature is an ineffective, outdated form of identification. My own penmanship is horrible and my scribble that is supposed to pass as a form of identification varies greatly from signature to signature.
Using a signature is not enough for important legal documents. These documents require that they be signed in the presence of a notary public. The notary will require some form of identification from the signer and in most states this information will be entered into the notary’s journal along with the date and the document signer will also have to sign the notary’s journal. In California at least, the signer will also have to enter their thumbprint into the notary’s journal for certain documents.
Using a signature as a form of identification is unreliable, and archaic. We already recognize that with the requirement that certain legal documents be signed in the presence of a notary public. Should we require that election ballots be notarized? Probably not. But we should also acknowledge that using signatures for identification just doesn’t work.
Comments are closed.