A box for dropping off postal ballots at the polling station. (Photo: Alex Wong/Getty Images)
Voting rights groups are asking Gov. Mike DeWine to veto a fresh bill requiring photo ID to cast an absentee ballot, and Ohio’s secretary of state nominees differ on what they think he should do.
While both Republicans and Democrats support requiring identification to vote, candidates for Ohio secretary of state differ on the newly passed bill.
Republican lawmakers in Ohio have passed a bill requiring absentee voters to show a copy of their ID when voting
“Photo ID for absentee ballots is extremely important because we want to make sure that people are who they say they are,” Republican candidate Robert Sprague, the current state treasurer, said in an interview.
Sprague supports the state legislature’s last-minute amendment to House Bill 472.
The original HB 472 would have waived ID fees for people at risk of homelessness. The fresh version requires the applicant to provide two forms of ID from a variety of options, including live photo ID capture or an electronic signature.
“This amendment is half-baked and sloppy,” Democratic candidate Allison Russo, a former House minority leader, said during a speech on the floor.
In an interview Monday, Russo urged DeWine to veto the measure.
“The system in Ohio works,” she said. “There is no evidence that there was fraud in our mail-in voting.”
Russo is joined by Libertarian candidate Tom Pruss in asking for a veto.
“Governor DeWine should veto this bill and send a clear message that protecting voting rights is not a partisan issue,” Pruss wrote in a Facebook post. “Ohio deserves voting laws that strengthen confidence in our system, not laws designed to discourage voting.”
The origin of the changes results from negotiations within the GOP.
Ohio Republicans really wanted to put a constitutional amendment on the November ballot that would require a photo ID to vote in person, a rule already in state law.
The policy, passed as SJR 10, did not appeal to either Democrats, who said it was an attempt to boost Republican turnout in the midterms, or more right-wing members of the GOP. Conservative activists testified that the proposal makes no difference to the actual integrity of the election, which for many requires photo ID for absentee ballots.
As stated, SJR 10 does not require photo ID for absentee ballots; however, it allows it as an option. To get enough GOP votes to put the resolution on the ballot, lawmakers amended unrelated HB 472.
“They’re desperate for anything to get them excited,” Russo said.
Republicans denied it was a “vote juicer,” and Sprague defended his party for not submitting it to higher law.
“I would like to see this in a constitutional amendment as well, but I will leave it to the General Assembly to decide where they want to put photo ID for absentee ballots,” he said.
I kept asking Republican Party leaders, including Sprague, if identity is so vital, why not include it in the Constitution? Each of them stated that it was “not what they were doing” at the moment.
Pruss called it “election manipulation” rather than honesty.
“After years of telling Ohioans that our elections are secure, Republican lawmakers continue to seek solutions to problems that do not exist,” Pruss said. “When politicians make it more difficult for eligible citizens to vote, knowing full well that fraud is already extremely rare, the inevitable result is fewer people voting.”
To be clear, there is no evidence of widespread voter fraud in Ohio, even if photo ID laws were not in place. Thousands of audits have confirmed this.
HB 472
Currently, to receive an absentee ballot, voters must provide their general identification, signature and the last four digits of their Social Security number or full driver’s license number. They can also provide photo ID, but this is not required.
Under the newly passed law, the applicant would have to complete all prior work as well as upload a live photo ID and electronic signature to an online portal – one that would have to be set up by the state. Individuals can also send a photocopy of their electoral commission.
“I actually think this is something we could reach a good agreement on [for] a lot of elements, but it was done in a hurry,” Russo said on the floor.
He points out that there are errors in the language, noting numerous typos that can radically change access.
“It refers to ballots in the plural, which means that now it will be OK if multiple ballots can be cast,” she said, exasperated.
Democrats are finding common ground with some Republicans. Speaking to reporters, Lt. LaRose said it was being pushed too quickly and would require money. Both candidates agreed.
“If you want elections to be secure, it will require investment,” Sprague said when asked what would happen to election commissions tasked with handling the mandate without funding. “It doesn’t bother me.”
But the bill does not provide funding for election boards, which Russo said leaves them in a complex situation – overworked and lacking guidance. Both she and Sprague said they support further aid.
“They should probably always have more money,” Sprague said.
Electoral boards and public libraries would have to provide a copy of photo ID free of charge. People with disabilities can apply for an exemption, but Russo says it can be complex to obtain one.
“Who actually assesses whether these layoffs are real or not?” Russo asked.
The bill does not specify who examines and approves exemptions.
“If you applied for an exemption and someone who needs to be identified says it’s not a valid exemption, you will be charged with voter fraud, which is a crime,” Russo explained.
Republicans oppose the issue, saying Democrats are trying “everything they can” to make the bill more confusing.
“If you are sick, this law does not apply to you. If you are disabled, this law does not apply to you. If you are in prison, this law does not apply to you. If you cannot work on a computer or show your ID, you can go to the Electoral Commission. If you cannot use the phone to show your ID, you can go to the Electoral Commission. If you do not have a copier to make a copy of your photo ID, you can use the phone or go online or go to the Electoral Commission” – said State Rep. Brian Stewart (R-Ashville).
Sprague pointed out that other states already have similar systems.
“You can see that in Kentucky and Wisconsin, where they already have the kind of photo ID required to vote by mail, they’re doing well,” Sprague said.
Moving on
If the governor signs the bill, it won’t go into effect until November 2027.
DeWine declined to comment on the bill, but his team said it was reviewing it carefully. He has until Wednesday to sign, veto or do nothing and let the bill go into effect.
The governor has previously expressed dissatisfaction with such moves by GOP leaders, yet he signed their election bill anyway.
LaRose is trying to work out logistics, as are local boards of elections.
“We appreciate the General Assembly’s commitment to election integrity and have already begun assessing the technical requirements of this new law, particularly as it relates to building a secure digital portal for absentee ballot applications,” said LaRose spokesman Ben Kindel. “As always, we will ensure Ohio remains the national gold standard in election administration.”
But politically, it’s something the GOP can build on.
The votes on HB 472 and SJR 10 already seem crucial to the election, which is why Russo says he has no problem with voter ID.
Before Russo’s vote, we asked Sprague what he thought the projected rejection of both votes would mean.
“Well, I think he’ll say something about why he’s voting no,” Sprague said, avoiding direct criticism of Russo. “I can only say I speak for myself. I think this is fundamental to election security in the state of Ohio, and I think Ohioans will support it.”
I asked if that meant there would be no ads about her voting no. He said he wasn’t sure. The day after her vote, an X account associated with Sprague began posting attack ads.
Russo responded by clapping, recalling an interview with Sprague from April in which we asked him about one example of mail-in voting fraud. He couldn’t do that during the interview.
Follow WEWS House of Representatives reporter Morgan Trau X AND Facebook.
This article was originally published on News5Cleveland.com and are published in the Ohio Capital Journal under a content sharing agreement. Unlike other OCJ articles, it is not available for free republication on other news outlets because it is owned by WEWS in Cleveland.
