Fiscal impact reports (FIRs) are prepared by the Legislative Finance Committee (LFC) for standing finance
committees of the Legislature. LFC does not assume responsibility for the accuracy of these reports if they
are used for other purposes.
F I S C A L I M P A C T R E P O R T
SPONSOR
Reps. Block, Lord, and Duncan/Sens.
Lanie
r and Block
LAST UPDATED
ORIGINAL DATE 03/18/2025
SHORT TITLE Require Voter I.D.
BILL
NUMBER House Bill 170
ANALYST Gygi
REVENUE*
(dollars in thousands)
Type FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 FY29
Recurring or
Nonrecurring
Fund
Affected
ID Fees ($690.0) ($690.0) ($690. 0) ($690.0) ($690.0) Recurring
MVD
Suspense
Fund
Parentheses ( ) indicate revenue decreases.
*Amounts reflect most recent analysis of this legislation.
ESTIMATED ADDITIONAL OPERATING BUDGET IMPACT*
(dollars in thousands)
Agency/Program
FY25 FY26 FY27
3 Year
Total Cost
Recurring or
Nonrecurring
Fund
Affected
AOC
Indeterminate
but minimal
Indeterminate
but minimal
Indeterminate
but minimal
Indeterminate
but minimal
Recurring General Fund
SOS 0.0 $81.0 to $161.0
$161.0 to
$323.0
$362.0 to
$604.0
Recurring
General Fund
SOS startup
costs
$120.0 $120.0 Nonrecurring
MVD 0.0 $115.0 $115.0 $330.0
Recurring
MVD Suspense
Fund
Parentheses ( ) indicate expenditure decreases.
*Amounts reflect most recent analysis of this legislation.
Conflicts with Senate Bills 16, 26, and 218
Sources of Information
LFC Files
Agency Analysis Received From
Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) New Mexico Attorney General (NMAG) Taxation and Revenue Department (TRD) Secretary of State (SOS) House Bill 170 – Page 2
SUMMARY
Synopsis of House Bill 170
House Bill 170 (HB170) would amend multiple sections of the Election Code to implement a
restricted voter identification law that would eliminate most current categories of documents
sufficient to register to vote, including identification issued by an Indian nation, tribe, or pueblo.
It also removes the ability for a voter to utilize an expired photo identification. Under the bill,
qualified electors would be required to have a current driver’s license or photo identification card
issued by the Motor Vehicle Division (MVD).
HB170 adds language allowing for challenges related to the identification documentation, in
which instance the voter must provide a copy of an MVD document for the voter’s provisional
ballot to be counted.
The bill would require MVD to provide free identification cards to eligible voters. It also
requires that a photocopy of a voter identification document be provided by the state on request
at no charge “when the voter presents the document during normal business hours at any city,
county or state government office that is capable of making such copies.”
Further, HB170 repeals current law directing suspension of voter identification requirements
other than those imposed by federal law if a voter is in line for over 45 minutes, which
suspension is subject to challenge by certain members of the election board.
The effective date of this bill is July 1, 2025.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS
There is no appropriation with HB170. Should the bill be enacted, both MVD and the Secretary
of State (SOS) report significant fiscal impacts. MVD estimates that providing customers with a
free voter ID would result in an annual revenue loss of $690 thousand to the MVD suspense
fund. This number represents the average revenue from the past five calendar years for
identification card for individuals 16 to 74 years old.
SOS estimates that providing a free copy of the required voter identification document would
range from $81 thousand to $323 thousand (in an election year) for printing supplies and
administration costs to coordinate with county clerks and state agencies. SOS would also have to
modify its software and processes for the mailed ballot application at an estimated one-time cost
of $120 thousand
The Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) indicates a minimal administrative cost for
statewide update, distribution, and documentation of statutory changes. The agency also
indicates increase caseloads for the courts resulting from HB170 would also increase costs, but
the associated costs are not quantified.
House Bill 170 – Page 3
SIGNIFICANT ISSUES
Current law provides a much broader range of voter identification types that may be
submitted, including:
• Original or a copy of a current and valid photo identification with or without an address
(which does not need to match the registration certification);
• Original or a copy of a utility bill, bank statement, government check, paycheck, student
identification card or other government document, including identification issued by an
Indian nation, tribe or pueblo that shows the name and address of the vote (which does
not need to match the registration certification); or
• A verbal or written statement by the voter of the voter’s name, registration address and
year of birth.
HB170 removes all these methods of identification except for an MVD-issued document, or, in
the case of an absentee ballot registering online, the voter’s social security number. However,
MVD states it is unclear whether the intent is to create a separate voter identification card solely
for voter registration identification purposes or to designate existing state-issued identification
cards for use in voting. Also, it is unclear whether a New Mexico resident can request a voter
identification card for voting purposes and still retain a valid driver’s license. Per Section 66-5-
401 NMSA 1978, New Mexico is a one credential state, and a New Mexico resident can only
hold a valid driver’s license or a valid identification card.
Unlike previous versions of bills with strict photo identification requirements, HB170 provides
for free identification cards to be issued to eligible voters. Nevertheless, SOS anticipates not
allowing alternatives to photo identification would likely dramatically reduce turnout among
qualified electors in New Mexico’s elections. For example, senior citizen voters often have no
current physical identification issued from the MVD. These groups rely on current provisions in
Section 1-1-24 NMSA 1978 to vote, which allow for original physical identification or verbal or
written statements related to identity.
Voter identification requirements have been found to disproportionately impact people of color,
the elderly, the poor and other classes of people (see “Other Substantive Issues”). AOC, the New
Mexico Attorney General (NMAG), and SOS anticipate legal challenges due to infringement on
the Constitutional right to vote, violation of federal voter registration law, and lack of equal
protection.
NMAG advises:
HB170 impacts the free exercise of the right to vote, which is a fundamental
constitutional
right. The U.S. Supreme Court has permitted voter ID laws to remain in effect. See
Crawford v. Marion Cty. Election Bd., 553 U.S. 181. However, a challenge to voter ID
laws could potentially be sustained under provisions of the New Mexico Constitution
which guarantee: “All elections shall be free and open, and no power, civil or military,
shall at any time interfere to prevent the free exercise of the right of suffrage.”
SOS notes HB170 may be vulnerable to challenge under the National Voter Registration Act’s
findings section, which states:
Discriminatory and unfair registration laws and procedures can have a direct and
damaging effect on voter participation in elections for Federal office and House Bill 170 – Page 4
disproportionately harm voter participation by various groups, including racial
minorities” (52 USC 20501(a)(3)). The provisions also likely violate federal law (52 USC
2108), which requires provisional voting be provided as [an] option to voters for whom
an “election official asserts that the individual is not eligible to vote.”
NMAG comments:
Photo identification requirements place a disproportionate burden on minorities, people
of color, the elderly, and the economically disenfranchised. If enacted HB170 will likely
be subjected to litigation under equal protection issues. Further, HB170 would have a
broad effect, reducing the ability for voters to participate without improved assurances of
election integrity. The legislation is not expected to provide significant material gains in
election security [which may] contribute to a finding that the HB170 is unconstitutional.
PERFORMANCE IMPLICATIONS
AOC notes the courts are participating in performance-based budgeting. Increased caseloads due
to HB170 may impact the following performance measures of the district courts:
• Cases disposed of as a percent of cases filed
• Percent change in case filings by case type
MVD states:
This bill will require MVD to issue a new type of credential, which will require
additional screening of the applicant. This will increase MVD transaction times and
waiting times by requiring an additional question to be reviewed on the electronic
signature pads at the time of issuance. MVD customer wait times are very sensitive to
transaction times.
ADMINISTRATIVE IMPLICATIONS
If HB170 passes, the SOS will have additional administration duties associated with education
and compliance: “The full funding of the SOS’s budget request is necessary to keep up with the
volume of work associated with all of the statutory duties supported by the office.”
NMAG reports it “provides legal representation to SOS and would necessarily be involved in
any litigation regarding this legislation and the various constitutional questions of law that would
be raised.”
Both MVD and SOS agree: “C
onsidering the effort, the effective due date of 7/1/2025 will not be
feasible. A more feasible effective date would be 1/1/2026.”
CONFLICT, DUPLICATION, COMPANIONSHIP, RELATIONSHIP
HB170 conflicts with Senate Bill 26 (also amending Section 1-4-5.1 NMSA 1978), Senate Bill
16 (also amending Section1-6-4, Section 1-12-7.1 and Section 1-12-20 NMSA 1978) and Senate
Bill 218 (also amending Section 1-12-8 and Section 1-24-3 NMSA 1978).
HB170 is similar to House Bill 110 introduced in the 2023 legislative session and House Bill 223
introduced in the 2024 session. House Bill 170 – Page 5
OTHER SUBSTANT IVE ISSUES
A total of 36 states have laws requiring voters to show some form of identification at the polls.
1
Of those, 22 states request or require voters to show an identification document that has a photo
on it, such as a driver’s license, state-issued identification card, military ID, tribal ID, and many
other forms of ID; and 14 states and the District of Columbia accept non-photo identification,
such as a bank statement with name and address or other document that does not necessarily
have a photo. Recent studies have found that strict photo identification laws deprive millions of
Americans the opportunity to vote and reduce voter turnout under the auspice of addressing
unsupported or rare allegations of voter fraud.
It is estimated that more than 16 million Americans lack government issued
identification, with minority voters almost three times more likely to not have an
identification.
2
The U.S. Government Accountability Office found that strict photo identification laws
reduce turnout by 2 to 3 percent on average, with a higher effect on minority turnout.
3
Voter fraud is exceedingly rare in both number of credible allegations and actual intent to
commit fraud.
4
It is likely that there will be challenges to the HB170 amendments because they involve a
fundamental right. In the FIR for 2023’s HB110, the Office of the New Mexico Attorney
General noted, “Since the right to exercise the franchise in a free and unimpaired manner is
preservative of other basic civil and political rights, any alleged infringement of the right of
citizens to vote must be carefully and meticulously scrutinized.” Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U.S. at
562, 84 S.Ct. 1362 (1964).
TECHNICAL ISSUES
NMAG points out a number of technical issues with the bill, including confusion about required
documentation for online registration and reference to procedures that no longer would exist in
statute.
KG/hj/hg/sgs
1
https://www.ncsl.org/elections-and-campaigns/voter-id
2
http://www.projectvote.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/AMERICANS-WITH-PHOTO-ID-Research-Memo-
February-2015.pdf
3
http://www.gao.gov/assets/670/665966.pdf.
4
Washington Post, August 6, 2014,
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2014/08/06/a-comprehensive-investigation-of-voter