The Photo ID Exception Form: No Photo ID Required to Vote

Our Election Integrity Warrior Queen, Carol Snow, who is always looking out for us, sent the email below to Senator Warren Daniel, Rep Hugh Blackwell (Sponsor of H958), and others, regarding the false claim "...that anyone attempting to vote in the name of a deceased voter would have to produce a photo ID containing the deceased person’s picture, personal information, and date of birth."

That is simply not accurate under current North Carolina law and practice. Photo ID – Not Required to Vote

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: cls28655@gmail.com <cls28655@gmail.com>

Sent: Tuesday, August 25, 2026 2:40 PM

To: 'Sen. Warren Daniel' <Warren.Daniel@ncleg.gov>; 'Rep. Hugh Blackwell' <Hugh.Blackwell@ncleg.gov>

Cc: 'Kenneth L. Carrico, Ph.D.' <kcarricophd@yahoo.com>; 'Andy Perrigo (Sen. Warren Daniel)' <Andy.Perrigo@ncleg.gov>

Subject: RE: 34,000 Deceased Registrations and the Veto of HB 958 Senator Daniel stated that anyone attempting to vote in the name of a deceased voter would have to produce a photo ID containing the deceased person’s picture, personal information, and date of birth.

That is simply not accurate under current North Carolina law and practice. Photo ID – Not Required to Vote

As you both know from the voter ID law (Session Law 2018-144 / NCGS 163-166.16), photo ID is required, but there are multiple exceptions.  See NCSBE “Voter ID Overview”. See NCDEM “No Photo ID? You can still vote!”.

A voter who does not present photo ID may complete and sign a Photo ID Exception Form and cast a provisional ballot. Under the current administrative rule, the provisional ballot must be counted unless the county board finds by majority vote that the Photo ID Exception Form (affidavit) is false. The burden is on the board members to find falsity; the affidavit is presumed to be true. [08 NCAC 17 .0101(e), as amended and approved July 16, 2026]

This same reliance on photo ID as a backstop against voting with ineligible or duplicate registrations was raised during the April 11, 2024 HAVA Administrative Complaint hearing. Board Member Jeff Carmon asked whether the photo ID requirement would stop the problem of ineligible or duplicate registrations remaining on the rolls. As I explained at that time, the existence of the Photo ID Exception Form means it does not.

Date of Birth – Not Required to Vote

Additionally, at the polling place the primary verification is the voter’s name and address. Voters are not required to provide a date of birth when checking in at the polls. In my own experience voting, I have never been asked for my date of birth at check-in. If that procedure has changed, I am not aware of it. See Election Official Resource Guide – pages 62-68.

Ineligible Registrations Present a VulnerabilityCitizen analysts, including myself, have identified thousands of cases in which the same individual appears to have two registration records — one that was properly removed as deceased (reason code RD) and another that remains in an eligible status (Active or Inactive). In those situations, a bad actor could appear at the polls, give the name and address of the still-eligible record, and vote without needing to present a photo ID or provide the date of birth of the deceased voter.

Many of the likely deceased registrations identified by citizen analysts were never submitted for matching against the SAVE database because the personal identifying information was either never collected (Registration Repair voters) or could not be verified as accurate. In other words, citizen analysts have located likely deceased voters not flagged by the SAVE match.

While voters on the Registration Repair list are required to vote provisionally and provide personal identifying information, that information is not required to be accurate under N.C.G.S. § 163-166.12(d). In practice, a utility bill (which can be easily fabricated) is accepted as sufficient documentation to satisfy the identity requirement.

From Sen Daniel’s response, it appears the Republican members of the General Assembly are prepared to accept the vulnerabilities created by leaving ineligible registrations on the official voter rolls for the upcoming federal election. That is a risk I believe is both unnecessary and avoidable.

I remain willing to provide specific examples of the duplicate deceased/eligible pairs if either of you would find them useful.

Respectfully,

Carol Snow

Morganton, NC

Burke Co