Skip to main content

HB 2004

In Committee

House

Voter database access

Providing secure online access to the voter registration database.

This status may be delayed. See Action History below for the latest updates.

How does a bill become law?
  1. Introduced: The bill is filed and assigned a number.
  2. Committee: A subject-matter committee holds hearings, takes public testimony, and decides whether to advance the bill.
  3. Floor Vote: The full chamber (House or Senate) debates and votes on the bill.
  4. Opposite Chamber: The bill repeats the committee and floor vote process in the other chamber.
  5. Governor: The Governor reviews the bill and decides whether to sign or veto it.
  6. Signed: The bill has been signed into law.
Introduced: February 19, 2025
Last Action: January 12, 2026
Status: H State Govt & Tr

AI Analysis

This analysis was generated by AI and may contain errors. It is not legal advice. Always refer to the official bill text for authoritative information.
People & CommunitiesPeople-leaningCorporate & Wealthy Interests

This bill establishes a centralized, secure statewide voter registration database managed by the Secretary of State and requires county auditors to use it. It gives voters secure online access to update their registration and print ballots, while strengthening data coordination and eligibility screening across state and federal agencies. The database must comply with federal law and include features to prevent duplicate registrations and identify ineligible voters.

  • Creates a centralized, interactive statewide voter registration database maintained by the Secretary of State’s office.
  • Requires each county auditor to electronically submit and update voter registration data in the statewide database and maintain local databases with additional local election details (e.g., precinct codes, past voting history).
  • Mandates a unique identifier for each voter and requires secure online access for voters to update registration and print replacement ballots using a password-protected verification system (exempt from public records disclosure).
  • Requires the database to screen for duplicates and check eligibility by linking with state and federal agency databases (e.g., corrections, licensing, immigration) to identify ineligible voters (e.g., felons serving sentences, non-citizens).
  • Requires retention of records of successful appeals of voter registration cancellations to prevent repeated cancellations for the same reason.

Who is affected

  • Registered voters in WashingtonVoters gain secure online access to view and update their registration information and print replacement ballots using a unique, password-protected verification system.
  • County auditors and their staffCounty auditors gain electronic access to the statewide database to manage registrations, search for duplicates, and update voter records; must maintain local databases with additional local election details.
  • Office of the Secretary of StateThe Secretary of State’s office gains full data authority over the statewide voter database and is responsible for maintaining, coordinating, and supporting the system across counties.
  • State government agenciesState agencies (e.g., Department of Licensing, Department of Health, Department of Corrections) may have their data used to verify voter eligibility (e.g., checking for felons serving sentences, non-citizens, or mentally incompetent individuals).
Effective: July 28, 2025Fiscal impact: The bill requires the Secretary of State to provide technical support to counties for database integration, which may involve new software, training, or staffing costs; however, no specific dollar amount is stated.
Model: Intel/Qwen3-Coder-Next-int4-AutoRoundGenerated: Mar 20, 2026 at 2:09 AM

Pro/Con Analysis

Stronger case for benefits

Potential Benefits (5)
  • Voters gain secure, self-service online access to update registration and print replacement ballots—reducing barriers for people with mobility issues, rural residents, and those without easy access to in-person offices, thereby increasing participation and convenience.

    Public SafetyPeopleRef: Sec. 1(9)(j)
  • Automated duplicate and eligibility screening—especially against state and federal databases—reduces opportunities for fraud and improves accuracy of voter rolls, increasing public confidence in election integrity while protecting eligible voters’ access.

    Public SafetyPeopleRef: Sec. 1(9)(d), (11)
  • A centralized, standardized statewide database eliminates inconsistencies between county systems, ensures uniform data standards, and provides a single authoritative source for election administration—reducing administrative errors and streamlining post-election audits.

    Public SafetyPeopleRef: Sec. 1(1), (2), (3), (4)
  • Retention of appeal records for cancelled registrations prevents repeated administrative errors and protects voters from being disenfranchised by repeated cancellations for the same reason—especially helpful for vulnerable populations with limited legal recourse.

    Public SafetyPeopleRef: Sec. 1(11)
  • Integration with the Department of Licensing change-of-address database and county databases improves timeliness and accuracy of voter records—reducing the number of voters displaced by outdated addresses and supporting more efficient mailings and precinct assignment.

    Public SafetyLean peopleRef: Sec. 1(9)(f), (9)(h)
Potential Concerns (5)
  • The bill authorizes integration with federal immigration and law enforcement databases (e.g., ICE, FBI, Bureau of Prisons) to identify ineligible voters, which could create a chilling effect among immigrant communities and discourage voter participation—even among eligible non-citizen residents who fear being flagged or tracked, regardless of legal status.

    Public SafetyRef: Sec. 1(9)(d), (10)
  • The verification system used for online voter access is exempt from public records disclosure (chapter 42.56 RCW), limiting transparency and independent auditability of the system’s security, accuracy, and fairness—reducing public accountability for potential errors or discriminatory outcomes.

    Rights & LibertiesRef: Sec. 1(9)(j)
  • Counties must integrate existing systems with the statewide database, requiring technical upgrades and staff time—costs that may fall disproportionately on smaller, under-resourced counties, potentially delaying implementation or diverting funds from other election functions.

    Local GovernmentLean peopleRef: Sec. 1(7), Fiscal Impact
  • Automated screening against correctional, licensing, and immigration databases may produce false positives (e.g., name mismatches, outdated addresses, or administrative errors), leading to wrongful cancellation of eligible voters’ registrations—especially affecting low-income, elderly, or non-English-dominant voters with less ability to appeal.

    Rights & LibertiesLean peopleRef: Sec. 1(9)(d)
  • While the bill emphasizes security, it does not specify cybersecurity standards, third-party audits, or incident reporting requirements—leaving the system potentially vulnerable to breaches, data manipulation, or foreign interference without independent verification.

    Public SafetyRef: Sec. 1(9)(j)

Who Is Most Affected

Registered voters in WashingtonMixed Impact

Registered voters benefit from increased convenience and self-service options, but may face risk of erroneous registration cancellation due to automated screening errors—especially those with limited digital literacy, unstable housing, or non-traditional names.

County auditors and their staffMixed Impact

County auditors gain standardized tools and data access, reducing manual work and duplication—but face new technical and staffing burdens to comply with integration requirements, especially in smaller counties.

Office of the Secretary of StateMixed Impact

The Secretary of State gains centralized authority and data control, improving election oversight—but also assumes significant liability and operational responsibility for system security, uptime, and compliance.

State government agenciesNegative Impact

State agencies (e.g., DOL, DOC) gain new data-sharing responsibilities but no new funding; their data may be used to disenfranchise eligible voters if records are outdated or mismatched—raising privacy and equity concerns.

Immigrant communities and non-citizen residentsNegative Impact

Immigrant communities—especially non-citizens with legal status—may experience increased fear and voter suppression due to integration with federal immigration databases, even if the bill includes safeguards.

Sponsors

Representative Chase(Republican)District 4Primary
Representative Volz(Republican)District 6Secondary