Voter registration, campaign finance reporting debated by North Dakota lawmakers

North Dakota is the only state in the country without voter registration. Instead, voters must provide valid identification at the polls or when they request a mail-in ballot.

Over the years, state lawmakers have repeatedly heard — and rejected — bills to implement a registration process. Rep. Mike Schatz, R-New England, is reviving the effort this session with House Bill 1287.

“I’m not super advocating for this, but I do want to get a pulse on how people feel about voter registration,” Schatz told the House Government and Veteran Affairs Committee on Thursday.

He said in his view, one possible advantage of voter registration is that it could curb cross-over voting.

“I want Republican Party members voting to choose the Republican candidates, the Democratic Party members voting to choose the Democratic candidates, and the independents voting for neither in the primary,” he said.

Schatz’s bill does not require a voter to register with a political party, but he said he would support an amendment to make registrants report this information.

Under the proposal, voters could register at their county auditor’s office; while applying for, renewing or updating a driver’s license or other ID; or while applying for or receiving public assistance. The bill also allows voters to register at polling locations.

Voters could register by mail as well, which would have to be done at least 30 days before an election.

Secretary of State Micheal Howe testified against the bill, calling it “duplicative.” He said most of the information it seeks to collect through registration is already recorded under the state’s existing ID laws.

“Registration adds an unneeded step for voters,” he told the committee.

Asking state agencies that offer public assistance to be involved in the voter registration process would also be an enormous administrative lift, Howe said.

“It’s my opinion that making more agencies involved in the election and ID process may not guarantee it, but may compromise the integrity of our very strong election system,” he said.

Howe said that if the bill were adopted into law, the Secretary of State’s Office would likely need at least $500,000 to launch a campaign to educate North Dakota’s approximately 600,000 eligible voters about voter registration in time for the June 2026 primary.

Nicole Donaghy, executive director of North Dakota Native Vote, on Thursday said voter registration would make voting harder for many Native American North Dakotans, who already face obstacles to participating in elections.

“Many tribal citizens live in areas where mail delivery is inconsistent or non-existent,” Donaghy said. “A lot of our communities are really lucky if they actually have a post office within their area, which further complicates the process to register to vote.”

The House Government and Veteran Affairs Committee that day also heard a bill to require political nonprofits to disclose the true source of financial contributions to North Dakota election campaigns and other political committees.

Other election-related bills

House Bill 1286, also sponsored by Schatz, is meant to address the use of so-called “dark money.” Certain kinds of organizations can raise money to support political causes without reporting where the funding comes from.

“The reason this bill was put forward was to answer this question: Who’s trying to influence my vote?” Schatz said. “Most people in North Dakota want to know.”

The bill proposes a complex system for reporting contributions to political committees, campaigns and ballot measures and for investigating possible violations.

Anyone who spends more than $200 in an election cycle for a political purpose, with some exceptions, would be required to maintain paper trails detailing the “identity of each ultimate and true source” of that money. The bill would apply to 501c(4) organizations, or nonprofits that can use money for some political activity. Organizations with this tax status are sometimes associated with dark money spending.

This financial information — as well as some other details –- would have to be reported to the Secretary of State’s Office, which would be required to publish the information online.

The bill establishes that trying to evade these campaign reporting requirements is a class A misdemeanor.

Deputy Secretary of State Sandy McMerty said it’s the opinion of the Secretary of State’s Office that the bill would be unconstitutional since the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that 501c(4) organizations can contribute to political causes and keep their donors’ identities anonymous in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission.

“I want to be perfectly clear; our office’s opposition to HB 1286 is in no way an endorsement of dark money in politics,” McMerty told the committee. “More and more citizens do not want to run for office for fear of hidden political attacks.”

She also said that the system the bill proposes for handling disclosures is overly complex and too cumbersome to implement. The Secretary of State’s Office would be charged with investigating violations of the proposed law, which McMerty said would leave the agency vulnerable to lawsuits.

Shane Goettle, a lobbyist for Brighter Future Alliance, said the bill would violate First Amendment rights and hamper the political process. In 2024, the Brighter Future Alliance opposed a ballot measure that sought to legalize recreational marijuana, promoted voter participation and funded advertising campaigns opposing some legislative candidates.

“Money is also a part of free expression,” he said. “The remedy for speech that we don’t like is more speech.”

Rep. Vicky Steiner, R-Dickinson, questioned whether the law currently provides an even playing field for political speech through financial contributions.

“You said the remedy for speech is more speech, but big money is more speech, and we don’t know where the big money comes through,” Steiner said.

In 2018, voters approved an amendment to the North Dakota Constitution that includes a mandate giving the Legislature three years to pass campaign finance laws similar to what House Bill 1286 proposes.

The same legislative committee on Thursday also heard House Bill 1245 brought by Rep. Jared Hendrix, R-Fargo, which would allow people circulating petitions for ballot measures to be paid based on the number of signatures they obtain. Current law allows them to be paid by the hour.

Hendrix was behind two recent successful ballot measures — one setting an age limit for North Dakota’s congressional delegates, and another setting term limits for state lawmakers.

The committee closed the public hearings on all three bills Thursday, but adjourned without taking any further action on the proposals.

Over in the Senate, a committee considered two other election and campaign finance-related bills.

Senate Bill 2156, sponsored by Sen. Sean Cleary, R-Bismarck, would add new reporting requirements for candidates, and bar the use of campaign contributions for personal benefits to the candidate or another person, loans, gifts, criminal fine or civil penalties. It also increases the penalties for late filings. The Senate State and Local Government Committee has yet to vote on the bill.

The committee on Thursday also held a hearing on Senate Bill 2178, which would require separate ballots for each political party during a primary. A record of which party a voter selected would be stored in the state’s central voter file for six years.

Bill sponsor Rep. Chuck Walen, R-New Town, told members of the committee the bill aims to prevent spoiled ballots, which occurs when voters cross over and vote for candidates in both parties.

Erika White, elections director for the Secretary of State’s Office, said the bill could nearly triple the cost of elections by requiring additional ballots. The League of Women Voters of North Dakota opposed the bill, citing privacy concerns and a potential deterrent to voter participation.

The Senate overwhelmingly rejected the bill on Friday.

Also last week, the House approved two election-related bills.

House Bill 1099 would require a presidential candidate’s first and last name to appear on the ballot. A Fargo election judge submitted written testimony indicating that voters were confused in November by presidential candidates appearing on the ballot by last name only.

House Bill 1178 would require school districts to allow students who are eligible to vote to leave school to participate in an election.

Both proposals will advance to the Senate for further consideration.

Michael Achterling contributed to this report.