Committee advances bill capping voter‑roll cost at $1,000 amid concerns over "publish" language

Representative Kiel introduced House Bill 67 on Feb. 11, proposing a $1,000 cap on the cost to obtain the statewide voter roll, removal of routine phone numbers from public output, and a prohibition on commercial use of the voter list.

During a public hearing, several volunteers and election‑integrity advocates told the County Municipal Government Committee that the bill’s language as drafted could unintentionally criminalize routine verification work. Becky Garretson, executive director of Eagle Forum of Alabama, warned the bill’s phrasing — specifically the inclusion of the word "publish" — could make it "unlawful to sell or publish any portion of a voter list," potentially barring nonprofit verification groups from sharing findings. "What good is a cheaper list if it can't be verified?" Garretson said.

Volunteers offered examples they said show flaws in the rolls. Suzanne Koehler of Huntsville said her group’s handout shows "nearly 3,800,000 registered voters, often exceeding the number of eligible adults," and said current public tools in Alabama are limited compared with other states. Susan Chipman of Huntsville and other witnesses urged the committee to remove the word "publish" or explicitly exempt voter‑verification and public‑research organizations to avoid chilling public oversight.

Representative Kiel told committee members that two amendments had already been taken on the House floor: one to allow a voter to opt in to having a telephone number appear on the roll and another meant to clarify what constitutes "commercial purposes." Kiel said the bill targets monetization — "somebody's making money off of commercial use" — and not oversight done in the public interest. He said, "when the voter roll is free, well, nothing's free, and so somebody's paying for it." Kiel added he would work with House and Senate sponsors to clarify "publish" versus commercial use language.

After committee questioning and discussion, Senator Hatcher moved to advance the bill and Senator Coleman Madison seconded. The committee held a roll call and reported the bill favorably (recorded in the transcript as a 6–1 result). Several committee members said the bill should be clarified before it reaches the full chamber.

The next step for HB67 is floor consideration; sponsors indicated they plan to pursue technical edits and clarifying amendments about the definitions of "publish" and "commercial use" prior to that debate.