Proposition · every Arizona voter

Proposition 144Government-issued proof of identity for every voter, including by mail, and other election rules

Constitutional amendment: Proposition 144, referred to voters by the Legislature as HCR 2001 (2026), the "Fast Accurate Secure Transparent Election Results Act". Passes with a majority of the voters voting on it (Arizona Constitution, Article 21, Section 1).

INCOMPLETE. Still open on this page: (1) The official ballot wording below is copied word for word from the Secretary of State's ballot language, but the YES and NO lines and the summary above it are ours, from the Legislative Council analysis and the pamphlet arguments read through a summary tool, which paraphrases. (2) The pass rule for a constitutional amendment is from Article 21, Section 1 of the Arizona Constitution (azleg.gov), read through a summary tool. (3) The "Today" column is our reading of the official "no" statement ("keeps the current law"), not checked against the current statutes. (4) Cost to the state: no cost estimate found. (5) The reasons for and against are the named arguments printed in the pamphlet; statistics inside them are the writers' claims and we have not checked them. No claim check has been done. (6) Campaign committees and campaign money were not looked up. (7) We did not read the full text of the measure.

Official ballot language (PDF): Secretary of State ballot language (PDF)

In plain words

This adds a new section to Article VII (elections) of the Arizona Constitution. Voters would have to show proof of identity in every election, including when they vote by mail, and only government-issued documents would count. The Legislature would decide the details by law. Every voter would also have the option to have their ballot counted at their voting location on Election Day. Foreign nationals could not give or spend money to influence an Arizona election, and no one could knowingly accept it. The measure also says only U.S. citizens may register and vote. It sets a rule for courts: election laws pass review if they are rationally connected to a legitimate state interest, such as fast and accurate results, efficient running of elections, election security and public confidence. It applies to elections on or after January 1, 2028. (azleg.gov (Arizona Legislature) )

Before and after

Question	Today	If YES wins
Showing ID to vote in person	One photo ID from List 1 (such as an Arizona driver license), or two documents with your name and address from List 2 or List 3 (such as a utility bill) (pamphlet)	Government-issued proof of identity only, as set by law
Showing ID when you vote by mail	The pamphlet lists no ID for mail ballots; you sign the ballot envelope	Government-issued proof of identity in every election, mail included (details left to law)
Counting ballots at the voting location	Not stated in the files we read	Every voter must have the option to have their ballot counted at their voting location on Election Day
Money from foreign nationals	Current constitutional provisions stay (official NO statement)	A constitutional ban on foreign nationals giving or spending money to influence Arizona elections, and on knowingly accepting it
When it starts	Not applicable	Elections on or after January 1, 2028

From the ballot language, the Legislative Council analysis and the pamphlet: see (apps.azsos.gov (Arizona Secretary of State) )

Biggest change

Every voter, including mail voters, would have to show government-issued proof of identity in each election, starting with elections on or after January 1, 2028. source: azleg.gov (Arizona Legislature)
Every voter would have the option to have their ballot counted at their voting location on Election Day. source: azleg.gov (Arizona Legislature)
Foreign nationals could not give or spend money to influence an Arizona election. source: azleg.gov (Arizona Legislature)
Courts would use a new test for election laws: they pass if rationally connected to a legitimate state interest. source: azleg.gov (Arizona Legislature)

Who it affects most: Every registered voter. The pamphlet's arguments name voters who use mail ballots, older and disabled voters, rural and tribal voters, and election officials.

Cost to the state: Unknown. The measure requires the Legislature to appropriate the money needed to carry it out and gives no amount. The Legislative Council analysis text we read has no fiscal section.

Our plain-words summary. Every line points to its source.

What your vote means

YES

Every voter, including mail voters, would have to show government-issued proof of identity in each election; only government-issued ID would count. Other election rules would also change.

Nothing changes: the current election rules in the constitution stay.

Our one-line summary of the official YES and NO statements in the Secretary of State's ballot language; the official statements, word for word, are under "Official ballot wording" below.

Why people want it, and why others object

Why this is on the ballot

The Legislature put this on the ballot. It changes the state constitution, so only another statewide vote can change it back. It passes with a majority of the voters voting on it.

The bill is House Concurrent Resolution 2001 (2026), the "Fast Accurate Secure Transparent Election Results Act" (also called the "Fast Election Results Act"). It adds Section 19 to Article VII of the Arizona Constitution. source: azleg.gov (Arizona Legislature)
Under Article 21, Section 1, a proposed amendment passes if a majority of the voters voting on it approve. source: azleg.gov (Arizona Legislature)

Why supporters want it

Alexander Kolodin, state representative (the pamphlet lists him as the sponsor of the act and a candidate for Secretary of State): the measure covers citizen-only voting, photo ID, a foreign-money ban and Election Day results. source: apps.azsos.gov (Arizona Secretary of State)
Scot Mussi, Arizona Free Enterprise Club: the current ID law exists only as a statute, so it is weak; a 2021 law let counties offer on-site ballot counting but none did. source: apps.azsos.gov (Arizona Secretary of State)
Nathan Duell, Heritage Action for America: the measure closes a foreign-funding loophole; he says a Swiss billionaire put over $1 million into an Arizona initiative last election (his claim). source: apps.azsos.gov (Arizona Secretary of State)
State Sen. Shawnna Bolick: the measure protects voting by citizens only, with photo ID, and a foreign-money ban. source: apps.azsos.gov (Arizona Secretary of State)
Several writers argue Maricopa County's 2022 count was slow because many ballots were dropped off on Election Day; one cites over 280,000 such ballots (their claim, not checked). source: apps.azsos.gov (Arizona Secretary of State)
Twenty-five arguments for are printed in the pamphlet. source: apps.azsos.gov (Arizona Secretary of State)

Why opponents object

Will Humble, Arizona Public Health Association: today's signature checks work, and the measure adds red tape that burdens older adults, disabled people, rural residents and caregivers. source: apps.azsos.gov (Arizona Secretary of State)
Pinny Sheoran, League of Women Voters of Arizona: it requires ID with every ballot, leaves the details to future law and names no funding source; she notes no evidence of widespread fraud. source: apps.azsos.gov (Arizona Secretary of State)
Darrell Hill, ACLU of Arizona: no-excuse mail voting began in 1991; the ID rule would expose sensitive data, delay results and narrow the IDs accepted. source: apps.azsos.gov (Arizona Secretary of State)
Taylor Clark, Common Cause Arizona: about 80% of voters use early ballots and roughly 264,000 dropped off ballots on Election Day 2024 (her figures); the measure would hurt elderly, disabled, rural and low-income voters without funding the logistics. source: apps.azsos.gov (Arizona Secretary of State)
Oscar De Los Santos, House Democratic Leader: voters would have to enclose a copy of a driver license with every early ballot or it is thrown out; he calls it a "Vote by Mail Ban". source: apps.azsos.gov (Arizona Secretary of State)
Gary Restaino, former federal prosecutor: he says fraud is nearly nonexistent and calls the ID rule a poll tax. source: apps.azsos.gov (Arizona Secretary of State)
Thirty-three arguments against are printed in the pamphlet. source: apps.azsos.gov (Arizona Secretary of State)

Who backs each side

For: many arguments are sponsored by the Arizona Free Enterprise Club; others by Heritage Action for America, Arizona Women of Action and the Yavapai County Republican Committee. Campaign committees and campaign money for this proposition were not looked up (INCOMPLETE). source: apps.azsos.gov (Arizona Secretary of State)
Against: Arizona Public Health Association, League of Women Voters of Arizona, ACLU of Arizona, Common Cause Arizona, Mi Familia Vota, Lumen Strategies staff, Fort McDowell Yavapai Nation and the Arizona House Democratic Leader, among 33 arguments. Campaign committees and campaign money for this proposition were not looked up (INCOMPLETE). source: apps.azsos.gov (Arizona Secretary of State)

In each side's own words where we could find them, quoted or summarized with a link to the source. We don't endorse either side.

What you will see on your ballot

Official ballot wording, word for word (tap to open)

The official ballot title, word for word from the Secretary of State's ballot language file .

PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION BY THE LEGISLATURE RELATING TO ELECTION REQUIREMENTS
OFFICIAL TITLE
AMENDING ARTICLE VII, CONSTITUTION OF ARIZONA, BY ADDING SECTION 19.
DESCRIPTIVE TITLE
REQUIRES ALL VOTERS, INCLUDING VOTERS WHO VOTE BY MAIL, TO SHOW GOVERNMENT-ISSUED ID TO VOTE IN EACH ELECTION; MAKES OTHER CHANGES TO ELECTION ADMINISTRATION AND CAMPAIGN FINANCE PROHIBITIONS.

A “yes” vote shall have the effect of amending the Arizona Constitution to: (1) require voters to show proof of identity when voting in each election, including when voting by mail; (2) changing existing proof of identity requirements to limit acceptable documentation to government-issued ID; (3) require election officials to provide all voters the option to have their ballot tabulated at their voting location on election day; (4) prohibit foreign nationals from contributing or spending to influence elections in Arizona and prohibit anyone from knowingly accepting such contributions, similar to prohibitions that already exist in federal law; (5) create a new standard for judicial review of election laws under the Arizona Constitution, which may make it harder to challenge election laws; and (6) require the legislature to appropriate money necessary to implement these provisions.
A “no” vote shall have the effect of maintaining current constitutional provisions governing elections.

Copied word for word from the Secretary of State's ballot language PDF (2026-Ballot-Language-English-2026-0819.pdf), page 3. The Secretary of State's file has no separate question line; it prints the official title, the descriptive title, and a YES statement and a NO statement, shown here in that order.

Latest news

Recent reporting from a range of outlets, newest first. We link to it; we don't endorse it.

No articles collected yet for this measure.

Full text of the measure

The Secretary of State's ballot language file prints the descriptive title and the YES and NO statements. The full text of the resolution is on the Legislature's website (azleg.gov, HCR 2001, 2026 session); we have not read it. Read it in the Secretary of State ballot language (PDF) .

We link to analysis from several sources; we don't endorse it.