Frequently Asked Questions
No. A National Voter ID System does not have to be mandatory to be functional. The entire model can be built around a voluntary framework of optional enrollment, pilot programs, and gradual adoption, as Counties and States choose to participate (or not) at their own pace, and as the system grows, confidence will grow. People will opt in because they want a simple, secure, and nationally valid identity system for voting that gives dignity and equal value to every citizen. Those who don’t trust the system need not enroll and may continue to vote as their state allows. This vision would be the ideal approach I believe.
The longer-term picture can be more nuanced though. The federal government could decide, via Congress, or Executive Order, that a single system for voter-identity-verification and numbering can be applied under Article 1 Section 4 of the Constitution regarding altering “the manner in which elections are conducted” by the states when it comes to voting in federal elections (Present, Vice-President, and members of Congress).
The biggest question here, of course, concerns the assumption of a single numbering system I evoke just now.
Federal elections already require that a person be a United States citizen to vote in a federal election, and Congress has the constitutional authority to establish standards to enforce such a requirement (see my related article on the “foundations” page). While this idea is true, for decades, states have not always required documentary proof of citizenship at registration, and identity verification has varied widely across the country.
As US population continues to expand, becomes more mobile, and grow more diverse, the demand for consistent verification standards is likely to increase. Border enforcement has fluctuated over time, growing stronger in some eras and weaker in others, which adds to the importance of reliable identity confirmation for federal eligibility.
In a future Congress might decide that standardized identity verification is necessary to enforce existing citizenship requirements for federal voting, and a system like NVIDS would serve as the logical and structural tool for its tracking. That possibility is a matter of future legislative decision-making, however, not the foundation of NVIDS itself.
NVIDS begins with openness, voluntary participation, and careful state-level experimentation. Its purpose is to prove its value long before any discussion of mandatory use ever arises. The strength of the system comes from demonstrating trustworthiness, functionality, and transparency—not from compulsion. If the system ever becomes a preferred standard for federal elections, it would be because it earned that position through performance, not because it was imposed from the start.
No. NVIDS is designed to be the most accessible voter-identification system ever created in the United States.
The entire model treats identity not as a barrier but as a public assurance that every eligible citizen can participate.
A National Voter ID number can be obtained through multiple, easy-access channels:
• local election offices
• county agencies
• DMV-style licensing centers
• public assistance offices
• libraries or mobile registration units
• and a secure online portal for those who already have digital credentials
NVIDS removes traditional obstacles by allowing individuals to authenticate their identity through layered options. People with full documentation can register quickly, but individuals with limited or no documents — including unhoused citizens — are still able to obtain an ID number through provisional pathways.
In these cases, an individual may verbally attest to their name, birthdate, or known details and confirm identity through biometrics such as fingerprints or retinal scans. This creates a secure, provisional National Voter ID number that can later be upgraded when additional documentation becomes available.
NVIDS is built on a simple principle: every eligible citizen must have one verified federal voter identity, and there must be no false, fictitious, or duplicate identities in the system. Accessibility is a core requirement — not an afterthought — because a system that is difficult to access is not a secure system. Real security depends on universal inclusion.
Traditional voter ID laws have been criticized because they often rely on rigid, document-heavy requirements. These rules can disproportionately burden low-income individuals, unhoused citizens, seniors, people with disabilities, students, and communities that face longstanding barriers to documentation. When voter ID depends on paperwork people may struggle to obtain, the result is unequal access — even if the law is intended to be neutral.
NVIDS takes the opposite approach.
Instead of creating an identification system that excludes people without perfect documents, NVIDS is designed to be the most accessible and inclusive voter-identification model in American history.
Through NVIDS, every eligible citizen can obtain a National Voter ID number through multiple, flexible pathways:
• If a person has standard identity documents, the process is fast and familiar.
• If they lack documents, NVIDS allows a secure provisional pathway using biometrics — fingerprints, retinal scans, or similar methods — along with a verbal declaration of their identity.
• If the individual is unhoused or has no fixed address, NVIDS still provides a pathway to issuance through verifiable contact points, mobile units, or assistance centers.
• If a citizen later acquires more documentation, the provisional ID can be upgraded without losing the original number.
Biometrics are used not as barriers, but as equalizers. They ensure dignity and equality by allowing individuals with no paperwork to stand on the same footing as anyone else. A person who arrives with “nothing” is still treated as “someone” — a unique individual whose civic identity deserves recognition and protection.
In the NVIDS model, accessibility is not a secondary consideration. It is a security feature.
A voter-ID system that excludes eligible people is insecure by definition because it produces false negatives — citizens who should be recognized but aren’t.
NVIDS eliminates that risk through universal pathways and the reassurance that every eligible citizen can be uniquely and fairly identified.
Rather than magnifying inequities, NVIDS resolves them — proving that strong security and broad accessibility can reinforce one another.
NVIDS is designed to ensure that every eligible citizen can obtain a National Voter ID number — even those who arrive with no documents, no identification, and no permanent address. In the current system, such individuals often fall into the cracks of bureaucracy. In the NVIDS model, they are still treated as full participants in American civic life.
The process begins with a simple idea:
a person without documents is still a person, still unique, and still entitled to be recognized.
If someone presents with no paperwork of any kind, NVIDS uses a secure, provisional pathway to establish identity based on what the individual can provide:
• a verbal declaration of name, birthdate, or known personal details
• confirmation that they are a U.S. citizen
• biometric verification such as fingerprints, retinal scans, or another secure modality
• a temporary contact point (a shelter, a service provider, a mobile unit, or a designated public office)
This combination is enough to issue a provisional National Voter ID number — a real, functional civic identity anchored to biometric uniqueness. No one is turned away for lack of documents.
Biometrics are not framed as suspicion. They represent dignity. When someone has nothing else to identify them, NVIDS still recognizes them as an individual with equal standing. Their existence and their voice are acknowledged through a stable civic identity that cannot be lost, stolen, or duplicated.
Later, if the person obtains documents, they can upgrade their provisional NVIDS profile without losing their number.
If they move, their verified residency can be updated.
If they stabilize their life or gain new records, their identity becomes more fully attested.
But throughout that journey, their National Voter ID number remains theirs, enabling participation in federal elections and anchoring them to a civic identity that respects their humanity.
In this way, NVIDS removes the most painful barrier in traditional voter-ID systems: the idea that documentation is the prerequisite for dignity. Instead, NVIDS affirms that identity itself begins with the individual — and that the system must meet people where they are, not deny them recognition because of their circumstances
Biometrics have often been misunderstood as intrusive or heavy-handed, but in the NVIDS model, they serve a very different purpose. Rather than limiting access, biometrics become the essential tool that ensures any eligible citizen — including those with no documents — can still be recognized fairly, treated with dignity, and given a secure national voter identity.
Traditional voter-ID systems rely heavily on paperwork, and paperwork disproportionately disadvantages unhoused citizens, low-income individuals, and people whose documents have been lost, stolen, or never issued in the first place. When identity depends entirely on documents, many people are left outside the system through no fault of their own.
NVIDS flips this dynamic.
Biometrics are not used to pry into a person’s history — they are used to anchor their civic identity when nothing else is available. If someone arrives with no ID and no records, they can still attest to who they are and verify their uniqueness through biometric confirmation. The system does not assume guilt, does not punish lack of paperwork, and does not treat vulnerability as suspicion. Instead, biometrics level the playing field by giving every individual an equal path into the system.
Privacy remains fully protected. Biometrics in NVIDS are used only for identity verification — not for tracking, monitoring, or political analysis. They are not tied to voting behavior, party affiliation, or any other personal data. They exist solely to ensure that one person receives one secure identity and that duplicate, false, or fictitious identities cannot undermine the system.
In this sense, biometrics actually enhance fairness rather than diminish it. They ensure that a person with zero documents is still treated as a full citizen whose identity matters. They prevent fraud without blocking legitimate voters. They preserve equality without imposing burdens that fall hardest on those with the fewest resources.
NVIDS uses biometrics to bring people in, not keep people out. It is a system where dignity, accuracy, and accessibility reinforce each other rather than compete. Far from threatening privacy, biometrics help secure the civic identity of every eligible citizen, especially those most at risk of falling through the cracks.
No. NVIDS has nothing to do with changing the Electoral College, altering how votes are counted, or replacing the representative structure established by the U.S. Constitution. The Electoral College is a constitutional mechanism for presidential elections, and NVIDS does not challenge, modify, or interfere with that structure in any way.
NVIDS addresses only identity verification for federal elections. It assigns each eligible U.S. citizen one verified federal voter identity number (NV-ID), created and issued through the National Voter Database (NV-DB), for the sole purpose of preventing false, fictitious, or duplicate identities — and therefore preventing false, fictitious, or duplicate votes — in federal elections.
NVIDS does not influence:
how ballots are weighed
how states allocate electors
congressional districting
proportional representation
vote tabulation processes
the constitutional design of presidential elections
It plays no role in deciding outcomes. Its function is limited to confirming that the person casting a federal ballot is uniquely verified.
Questions about national popular vote systems, Electoral College reform, or alternative presidential election models are completely separate policy discussions. NVIDS remains neutral and compatible with the existing constitutional framework.
The National Voter ID System (NVIDS) is intentionally built around a simple principle: participation begins voluntarily and expands only if voters and states choose it. The system is voluntary by design because no state is required to adopt the NV-ID or participate in the National Voter Database (NV-DB). Any state or county may begin with small, controlled pilot programs without changing existing identification rules or election procedures. Voters themselves are not required to use an NV-ID during this voluntary phase.
The system is scalable by choice because its broader adoption depends on public confidence, state decision-making, and eventual national consensus. A state that voluntarily adopts NVIDS may choose to rely solely on the NV-ID for federal election identity verification within its borders, but that remains a state-level option, not a mandate. Other states may join only if they decide the system benefits them. Nationwide mandatory use would require overwhelming national support and action by Congress, potentially including a constitutional amendment.
This approach respects federalism and democratic consent. It prevents any rapid or untested changes to election procedures while allowing jurisdictions to explore potential improvements. NVIDS grows — or does not grow — based on performance, transparency, and trust. “Voluntary by design, scalable by choice” captures the idea that a modern identity-verification system for federal elections must earn its place, not force its place.
A national voter registry and a national voter database may sound similar, but they are entirely different systems with very different implications for privacy, constitutional authority, and election trust. Understanding this distinction is essential to understanding what NVIDS truly is — and what it is not.
A national voter registry is a federal master list of voters. It holds full registration records, participation history, and possibly party affiliation, all under direct federal control. Such a system would represent a dramatic shift in election authority away from the states and toward Washington. It would be seen as intrusive, politically explosive, and a fundamental change to how American elections have always been managed. NVIDS is not, and will never become, a national voter registry.
A national voter database, by contrast, is simply an identity-verification tool. It stores only what is necessary to confirm that a person is real, unique, and eligible. NVIDS contains a single national voter ID number, verified identity data, and eligibility markers — and nothing else. It does not store how people vote. It does not store party affiliation. It does not store voting history. It does not replace state voter rolls, nor does it track registration status. Control over elections remains exactly where it belongs: in the hands of the states.
This distinction matters because it protects both privacy and constitutional order. A registry feels like surveillance. A database feels like infrastructure. A registry assumes federal authority over voters. A database simply supports state authority by providing a reliable identity check. Keeping the core database minimal, clean, and strictly limited is the strongest safeguard against misuse.
NVIDS also allows for optional, voter-controlled tools that live outside the core database. These tools are available only if a voter chooses to activate them and verifies their identity. For example, some people may want to use their NVIDS number to personally confirm that their vote was recorded as intended after an election. Others might want the ability to privately log their own voting history, store their preferred party affiliation, or add advanced security features such as biometric authentication to access their personal account.
These optional features belong to the voter, not to the government. They are personal tools, not components of the national database. If a voter chooses to store more information, that is their decision. If a voter prefers not to — then nothing beyond basic identity data ever exists in NVIDS. And if someone loses access to an optional account, recovery would follow strict identity-verification protocols, just as with any secure government or financial system.
The core NVIDS database remains unchanged regardless of individual choices. It continues to serve as a minimal, privacy-first identity backbone that states can rely on without ever creating a federal registry of voters. States keep their own rolls. States track participation. States maintain full authority over elections. And voters maintain control over their own optional data.
By keeping NVIDS fundamentally separate from any form of national registry — while still allowing voters to add personal tools if they choose — the system preserves privacy, respects constitutional boundaries, and offers modern verification where it’s needed most. This balance is what makes NVIDS a trustworthy, sustainable civic technology for the future.
At first glance, it may seem unnecessary to create a national voter identity system when states already administer elections, maintain voter rolls, and verify eligibility. But NVIDS does not replace state authority — it strengthens it. States remain fully in charge of registering voters, maintaining records, and running elections. What NVIDS provides is an identity verification backbone that makes those state systems more accurate, more secure, and far more efficient.
Americans move more than ever before, shifting states frequently for work, school, family, or retirement. State voter rolls struggle to stay synchronized, and duplicate registrations across state lines are increasingly common. When each state operates in isolation, no state can easily know whether a person is registered elsewhere, whether a previous registration should be canceled, or whether identity documents presented in one state conflict with information from another. The result is not fraud so much as friction and inconsistency — an outdated system trying to function in a modern, mobile society.
A national voter identity number solves this problem without touching state voter rolls. It gives each eligible voter one unique identity anchor that never changes, no matter where they live. States can use this identity number to verify eligibility, spot duplicates, and update voter rolls more accurately. Each state continues to manage its own list of voters, but the underlying identity verification becomes consistent and reliable nationwide.
This is especially important for federal elections. Federal law already requires that only U.S. citizens vote for Congress or President, yet states vary widely in how they verify citizenship. A national identity database offers a standardized way to confirm eligibility without federalizing voter rolls. Congress maintains its constitutional role of setting standards for federal voting, while states maintain their constitutional role of running elections.
For voters, the benefits are straightforward. Moving between states becomes simpler. Registering becomes cleaner. Errors and duplicates become rarer. Election-day check-in becomes faster. And verification becomes more consistent. NVIDS strengthens state systems precisely because it does not replace them — it supports them with a secure, modern layer of identity confirmation.
In a nation of hundreds of millions of people, with constant mobility and an increasingly complex identity landscape, states alone cannot maintain perfect accuracy in isolation. A national identity system helps them do their job better, while preserving their full authority over elections. This partnership between state autonomy and national identity verification is what makes NVIDS both practical and constitutionally sound.
The National Voter ID System (NVIDS) is designed with a strict privacy-first foundation. By default, the system stores only what is absolutely necessary to ensure one verified federal voter identity per eligible citizen. This includes the NV-ID, basic identity markers, and eligibility confirmation — nothing more. NVIDS does not store party affiliation, voting history, ballot selections, demographic data, or any political or behavioral information. It is not a national registry and does not function like one.
However, some voters may desire additional optional features for the sake of transparency or personal confidence. For example, a voter may want the ability to log into a secure portal, verify their identity through strong authentication, and confirm that their federal ballot was recorded as intended. Others may wish to record their party preference or require biometric authentication for access to their NV-ID account.
NVIDS allows for these kinds of expanded features, but only on a strictly voluntary, user-initiated basis. No voter is required to store additional data, and no such data is stored unless the individual explicitly opts in through a verified, multi-step identity process. Importantly, any optional data a voter chooses to store would be for their eyes only, not for political use, not for government profiling, and not for public access. If a voter later decides to remove that data or revert their account to the minimum-default privacy mode, that choice remains theirs.
In the unlikely event of account access issues — such as lost credentials or forgotten verification methods — a recovery process would exist, but only under strict identity-proofing protocols. The voter always retains final control over what is added and what is removed. NVIDS is built to protect privacy, preserve autonomy, and ensure that federal elections count no false, fictitious, or duplicate votes, while giving individuals optional tools only if they personally choose to use them.
A pilot for the National Voter ID System (NVIDS) can be conducted without changing any existing state election laws or identification requirements. The purpose of a pilot is not implementation, but simulation — allowing a county or state to test the system’s components in a controlled environment while keeping all real-world voting procedures exactly the same.
A pilot begins with voluntary enrollment, where residents may participate if they choose. Identity and eligibility are verified by the state in the same manner used today. Once verification is complete, the National Voter Database (NV-DB) would generate and issue a simulated NV-ID. This number would not replace any existing identification documents and would not be required for voting. It is simply a test of the system’s ability to create unique federal voter identities.
During the pilot, counties can test check-in workflows by running voters through two parallel systems: the real system currently used for elections, and a simulated NV-ID validation process that shows how NVIDS would function alongside existing procedures. This allows election staff to observe how quickly identities can be validated, whether the simulated NV-IDs work as intended, and how well the system prevents duplicate or fictitious identities in the pilot environment.
No ballots are issued using NV-ID during the pilot.
No real elections are affected.
No voter is required to participate.
No existing ID rules are changed.
This kind of “safe sandbox” pilot lets a state or county evaluate system performance, cybersecurity integrity, identity verification accuracy, and administrative workflow impact without altering any legal requirements or putting any election at risk. It is a low-risk, high-information way to determine whether a unified national voter numbering system is practical, secure, and beneficial.
I trademarked the acronym NVIDS to protect the name of the system, not to claim ownership of the idea. A national voter ID number is something many people may have imagined, but giving the idea structure, clarity, and a public identity is a responsibility that needs careful stewardship. The explanation below describes why the name matters and why protecting it is an important part of guiding this movement forward.
The National Voter ID System (NVIDS) is built around a simple idea: every eligible voter would have one unique identification number—similar in spirit to a Social Security number, but created solely for election identity verification. This idea is not new in a cosmic sense; many people have probably wondered about similar systems over the years. What makes NVIDS distinctive is the effort to take that idea and shape it into a concrete, organized movement.
Trademarking the acronym NVIDS is not about claiming ownership over the concept of national identity verification. Ideas themselves cannot be owned or copyrighted. Instead, the trademark protects the expression—the name, the symbolism, and the public identity of the system. In history, movements often become associated with the people who give them structure, identity, and direction. The name becomes the banner under which the work is carried forward.
Throughout civic and technological history, this pattern appears repeatedly. Many people imagined digital cash long long before Bitcoin existed, but Satoshi Nakamoto gave the idea a public identity and set a movement in motion. Many countries explored digital identity systems, but Estonia became known worldwide because it implemented one clearly, named it, and demonstrated it in action. Countless people had thought about ranked-choice voting, but organizations like FairVote became recognized as the catalysts because they built the structure around the idea and carried it into the public square.
Trademarking NVIDS follows that tradition. It signals that this particular formulation of the idea—the National Voter ID System as a structured, voluntary, pilot-friendly, cybersecurity-driven identity model—has an author. It helps ensure that the public conversation remains respectful, accurate, and consistent. The goal is not exclusivity; the goal is stewardship. The name represents a specific vision, and trademarking it helps maintain the integrity of that vision as it grows.
In the end, no one can claim to be the first person who ever imagined a single national voter ID number. That is not the point. The point is to guide the idea into reality with care and clarity—to take something many have pondered and turn it into something that can be built, studied, improved, and trusted. If the work of shaping, presenting, and advocating for NVIDS earns a small place in the historical record, that is more than enough.
If the United States ever adopted a pure national popular vote — meaning every vote in every state is counted equally in a single nationwide tally — a unified national voter identity system would almost certainly be required. A national popular vote demands something the country does not currently have: a unified, cross-state mechanism ensuring that each eligible citizen has one verified federal voter identity and that no individual can cast multiple votes across states.
Under the current Electoral College system, each state manages its elections independently, with different identity-verification standards and separate voter rolls. This variation is workable because votes are counted within state boundaries. But a united national tally would require consistent identity verification across all states, prevention of interstate duplicates, and harmonized eligibility confirmation. A system like NVIDS — with its unique NV-ID and minimal, privacy-focused National Voter Database (NV-DB) — would provide that backbone.
However, it is important to speak realistically: the Electoral College is rooted in the U.S. Constitution, and replacing it would require one of the most demanding political acts in American civic life — a constitutional amendment. That means approval by two-thirds of both the House and Senate, followed by ratification from three-fourths of the states. Given the political diversity of the states and their differing interests, such a change is extraordinarily unlikely.
For that reason, NVIDS does not advocate for or depend on any change to the Electoral College. The system functions entirely within the existing constitutional structure. It strengthens the identity side of federal elections without touching how votes are counted or weighted.
If, against long historical odds, the nation ever moved to a pure popular vote, a framework like NVIDS would likely be necessary to manage identity integrity at a national scale. But that scenario is hypothetical. The practical approach — and the one NVIDS is designed for — is to work within the constitutional system America has today.
NVIDS does not directly draw district maps, and it does not replace the Census. But it strengthens the foundation that fair districting depends on: accurate, verified, up-to-date information about where eligible citizens actually live. Gerrymandering thrives in the gaps — the shadows where outdated voter rolls, inconsistent residency data, population errors, and legacy records create uncertainty about who lives in which communities. NVIDS closes those gaps.
By giving every eligible citizen one unique federal voter identity and linking that identity to one verified place of residence, the system provides the most accurate population-placement data the United States has ever had. This eliminates inflated rolls, duplicate registrations, phantom addresses, and inconsistent state-to-state residency rules — all of which distort the population picture used to create districts.
While NVIDS doesn’t stop a legislature from drawing lines in unusual shapes, it does prevent those lines from being built on distorted data. A district can only be fair if its underlying population is real, verified, and counted correctly. NVIDS ensures that the “people layer” of redistricting is honest, uniform, and transparent.
The system also makes mid-decade redistricting — often used for partisan advantage — easier to regulate. With precise residency and movement data, states could require that any mid-cycle map changes be tied to actual demographic shifts rather than political opportunity. NVIDS creates the factual basis needed for future reforms such as independent commissions, algorithmic mapmaking, smaller districts, or expansions of representation.
NVIDS doesn’t eliminate gerrymandering by itself, but it removes the ambiguity that gerrymandering relies on. It gives reformers, mapmakers, and courts a clean, verified dataset rooted in reality. When every eligible citizen is counted once, in the right place, the path to fairer district maps becomes clearer than it has ever been.
No. NVIDS does not record or track how any citizen voted, and it does not store party affiliation as part of a federal voter identity. The system is designed to protect voter privacy by default while still allowing citizens to benefit from modern cryptographic tools if they choose.
The core function of NVIDS is to ensure that each eligible citizen has one verified federal voter identity — no false, fictitious, or duplicate identities — and to confirm participation in an election, not preferences within it. NVIDS only tracks the fact that a voter participated (the equivalent of the traditional “voter history” used to maintain rolls), but not which candidates, issues, or parties they selected.
However, NVIDS also respects the idea that some voters may want a secure way to retrieve or verify their own personal voting record for private purposes. For that reason, NVIDS includes an optional, voter-controlled encrypted record that allows a citizen to store their own vote choices privately and decrypt them only with their personal key. This information is never visible to the government, political parties, election officials, or anyone else. It belongs solely to the voter and cannot be accessed without their own consent.
This optional record does not influence districting, political targeting, or any public data. It simply provides a modern form of personal assurance — a way for individuals to privately confirm their own selections, check for errors, or maintain a civic record of their participation. NVIDS separates identity from preference.
It ensures one voter, one identity, one ballot — while preserving the longstanding American norm that a citizen’s vote is secret unless they choose to reveal it.