A process for applicants who cannot provide proof
What the document says“each State shall establish a process under which an applicant who cannot provide documentary proof of United States citizenship under paragraph (1) may, if the applicant signs an attestation under penalty of perjury that the applicant is a citizen of the United States and eligible to vote in elections for Federal office, submit such other evidence to the appropriate State or local official demonstrating that the applicant is a citizen of the United States”
The state official then determines whether citizenship has been sufficiently established, and a positive determination must be accompanied by a signed affidavit on a uniform form developed by the Election Assistance Commission. The Act does not state what other evidence is sufficient.
What the document actually says“each State shall establish a process under which an applicant who cannot provide documentary proof of United States citizenship under paragraph (1) may, if the applicant signs an attestation under penalty of perjury that the applicant is a citizen of the United States and eligible to vote in elections for Federal office, submit such other evidence to the appropriate State or local official demonstrating that the applicant is a citizen of the United States”
Each state must set up a way for someone who cannot show the papers. They sign a sworn statement, then hand in other proof for an official to judge.
Some citizens cannot get the papers on the list. The bill says each state must make a back-up path for them. You swear under oath that you are a citizen. Then you bring whatever other proof you have. An official decides if it is enough. The bill does not say what is enough.
Supporters point to this subsection as the answer to the objection that eligible citizens without the listed documents would be shut out, since the Act requires every state to provide a route. Opponents read the same words as leaving the standard undefined and the decision to an individual official, so that what satisfies one state or one clerk may not satisfy another. The text sets no standard for sufficient other evidence and the site does not resolve which reading is right.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken. See what the tracker does not yet cover.