WeVote
Log In

Bill

AA

Bill

HB 4192

Corrections: other; program to provide driver license and state identification cards to parolees; provide for. Amends sec. 34c of 1953 PA 232 (MCL 791.234c). TIE BAR WITH: HB 4191'23, HB 4193'23

2023-2024 Regular Session Introduced by Abraham Aiyash and 19 co-sponsors

DOC must help eligible prisoners obtain Michigan driver's license or state ID before release and provide it at discharge to ease housing, employment, and benefits access.

vetoed by the Governor 01/17/2025
#corrections:other #corrections:parole #stateagencies(existing):corrections #stateagencies(existing):state #state:identificationcards #trafficcontrol:driverlicense
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HB 4192

Summary — HB 4192 (102nd Legislature, Michigan)

Title: Corrections: other; program to provide driver license and state identification cards to parolees; provide for. (Amends MCL 791.234c)
Status: Vetoed by the Governor, 01/17/2025

Purpose / Intent

HB 4192 would codify and expand a Department of Corrections (DOC) reentry program that obtains Michigan driver’s licenses or official state ID cards for eligible prisoners prior to release, ensuring individuals leave custody with government photo identification to facilitate housing, employment, Social Security enrollment, banking, and other reentry needs.

Key provisions

  • Amend MCL 791.234c to require the DOC (by contract or otherwise) to assist — rather than merely “reasonably allow” — prisoners in obtaining identification documents needed for driver’s license or state ID applications.
  • At least 60 days before a scheduled parole release or discharge, DOC must:
    • Collect available application documents and a photograph required by the Secretary of State (SOS), and
    • Send those documents, the photograph, and the projected release/discharge date to the SOS.
  • DOC must provide any license or ID received from the SOS to the individual at the time of parole or discharge.
  • Authorizes electronic access by the SOS to prisoner information for identity verification.
  • Creates a “reentry success fund” in the state treasury to receive funds (from any source) to pay for DOC’s expenses in performing these activities; funds remain in the account and are appropriated for DOC reentry ID work.
  • Tie-bar: HB 4192 is tie-barred to HB 4191 and HB 4193 (all must be enacted for any to take effect); HB 4194 is tie-barred to HB 4193.

Who is affected

  • Primary: prisoners under DOC jurisdiction who are eligible for a Michigan driver’s license or official state personal identification card and who will be released on parole or discharged.
  • Agencies: Department of Corrections and Michigan Secretary of State (process and issuance).
  • Indirectly: employers, housing providers, benefits agencies and community reentry partners who rely on state ID for services.

Fiscal impact and program background

  • The bills would codify practices already in place (program created spring 2020, launched fall 2020).
  • No new net fiscal impact projected; DOC covers operational costs within existing appropriations.
  • DOC staff involvement: ~19–20 regional employment counselors (60–70% of time on vital documents) + 3 HQ staff full-time on documents.
  • DOC pays the same fees as the public for documents and makes an annual $100,000 payment to the SOS to support staff involved in the process.
  • Documented documents/licenses secured for offenders (by year): 2019 — 381; 2020 — 715; 2021 — 4,831; 2022 — 5,939; 2023 — 6,052; 2024 — 6,945. DOC reported goals of ~95–98% of releases obtaining ID.

Timeline / procedural history

  • Introduced (House): March 2023 (sponsor Rep. Felicia Brabec); passed House and Senate in late 2024; enrolled 12/23/2024; presented to Governor 01/08/2025.
  • Vetoed by Governor 01/17/2025. The veto message supported the policy but explained the bill, as drafted, would have unintentionally overwritten more recent statutory amendments the Legislature had already made — a technical conflict that required correction before enactment.

Notes / policy considerations

  • Supporters: cite reduced barriers to employment/housing and lower recidivism when individuals leave custody with ID.
  • Concerns raised by the Governor’s office were technical (conflict with recent amendments), not necessarily substantive opposition to the reentry policy; sponsors and fiscal analyses emphasized the bills largely codified existing interagency procedures.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.