The Help America Vote Act of 2002 (HAVA): Overview and Ongoing Role in Election Administration Policy

Changes from October 28, 2021 to September 28, 2022

This page shows textual changes in the document between the two versions indicated in the dates above. Textual matter removed in the later version is indicated with ~~red strikethrough~~ and textual matter added in the later version is indicated with blue.

The Help America Vote Act of 2002 (HAVA):
~~October 28, 2021~~September 28, 2022
Overview and Ongoing Role in Election
Karen L. Shanton
Administration Policy
Analyst in American Analyst in American
National Government National Government
The Help America Vote Act of 2002 (HAVA) was enacted in response to issues with the The Help America Vote Act of 2002 (HAVA) was enacted in response to issues with the

administration of the 2000 elections. The highest-profile problems in 2000 were in Florida— administration of the 2000 elections. The highest-profile problems in 2000 were in Florida—
where where ~~issues with~~disputes about the vote count delayed the resolution of the presidential race for weeks— the vote count delayed the resolution of the presidential race for weeks—~~but~~

For a copy of the full report, but post-election hearings and reports identified post-election hearings and reports identified ~~problems~~issues with various aspects of election with various aspects of election
please call 7-5700 or visit www.crs.gov. administration across multiple states. administration across multiple states.
Congress’s response to those findings, in HAVA, spanned a correspondingly wide range of elections topics. It took three Congress’s response to those findings, in HAVA, spanned a correspondingly wide range of elections topics. It took three
main approaches to the issues. First, it set requirements for the administration of federal elections. Some states and localities main approaches to the issues. First, it set requirements for the administration of federal elections. Some states and localities
had adopted policies or technologies before the 2000 elections that may have helped them avoid problems faced by other had adopted policies or technologies before the 2000 elections that may have helped them avoid problems faced by other
jurisdictions in 2000, and jurisdictions in 2000, and other policy proposals were offered~~policy solutions were proposed~~ in post-2000 hearings and reports. HAVA was designed, in part, to in post-2000 hearings and reports. HAVA was designed, in part, to
standardize use of some of those policies and technologies in federal elections. Title III of the act set new federal standardize use of some of those policies and technologies in federal elections. Title III of the act set new federal
requirements for voting systems, provisional voting, voting information, statewide voter registration databases, voter requirements for voting systems, provisional voting, voting information, statewide voter registration databases, voter
identification, and the federal mail voter registration form created by the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 (NVRA). identification, and the federal mail voter registration form created by the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 (NVRA).
Second, HAVA authorized the first major federal grant programs for elections. Complying with HAVA’s Second, HAVA authorized the first major federal grant programs for elections. Complying with HAVA’s ~~title~~Title III III
requirements involved significant financial investments for many states and localities. There were also other post-2000 requirements involved significant financial investments for many states and localities. There were also other post-2000
~~adjustments~~changes to election processes—not addressed by the HAVA requirements—that states and localities wanted or needed to to election processes—not addressed by the HAVA requirements—that states and localities wanted or needed to
make. Congress authorized a pair of general grant programs in HAVA to help states meet the act’s make. Congress authorized a pair of general grant programs in HAVA to help states meet the act’s Title III requirements and make requirements and make
certain general improvements to general improvements to ~~the~~election administration administration ~~of federal elections~~. HAVA also authorized more specialized grant programs to . HAVA also authorized more specialized grant programs to
facilitate or incentivize action on voting technology, disability access, youth voter participation, and poll worker recruitment. facilitate or incentivize action on voting technology, disability access, youth voter participation, and poll worker recruitment.
Third, HAVA provided for creation of the election administration-dedicated U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC). Third, HAVA provided for creation of the election administration-dedicated U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC).
Federal agency support for Federal agency support for ~~general election administration~~the general administration of elections was provided in 2000 by a small office at the Federal Election was provided in 2000 by a small office at the Federal Election
Commission (FEC) known as the Office of Election Administration (OEA). The scope of the issues with the conduct of the Commission (FEC) known as the Office of Election Administration (OEA). The scope of the issues with the conduct of the
2000 elections prompted calls for an expanded federal agency role in elections2000 elections prompted calls for an expanded federal agency role in elections ~~issues~~. Some proposed assigning any new . Some proposed assigning any new
responsibilities to the existing OEA, while others wanted to create a new agency that would be fully dedicated to election responsibilities to the existing OEA, while others wanted to create a new agency that would be fully dedicated to election
administration. There was also debate about whether a new elections agency should have the administration. There was also debate about whether a new elections agency should have the ~~power~~authority to issue regulations. to issue regulations.
Congress struck a balance in HAVA by providing for a new agency, the EAC, but positioning it as a support agency. Congress struck a balance in HAVA by providing for a new agency, the EAC, but positioning it as a support agency.
HAVA and the agency it created have continued to play a central role in congressional engagement with election HAVA and the agency it created have continued to play a central role in congressional engagement with election
administration issues since the act’s enactment in 2002. Congress responded to foreign interference in the 2016 elections and administration issues since the act’s enactment in 2002. Congress responded to foreign interference in the 2016 elections and
the emergence of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in the 2020 election cycle, for example, with new the emergence of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in the 2020 election cycle, for example, with new
funding for one of HAVA’s grant programs. funding for one of HAVA’s grant programs. ~~Legislation has also been introduced~~Members have also introduced legislation to revisit HAVA or the EAC or to extend to revisit HAVA or the EAC or to extend
them to new aspects of election administration. them to new aspects of election administration.
The ongoing role of HAVA The ongoing role of HAVA in federal elections policymaking is partly a result of two distinctive features of the act. HAVA was (1) more wide-ranging in the is partly a result of two distinctive features of the act. HAVA was (1) more wide-ranging in the
topics it aimed to address than elections measures Congress had tended to approve in the recent past, with (2) a greater topics it aimed to address than elections measures Congress had tended to approve in the recent past, with (2) a greater
emphasis on federal assistance for states and localities. Other recent federal election laws had emphasis on federal assistance for states and localities. Other recent federal election laws had ~~tended~~tended primarily to set requirements and to focus on particular to focus on particular
aspects of election administration or aspects of election administration or ~~ensuring~~ access to the electoral process for particular groups of votersaccess to the electoral process for particular groups of voters ~~and on setting~~
~~requirements~~. HAVA, by contrast, spans multiple issues and voter groups and pairs its requirements with grant programs and . HAVA, by contrast, spans multiple issues and voter groups and pairs its requirements with grant programs and
the assistance-oriented EAC. Those features have made HAVA and the EAC common the assistance-oriented EAC. Those features have made HAVA and the EAC common choices of vehicles for vehicles for ~~congressional~~ proposals to proposals to
set new set new ~~requirements for the~~federal standards for election administration administration ~~of federal elections~~ or provide new federal support for or provide new federal support for ~~election administration~~elections. .
Ongoing Ongoing congressional engagement with HAVA can also be traced, in part, to interest in revisiting the act. There was broad agreement engagement with HAVA can also be traced, in part, to interest in revisiting the act. There was broad agreement
during the HAVA debate that Congress should consider a legislative response to the problems with the during the HAVA debate that Congress should consider a legislative response to the problems with the ~~administration~~conduct of the of the
2000 elections but disagreement about exactly what that legislative response should look like. Compromises struck in HAVA 2000 elections but disagreement about exactly what that legislative response should look like. Compromises struck in HAVA
did not necessarily resolve the underlying disagreements, and new developments did not necessarily resolve the underlying disagreements, and new developments ~~have emerged~~ since 2002—both due to since 2002—both due to
HAVA and independently of it—HAVA and independently of it—~~that~~ have changed the election administration landscape. As a result, some Members have have changed the election administration landscape. As a result, some Members have
proposed revisiting HAVA’s treatment of particular elections issues or the structure of the act or the agency it created. proposed revisiting HAVA’s treatment of particular elections issues or the structure of the act or the agency it created.
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service

link to page 12 The Help America Vote Act of 2002: Overview and Ongoing Role

Introduction
The Help America Vote Act of 2002 (HAVA; P.L. 107-252; 52 U.S.C. §§20901-21145) was The Help America Vote Act of 2002 (HAVA; P.L. 107-252; 52 U.S.C. §§20901-21145) was
enacted in response to issues with the administration of the 2000 elections. The highest-profile enacted in response to issues with the administration of the 2000 elections. The highest-profile
problems in 2000 were in Florida—where problems in 2000 were in Florida—where ~~issues with~~disputes about the vote count delayed the resolution of the the vote count delayed the resolution of the
presidential race for weeks—but post-election hearings and reports identified presidential race for weeks—but post-election hearings and reports identified ~~problems~~issues with with
various aspects of election administration across multiple states.1 various aspects of election administration across multiple states.1
Congress’s response to those findings, in HAVA, spanned a correspondingly wide range of Congress’s response to those findings, in HAVA, spanned a correspondingly wide range of
elections topics, from voting systems to voter identification to the accessibility of the electoral elections topics, from voting systems to voter identification to the accessibility of the electoral
process to individuals with disabilities. HAVA took three main approaches to the issues: (1) process to individuals with disabilities. HAVA took three main approaches to the issues: (1)
setting requirements for the administration of federal elections, (2) authorizing the first major setting requirements for the administration of federal elections, (2) authorizing the first major
federal grant programs for elections, and (3) providing for creation of the election administration-federal grant programs for elections, and (3) providing for creation of the election administration-
dedicated U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC). dedicated U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC).
HAVA and the agency it created have continued to play a central role in congressional HAVA and the agency it created have continued to play a central role in congressional
engagement with election administration issues since the act’s enactment in 2002. Congress engagement with election administration issues since the act’s enactment in 2002. Congress
responded to foreign interference in the 2016 elections and the emergence of the Coronavirus responded to foreign interference in the 2016 elections and the emergence of the Coronavirus
Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in the 2020 election cycle, for example, with new funding Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in the 2020 election cycle, for example, with new funding
for one of HAVA’s grant programs.2 for one of HAVA’s grant programs.2 ~~Legislation has also been introduced~~Members have also introduced legislation to revisit HAVA or the to revisit HAVA or the
EAC or to extend them to EAC or to extend them to ~~encompass~~ new aspects of election administration. new aspects of election administration.
This report provides an overview of HAVA and the ongoing role the act has played in policy This report provides an overview of HAVA and the ongoing role the act has played in policy
discussions about election administration. It starts by describing major provisions of HAVA and discussions about election administration. It starts by describing major provisions of HAVA and
then summarizes proposals to revisit or extend the act or the agency it created. The report closes then summarizes proposals to revisit or extend the act or the agency it created. The report closes
by briefly introducing some considerations that might be relevant to discussions of any future role by briefly introducing some considerations that might be relevant to discussions of any future role
for HAVA in federal policymaking on election administration. for HAVA in federal policymaking on election administration.
Note on Terminology
HAVA defines “state” as including the 50 states, the District of Columbia (DC), American Samoa, HAVA defines “state” as including the 50 states, the District of Columbia (DC), American Samoa,
Guam, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands.3 Guam, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands.3 ~~Proposals have been offered~~Congress has considered proposals to expand the to expand the
definition to include the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI), but none of definition to include the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI), but none of
those proposals has been enacted as of this writing.4 those proposals has been enacted as of this writing.4
This report generally follows HAVA’s usage of the term. Where the narrower meaning of “state” This report generally follows HAVA’s usage of the term. Where the narrower meaning of “state”
is intended, the report uses the phrase “the 50 states.” is intended, the report uses the phrase “the 50 states.”

1 See, for example, R. Michael Alvarez et al., 1 See, for example, R. Michael Alvarez et al., Voting—What Is, What Could Be, Caltech/MIT Voting Technology , Caltech/MIT Voting Technology
Project, July 2001, at https://vote.caltech.edu/reports/1; The National Commission on Federal Election Reform, Project, July 2001, at https://vote.caltech.edu/reports/1; The National Commission on Federal Election Reform, To
Assure Pride and Confidence in the Electoral Process, August 2001, at https://www.verifiedvoting.org/wp-content/, August 2001, at https://www.verifiedvoting.org/wp-content/
uploads/2012/10/NCFER_2001.pdf; and U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO), uploads/2012/10/NCFER_2001.pdf; and U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO), Elections: Perspectives on
Activities and Challenges Across the Nation, GAO-02-3, October 2001, at https://www.gao.gov/new.items/d023.pdf. , GAO-02-3, October 2001, at https://www.gao.gov/new.items/d023.pdf.
2 P.L. 115-141; P.L. 116-93; and P.L. 116-136. 2 P.L. 115-141; P.L. 116-93; and P.L. 116-136.
3 52 U.S.C. §21141. 3 52 U.S.C. §21141.
~~4 See, for example, the For the People Act of 2021 (H.R. 1/S. 1/S. 2093) and the Voter Empowerment Act of 2021~~
~~(H.R. 2358/S. 954)~~CNMI was not included in HAVA’s definition of “state” because it did not hold federal elections when HAVA was enacted in 2002. Testimony of the Honorable Gregorio Kilili Camacho Sablan, in U.S. Congress, Committee on House Administration, Subcommittee on Elections, Voting Rights and Election Administration in the U.S. Virgin Islands and Other Territories, hearing, 116th Cong., 2nd sess., July 28, 2020, p. 2. 4 See, for example, the For the People Act of 2021 (H.R. 1/S. 1/S. 2093) and the Voter Empowerment Act of 2021 (H.R. 2358/S. 954). Some appropriations acts have included language extending eligibility for certain HAVA funding to CNMI. For more on those acts, see Table 2 of this report and CRS Report R46646, Election Administration: Federal Grant Funding for States and Localities, by Karen L. Shanton. .
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service

1 1

link to page 25 link to page 25 The Help America Vote Act of 2002: Overview and Ongoing Role

Overview of Major Provisions
A defining image of the 2000 elections was a picture of a member of a Florida county canvassing A defining image of the 2000 elections was a picture of a member of a Florida county canvassing
board inspecting a punch card ballot with a magnifying glass.5 Florida’s closely contested race board inspecting a punch card ballot with a magnifying glass.5 Florida’s closely contested race
would decide the 2000 presidential election. One of the issues highlighted by litigation and would decide the 2000 presidential election. One of the issues highlighted by litigation and
recounts in the state was the challenge of interpreting incompletely punched “hanging chads” and recounts in the state was the challenge of interpreting incompletely punched “hanging chads” and
“dimpled chads” left by the punch card voting machines used in some Florida counties.6 “dimpled chads” left by the punch card voting machines used in some Florida counties.6
Hearings and reporting on the 2000 elections emphasized, however, that the election Hearings and reporting on the 2000 elections emphasized, however, that the election
administration problems in 2000 were not limited to Florida or to punch card voting machines.7 administration problems in 2000 were not limited to Florida or to punch card voting machines.7
Those investigations identified other Those investigations identified other ~~issues~~problems with voting systems. The lever voting machines used with voting systems. The lever voting machines used
in some jurisdictions in 2000 could jam, for example, and did not produce paper trails that could in some jurisdictions in 2000 could jam, for example, and did not produce paper trails that could
be used to reconstruct votes cast on a jammed machine.8 Confusing ballot be used to reconstruct votes cast on a jammed machine.8 Confusing ballot ~~designs~~ formats contributed to contributed to
high rates of “overvoting”—or making high rates of “overvoting”—or making ~~multiple~~more selections for a selections for a ~~single office~~given contest than permitted—in some counties.9 —in some counties.9
~~Problems were also reported~~The investigations also revealed problems with other aspects of the administration of the 2000 with other aspects of the administration of the 2000 ~~elections.~~
elections, beyond voting systems. Eligible voters who had been erroneously removed from the voter registration rolls were turned Eligible voters who had been erroneously removed from the voter registration rolls were turned
away from the polls in some states, for example.10 Representatives of military and overseas away from the polls in some states, for example.10 Representatives of military and overseas
citizens and of individuals with disabilities and older individuals reported particular obstacles to citizens and of individuals with disabilities and older individuals reported particular obstacles to
registration and voting by members of those groups.11 registration and voting by members of those groups.11
Congress took three main approaches, in HAVA, to responding to issues highlighted by the 2000 Congress took three main approaches, in HAVA, to responding to issues highlighted by the 2000
electionselections~~. The major provisions of the act can be grouped into provisions related to~~: (1) setting (1) setting
requirements for the administration of federal elections, (2) authorizing elections grant programs, requirements for the administration of federal elections, (2) authorizing elections grant programs,
and (3) expanding agency support for election administration through creation of the EAC.12 and (3) expanding agency support for election administration through creation of the EAC.12
Requirements
Some states and localities had adopted policies or technologies before the 2000 elections that may Some states and localities had adopted policies or technologies before the 2000 elections that may
have helped them avoid problems faced by other jurisdictions in 2000. Voting systems that alerted have helped them avoid problems faced by other jurisdictions in 2000. Voting systems that alerted
voters to multiple selections for a single office reportedly reduced overvoting in some cases, for voters to multiple selections for a single office reportedly reduced overvoting in some cases, for
~~example, and statewide voter registration databases may have helped election officials in some~~

5 See, for example, Robert Rosenberg, “‘I Had to Examine Every Disputed Ballot’: George W Bush v Al Gore, Florida, 5 See, for example, Robert Rosenberg, “‘I Had to Examine Every Disputed Ballot’: George W Bush v Al Gore, Florida,
2000,” 2000,” The Guardian, July 1, 2016, at https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2016/jul/01/disputed-ballot-george-, July 1, 2016, at https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2016/jul/01/disputed-ballot-george-
w-bush-al-gore-florida-recount-2000. w-bush-al-gore-florida-recount-2000.
6 See, for example, Samantha Levine, “Hanging Chads: As the Florida Recount Implodes, the Supreme Court Decides 6 See, for example, Samantha Levine, “Hanging Chads: As the Florida Recount Implodes, the Supreme Court Decides
Bush v. Gore,” January 17, 2008, at https://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2008/01/17/the-legacy-of-hanging-chads. Bush v. Gore,” January 17, 2008, at https://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2008/01/17/the-legacy-of-hanging-chads.
7 See, for example, The National Commission on Federal Election Reform, 7 See, for example, The National Commission on Federal Election Reform, To Assure Pride and Confidence in the
Electoral Process, p. 18; and GAO, , p. 18; and GAO, Elections: Perspectives on Activities and Challenges Across the Nation, pp. 24-25. , pp. 24-25.
8 See, for example, R. Michael Alvarez et al., 8 See, for example, R. Michael Alvarez et al., Voting—What Is, What Could Be, p. 6. , p. 6.
9 See, for example, Alan Agresti and Brett Presnell, “Misvotes, Undervotes and Overvotes: The 2000 Presidential 9 See, for example, Alan Agresti and Brett Presnell, “Misvotes, Undervotes and Overvotes: The 2000 Presidential
Election in Florida,” Election in Florida,” Statistical Science, vol. 17, no. 4 (2002), pp. 438-439. , vol. 17, no. 4 (2002), pp. 438-439.
10 See, for example, U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, 10 See, for example, U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, Voting Irregularities in Florida During the 2000 Presidential
Election, June 2001, at https://www.usccr.gov/pubs/vote2000/report/main.htm; and U.S. Congress, Senate Committee , June 2001, at https://www.usccr.gov/pubs/vote2000/report/main.htm; and U.S. Congress, Senate Committee
on Governmental Affairs, on Governmental Affairs, Federal Election Practices and Procedures, 107th Cong., 1st sess., May 3, 2001. , 107th Cong., 1st sess., May 3, 2001.
11 See, for example, U.S. Congress, House Committee on Armed Services, Subcommittee on Military Personnel, 11 See, for example, U.S. Congress, House Committee on Armed Services, Subcommittee on Military Personnel,
Department of Defense Voting Assistance and Military Absentee Ballot Issues, 107th Cong., 1st sess., May 9, 2001 , 107th Cong., 1st sess., May 9, 2001
(Washington: GPO, 2001); and U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on Rules and Administration, (Washington: GPO, 2001); and U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on Rules and Administration, Election Reform, ,
hearing, 107th Cong., 1st sess., March 14, 2001, S.Hrg. 107-1036 (Washington, DC: GPO, 2003). hearing, 107th Cong., 1st sess., March 14, 2001, S.Hrg. 107-1036 (Washington, DC: GPO, 2003).
12 The following three subsections of this report provide an overview of major provisions of the act by type of 12 The following three subsections of this report provide an overview of major provisions of the act by type of
provision. For an overview of major provisions of HAVA by issueprovision. For an overview of major provisions of HAVA by issue~~, se~~e area, see Appendix A.
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service

2 2

link to page 7 link to page 30 link to page 7 link to page 7 link to page 30 link to page 7 The Help America Vote Act of 2002: Overview and Ongoing Role

example, and statewide voter registration databases may have helped election officials in some states maintain more accurate voter rolls.13 Provisional voting policies, which enabled voters states maintain more accurate voter rolls.13 Provisional voting policies, which enabled voters
whose eligibility was challenged at the polls to castwhose eligibility was challenged at the polls to cast a provisional provisional ~~ballot~~ballots, may have helped , may have helped
mitigate some of the effects of voter registration list maintenance errors.14 mitigate some of the effects of voter registration list maintenance errors.14
~~Policy solutions were also proposed~~Other policy proposals were offered in post-2000 hearings and reports. Technology experts in post-2000 hearings and reports. Technology experts
suggested setting national standards for voting system auditability, for example, and the U.S. suggested setting national standards for voting system auditability, for example, and the U.S.
Department of Defense’s (DOD’s) Federal Voting Assistance Program (FVAP), among others, Department of Defense’s (DOD’s) Federal Voting Assistance Program (FVAP), among others,
proposed changes to military and overseas votingproposed changes to military and overseas voting processes.15 .15
HAVA was designed, in part, to standardize use of some of those policies and technologies in HAVA was designed, in part, to standardize use of some of those policies and technologies in
federal elections. Title VII of the act amended existing law to incorporate some federal elections. Title VII of the act amended existing law to incorporate some of the proposed proposed
~~revisions~~changes to military and overseas voting, and to military and overseas voting, and ~~title~~Title III set III set ~~national~~ requirements for requirements for ~~additional~~
other aspects of the aspects of the ~~administration~~conduct of federal elections. The of federal elections. The ~~title~~Title III requirements are briefly III requirements are briefly
summarized below. For details of those requirements and the summarized below. For details of those requirements and the ~~title~~Title VII provisions, respectively, VII provisions, respectively, ~~see~~see
Table 1 andand Appendix B.16 16
  Voting ~~Systems~~systems. Require each state to set uniform standards for what counts as a Require each state to set uniform standards for what counts as a
vote vote on each type of voting system it uses, and require voting systems to offer on each type of voting system it uses, and require voting systems to offer
voters the opportunity to check and correct their ballots; notify voters about voters the opportunity to check and correct their ballots; notify voters about
overvoting; produce a manually auditable permanent paper record; overvoting; produce a manually auditable permanent paper record; ~~be accessible~~
to provide for accessibility for individuals with disabilities; satisfy alternative language requirements of the individuals with disabilities; satisfy alternative language requirements of the
Voting Rights Act of 1965 (VRA; P.L. 89-110), as amended; and Voting Rights Act of 1965 (VRA; P.L. 89-110), as amended; and ~~comply with~~
meet specified error rate standards. specified error rate standards.
  Provisional ~~Voting~~voting. Require election officials to permit certain voters, including Require election officials to permit certain voters, including
voters whose names do not appear on the voter rolls, to cast voters whose names do not appear on the voter rolls, to cast a provisional provisional ~~ballot;~~
ballots; count provisional ballots cast by voters who are found to be eligible under state count provisional ballots cast by voters who are found to be eligible under state
law to vote; and provide voters with specified options for checking the status of law to vote; and provide voters with specified options for checking the status of
their provisional ballots. their provisional ballots.
  Voting ~~Information~~information. Require election officials to post the following information Require election officials to post the following information
at at the polls: a sample ballot, the date of the election, polling place hours, the polls: a sample ballot, the date of the election, polling place hours,
instructions for instructions for ~~voting, instructions about~~voting and for complying with HAVA’s requirements for mail HAVA’s requirements for mail
registrants and first-time voters, and general information about voting rights and registrants and first-time voters, and general information about voting rights and
prohibitions on fraud and misrepresentation. prohibitions on fraud and misrepresentation.
(Section continues ~~following~~following Table 1.)

13 See, for example, U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, 13 See, for example, U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, S. 368 and Election
Reform, 107th Cong., 1st sess., May 8, 2001 (Washington, DC: GPO, 2001), pp. 40-41; and Electionline, , 107th Cong., 1st sess., May 8, 2001 (Washington, DC: GPO, 2001), pp. 40-41; and Electionline, Election
Reform: What’s Changed, What Hasn't and Why, 2000-2006, February 2006, p. 19, at https://www.pewtrusts.org/-/, February 2006, p. 19, at https://www.pewtrusts.org/-/
media/legacy/uploadedfiles/wwwpewtrustsorg/reports/election_reform/electionline022006pdf.pdf. media/legacy/uploadedfiles/wwwpewtrustsorg/reports/election_reform/electionline022006pdf.pdf.
14 See, for example, U.S. Congress, House Committee on House Administration, 14 See, for example, U.S. Congress, House Committee on House Administration, Help America Vote Act of 2001, report , report
to accompany H.R. 3295, 107th Cong., 1st sess., December 10, 2001, H.Rept. 107-329 (Washington, DC: GPO, 2001), to accompany H.R. 3295, 107th Cong., 1st sess., December 10, 2001, H.Rept. 107-329 (Washington, DC: GPO, 2001),
pp. 37-39; and Electionline, pp. 37-39; and Electionline, Election Reform: What’s Changed, What Hasn't and Why, 2000-2006, p. 32. For more on , p. 32. For more on
voter registration list maintenance, see CRS Report R46943, voter registration list maintenance, see CRS Report R46943, Voter Registration Records and List Maintenance for
Federal Elections, by Sarah J. Eckman., by Sarah J. Eckman.
15 See, for example, R. Michael Alvarez et al., 15 See, for example, R. Michael Alvarez et al., Voting—What Is, What Could Be, p. 24; Democratic Caucus Special , p. 24; Democratic Caucus Special
Committee on Election Reform, Committee on Election Reform, Revitalizing Our Nation’s Election System, pp. 79-80, at https://web.archive.org/web/, pp. 79-80, at https://web.archive.org/web/
20011108222052/http:/housedemocrats.house.gov/documents/electionreformreport.pdf; The National Commission on 20011108222052/http:/housedemocrats.house.gov/documents/electionreformreport.pdf; The National Commission on
Federal Election Reform, Federal Election Reform, To Assure Pride and Confidence in the Electoral Process, pp. 42-43; and U.S. Congress, , pp. 42-43; and U.S. Congress,
House Committee on Armed Services, Subcommittee on Military Personnel, House Committee on Armed Services, Subcommittee on Military Personnel, Department of Defense Voting Assistance
and Military Absentee Ballot Issues. .
16 For more on military and overseas voting in general, see CRS In Focus IF11642, 16 For more on military and overseas voting in general, see CRS In Focus IF11642, Absentee Voting for Uniformed
Services and Overseas Citizens: Roles and Process, In Brief, by R. Sam Garrett; and CRS Report RS20764, , by R. Sam Garrett; and CRS Report RS20764, The
Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act: Overview and Issues, by R. Sam Garrett. , by R. Sam Garrett.
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service

3 3

link to page 9 link to page 9 link to page 9 link to page 9 link to page 9 link to page 9 link to page 9 link to page 9
Table 1. Requirements for Federal Elections Established by Title III of HAVA

Effective Date
Requirements
Voting Systems Voting Systems
January 1, 2006 January 1, 2006
Require voting systems to permit voters privately and independently to verify and change or correct their Require voting systems to permit voters privately and independently to verify and change or correct their
52 U.S.C. §21081 52 U.S.C. §21081
ballots before they are cast and counted; notify voters who have selected more than one candidate for a single ballots before they are cast and counted; notify voters who have selected more than one candidate for a single
office that they have overvoted, inform them of the effects of overvoting, and provide an opportunity to office that they have overvoted, inform them of the effects of overvoting, and provide an opportunity to
correct the ballot before it is cast and councorrect the ballot before it is cast and counted;a produce a manually auditable permanent paper record that is produce a manually auditable permanent paper record that is
available as an official record for recounts, and permit voters to change or correct their ballots before the available as an official record for recounts, and permit voters to change or correct their ballots before the
manually auditable permanent paper record is produced; be accessible to individuals with disabilities in a manually auditable permanent paper record is produced; be accessible to individuals with disabilities in a
manner that provides them the same opportunity for access and participation as other voters, through use of manner that provides them the same opportunity for access and participation as other voters, through use of
at least one direct recording electronic (DRE) voting system or other accessible voting system at each pol ing at least one direct recording electronic (DRE) voting system or other accessible voting system at each pol ing
plplace;b provide alternative language accessibility as required by Section 203 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 provide alternative language accessibility as required by Section 203 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965
(VRA), as amended; and comply with the error rate standards established by Section 3.2.1 of the Federal (VRA), as amended; and comply with the error rate standards established by Section 3.2.1 of the Federal
Election Commission’s (FEC’s) 1990 Voting Systems Standards. Election Commission’s (FEC’s) 1990 Voting Systems Standards.
Require each state to adopt uniform and nondiscriminatory standards for what constitutes and wil be counted Require each state to adopt uniform and nondiscriminatory standards for what constitutes and wil be counted
as a vote for each type of voting system it uses. as a vote for each type of voting system it uses.
Provisional Votin Provisional Votingc
January 1, 2004 January 1, 2004
Require individuals who do not appear on the official list of eligible voters or whose eligibility to vote is Require individuals who do not appear on the official list of eligible voters or whose eligibility to vote is
52 U.S.C. §§21082(a),(c) 52 U.S.C. §§21082(a),(c)
otherwise challenged by an election official to be permitted to cast a provisional ballot if they provide written otherwise challenged by an election official to be permitted to cast a provisional ballot if they provide written
affirmation that they are registered in the jurisdiction and eligible to vote in the election. affirmation that they are registered in the jurisdiction and eligible to vote in the election.
Require election officials to notify eligible individuals that they may cast a provisional Require election officials to notify eligible individuals that they may cast a provisional ~~ballot~~bal ot; transmit ; transmit
provisional ballots to the appropriate officials for prompt verification; count provisional ballots cast by provisional ballots to the appropriate officials for prompt verification; count provisional ballots cast by
individuals they find to be eligible under state law to vote; establish a free access system individuals can use to individuals they find to be eligible under state law to vote; establish a free access system individuals can use to
check the status of their provisional ballots; provide individuals who cast provisional ballots with written check the status of their provisional ballots; provide individuals who cast provisional ballots with written
information about the free access system; and establish and maintain procedures to protect the security, information about the free access system; and establish and maintain procedures to protect the security,
confidentiality, and integrity of personal information col ected, stored, or otherwise used by the free access confidentiality, and integrity of personal information col ected, stored, or otherwise used by the free access
system. system.
Require individuals who vote during certain extended pol ing place hours to cast provisional rather than Require individuals who vote during certain extended pol ing place hours to cast provisional rather than
regular ballots, and require those ballots to be held apart from other provisional balloregular ballots, and require those ballots to be held apart from other provisional ballots.d
Voting Information Voting Information
January 1, 2004 January 1, 2004
Require election officials to post the fol owing information at the pol s: a sample ballot; information about the Require election officials to post the fol owing information at the pol s: a sample ballot; information about the
52 U.S.C. §21082(b) 52 U.S.C. §21082(b)
date of the election and pol ing place hours; instructions for how to vote, including how to cast a vote and a date of the election and pol ing place hours; instructions for how to vote, including how to cast a vote and a
provisional ballot; instructions about HAVA’s requirements for mail-in registrants and first-time voters; general provisional ballot; instructions about HAVA’s requirements for mail-in registrants and first-time voters; general
information about federal and state voting rights, including information about the right to cast a provisional information about federal and state voting rights, including information about the right to cast a provisional
ballot and how to report violations of voting rights; and general information about federal and state ballot and how to report violations of voting rights; and general information about federal and state
prohibitions on fraud and misrepresentation. prohibitions on fraud and misrepresentation.
CRS-4 CRS-4

link to page 9 link to page 9 link to page 9 link to page 9 link to page 9 link to page 9 link to page 9 link to page 9 link to page 9 link to page 9 link to page 9 link to page 9

Effective Date
Requirements
Statewide Voter Registration Statewide Voter Registration
January 1, 200 January 1, 2004f
Require states to implement a single, uniform, official, centralized, interactive computerized statewide voter Require states to implement a single, uniform, official, centralized, interactive computerized statewide voter
Datab Databasese
registration list that is defined, maintained, and administered at the state level; includes the name and registration list that is defined, maintained, and administered at the state level; includes the name and
52 U.S.C. §21083(a) 52 U.S.C. §21083(a)
registration information of all registered voters in the state; assigns each registered voter a unique identifier; registration information of all registered voters in the state; assigns each registered voter a unique identifier;
and can be immediately electronically accessed by any election official in the state. and can be immediately electronically accessed by any election official in the state.
Require coordination of the statewide voter registration list with other agency databases in the state. Require coordination of the statewide voter registration list with other agency databases in the state.
Require voter registration information obtained by local election officials to be electronically entered into the Require voter registration information obtained by local election officials to be electronically entered into the
list on an expedited basis, and require chief state election officials to provide any support required to facilitate list on an expedited basis, and require chief state election officials to provide any support required to facilitate
expeditious entry of such information. expeditious entry of such information.
Require election officials to comply with provisions of the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 (NVRA) Require election officials to comply with provisions of the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 (NVRA)
when removing individuals from the list and coordinate the list with state agency records on felony status and when removing individuals from the list and coordinate the list with state agency records on felony status and
death for purposes of removing ineligible voters from the death for purposes of removing ineligible voters from the ~~lis~~tlist.g
Require list maintenance under the above provisions to be conducted in a manner that ensures that the name Require list maintenance under the above provisions to be conducted in a manner that ensures that the name
of each registered voter appears in the computerized list, only voters who are not registered or are ineligible of each registered voter appears in the computerized list, only voters who are not registered or are ineligible
to vote are removed from the list, and duplicate names are removed from the list. to vote are removed from the list, and duplicate names are removed from the list.
Require state or local officials to provide adequate technological security measures to prevent unauthorized Require state or local officials to provide adequate technological security measures to prevent unauthorized
access to the statewide voter registration list. access to the statewide voter registration list.
Require provisions to ensure that voter registration records are accurate and regularly updated, including Require provisions to ensure that voter registration records are accurate and regularly updated, including
reasonable efforts to remove registrants who are not eligible to vote and safeguards against erroneous reasonable efforts to remove registrants who are not eligible to vote and safeguards against erroneous
removal of eligible voters. removal of eligible voters.
Require voter registration applicants who have a current and valid driver’s license number or Social Security Require voter registration applicants who have a current and valid driver’s license number or Social Security
number to provide the license number or the last four digits of the Social Security number with their number to provide the license number or the last four digits of the Social Security number with their
registration applications, and require states to verify the information applicants provide. registration applications, and require states to verify the information applicants provide.
Require states to assign unique identifying numbers to voter registration applicants who have not been issued a Require states to assign unique identifying numbers to voter registration applicants who have not been issued a
current and valid license or Social Security number. current and valid license or Social Security number.
Require the official responsible for the state motor vehicle authority of each state to enter into dataRequire the official responsible for the state motor vehicle authority of each state to enter into data -matching matching
agreements with the chief state election official of the state and the Commissioner of Social Security for agreements with the chief state election official of the state and the Commissioner of Social Security for
purposes of verifying the accuracy of information provided on voter registration applicationpurposes of verifying the accuracy of information provided on voter registration applications.h
Voter Identification Voter Identification
January 1, 200 January 1, 2004i
Require individuals who registered by mail, have not previously voted in a federal election in the state, and do Require individuals who registered by mail, have not previously voted in a federal election in the state, and do
52 U.S.C. §21083(b)(1)-(3) 52 U.S.C. §21083(b)(1)-(3)
not meet certain conditions to present one of a specified list of types of identification at the pol s (if voting in not meet certain conditions to present one of a specified list of types of identification at the pol s (if voting in
person) or include a copy of such identification with their ballot (if voting by mailperson) or include a copy of such identification with their ballot (if voting by mail).j
Require individuals who fail to meet the voter identification requirement to be permitted to cast a provisional Require individuals who fail to meet the voter identification requirement to be permitted to cast a provisional
ballot or have their mail ballot counted as a provisional ballot. ballot or have their mail ballot counted as a provisional ballot.
CRS-5 CRS-5

Effective Date
Requirements
Federal Mail Voter Registration Federal Mail Voter Registration
January 1, 2004i January 1, 2004i
Require the federal mail voter registration form to include questions about citizenship status and age and Require the federal mail voter registration form to include questions about citizenship status and age and
Form Form
boxes for applicants to check in response, a statement that voters who check “no” in response to either of the boxes for applicants to check in response, a statement that voters who check “no” in response to either of the
52 U.S.C. §21083(b)(4) 52 U.S.C. §21083(b)(4)
questions should not complete the form, and a statement informing applicants who are registering for the first questions should not complete the form, and a statement informing applicants who are registering for the first
time by mail that identification information must be submitted with the registration form to avoid additional time by mail that identification information must be submitted with the registration form to avoid additional
identification requirements when voting for the first time. identification requirements when voting for the first time.
Require registrars to notify individuals who fail to answer the citizenship question that they did not answer the Require registrars to notify individuals who fail to answer the citizenship question that they did not answer the
question and provide them with an opportunity to complete the form. question and provide them with an opportunity to complete the form.
Source: CRS, based on review of the CRS, based on review of the U.S. Code. .
Notes: The requirements in this table apply to elections for federal office. The voting systems standards, for example, are for systems used in federal elections. The requirements in this table apply to elections for federal office. The voting systems standards, for example, are for systems used in federal elections.
a. Jurisdictions that use paper ballot, punch card, or central count voting systems can meet this requirement by creating a voter education program that informs voters a. Jurisdictions that use paper ballot, punch card, or central count voting systems can meet this requirement by creating a voter education program that informs voters
of the effects of overvoting and providing voters with instructions for correcting overvotes before their ballots are cast and counted. of the effects of overvoting and providing voters with instructions for correcting overvotes before their ballots are cast and counted.
b. Voting systems purchased with requirements payments made available on or after January 1, 2007, are required to meet HAVA’s standards for disability access. b. Voting systems purchased with requirements payments made available on or after January 1, 2007, are required to meet HAVA’s standards for disability access.
c. States that c. States that ~~had~~have not required voter registration on and since August 1, 1994, or that not required voter registration on and since August 1, 1994, or that ~~had~~have permitted same-day registration on permitted same-day registration on orand since August 1, 1994, since August 1, 1994, ~~could use their~~
can use their existing voter registration procedures to satisfy HAVA’s provisional voting requirements. existing voter registration procedures to satisfy HAVA’s provisional voting requirements.
d. HAVA also d. HAVA also ~~required~~requires that individuals who do not meet its voter identification requirement individuals who do not meet its voter identification requirement to be allowed to be allowed to ~~vote~~cast a provisional ballot. For more on that requirement, see a provisional ballot. For more on that requirement, see
the “Voter Identification” section of this table. the “Voter Identification” section of this table.
e. HAVA’s statewide voter registration database requirements do not apply to North Dakota, which does not require voter registration. e. HAVA’s statewide voter registration database requirements do not apply to North Dakota, which does not require voter registration.
f. f.
HAVA provided for this deadline to be extended to January 1, 2006, for states or jurisdictions that certified to the U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC) by HAVA provided for this deadline to be extended to January 1, 2006, for states or jurisdictions that certified to the U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC) by
January 1, 2004, that they would not meet the original deadline for good cause. January 1, 2004, that they would not meet the original deadline for good cause.
g. HAVA indicates that states that g. HAVA indicates that states that ~~had~~have not required voter registration on and since August 1, 1994, or that not required voter registration on and since August 1, 1994, or that ~~had~~have permitted same-day registration on and since August permitted same-day registration on and since August 1, 1,
1994, should fol ow their state laws for removing ineligible voters from their voter registration lists rather than the HAVA requirements. 1994, should fol ow their state laws for removing ineligible voters from their voter registration lists rather than the HAVA requirements.
h. Compliance with this requirement and the above two requirements is optional for states that are permitted to use Social Security numbers—and that provide for h. Compliance with this requirement and the above two requirements is optional for states that are permitted to use Social Security numbers—and that provide for
use of Social Security numbers—on voter registration applications in accordance with Section 7 of the Privacy Act of 1974 (P.L. 93-579). use of Social Security numbers—on voter registration applications in accordance with Section 7 of the Privacy Act of 1974 (P.L. 93-579).
i. i.
HAVA indicates that these requirements apply to any individual who registers on or after January 1, 2003. HAVA indicates that these requirements apply to any individual who registers on or after January 1, 2003.
j. j.
The relevant conditions are The relevant conditions are: (1) registering to vote by mail under Section 6 of the NVRA and submitting a copy of acceptable identification with the registration; (2) (1) registering to vote by mail under Section 6 of the NVRA and submitting a copy of acceptable identification with the registration; (2)
registering to vote by mail under Section 6 of the NVRA, submitting a driver’s license number or at least the last four digits of a Social Security number with the registering to vote by mail under Section 6 of the NVRA, submitting a driver’s license number or at least the last four digits of a Social Security number with the
registration, and having the submitted information matched by an election official to an existing state identification record with the same number, name, and date of registration, and having the submitted information matched by an election official to an existing state identification record with the same number, name, and date of
birth; or (3) being entitled to vote by absentee ballot under the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act of 1986 (UOCAVA) or to vote other than in birth; or (3) being entitled to vote by absentee ballot under the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act of 1986 (UOCAVA) or to vote other than in
person under the Voting Accessibility for the Elderly and Handicapped Act of 1984 (VAEHA; P.L. 98-435) or any other federal law. person under the Voting Accessibility for the Elderly and Handicapped Act of 1984 (VAEHA; P.L. 98-435) or any other federal law.
CRS-6 CRS-6

link to page 12 link to page 12 ~~link to page 12~~ The Help America Vote Act of 2002: Overview and Ongoing Role

  Statewide ~~Voter Registration Databases~~voter registration databases. Require states to implement Require states to implement
centralized, centralized, computerized statewide voter registration lists and follow specified computerized statewide voter registration lists and follow specified
procedures for maintaining them.17 procedures for maintaining them.17
  Voter ~~Identification~~.identification. Require certain first-time voters who register by mail to Require certain first-time voters who register by mail to
provide one of a specified list of types of identification in order to provide one of a specified list of types of identification in order to ~~vote~~cast a regular a regular
ballot. ballot.
  Federal ~~Mail Voter Registration Form~~mail voter registration form. Require questions about citizenship and Require questions about citizenship and
age age and statements about the new questions and HAVA’s voter ID requirement to and statements about the new questions and HAVA’s voter ID requirement to
be added to the federal mail voter registration form established by the National be added to the federal mail voter registration form established by the National
Voter Registration Act of 1993 (NVRA; P.L. 103-31Voter Registration Act of 1993 (NVRA; P.L. 103-31; 52 U.S.C. §§20501-20511), and require election ), and require election
officials to offer voters who fail to answer the citizenship question an opportunity officials to offer voters who fail to answer the citizenship question an opportunity
to complete the form. to complete the form.
HAVA left decisions about how to implement—and, to a certain extent, enforce—its HAVA left decisions about how to implement—and, to a certain extent, enforce—its ~~title~~Title III III
requirements to the states. The act requirements to the states. The act ~~directs~~directed the EAC to issue voluntary guidance for implementing the EAC to issue voluntary guidance for implementing
~~the title~~the Title III requirements but III requirements but ~~leaves~~left states discretion over exactly how to meet them.18 states discretion over exactly how to meet them.18 It assigned ~~It assigns~~
federal enforcement of the requirements to the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) but federal enforcement of the requirements to the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) but ~~routes~~routed action action
by individual voters on violations through state-based administrative complaint procedures19 by individual voters on violations through state-based administrative complaint procedures19
rather than an explicit private right of action.20rather than an explicit private right of action.20
Grant Programs
Complying with HAVA’s Complying with HAVA’s ~~title~~Title III requirements involved significant financial investments for III requirements involved significant financial investments for
many states and localities. There were also other post-2000 many states and localities. There were also other post-2000 ~~adjustments~~changes to election processes— to election processes—
not addressed by the HAVA requirements—that states and localities wanted or needed to make. not addressed by the HAVA requirements—that states and localities wanted or needed to make.
Congress accounted for both Congress accounted for both ~~cases~~of those circumstances, in HAVA, with a pair of general grant programs that were , in HAVA, with a pair of general grant programs that were
designed to help states meet HAVA’s designed to help states meet HAVA’s ~~title~~Title III requirements and make III requirements and make certain general improvements to general improvements to ~~the~~
~~administration of federal elections~~election administration. .
HAVA also authorized grant programs to facilitate or incentivize action on specific issues or HAVA also authorized grant programs to facilitate or incentivize action on specific issues or
policy proposals, such as replacing lever and punch card voting systems. Those more specialized policy proposals, such as replacing lever and punch card voting systems. Those more specialized
grant programs included programs related to voting technology, disability access, youth voter grant programs included programs related to voting technology, disability access, youth voter
participation, and poll worker recruitment. participation, and poll worker recruitment.
Each of the grant programs authorized by HAVA is summarized below. Information about the Each of the grant programs authorized by HAVA is summarized below. Information about the
funding Congress has authorized and appropriated for each program funding Congress has authorized and appropriated for each program ~~to date~~as of this writing is available i is available in Table
2~~. For more~~2. For more on federal elections grant programs in general, see CRS Report R46646, on federal elections grant programs in general, see CRS Report R46646, Election
Administration: Federal Grant Funding for States and Localities, by Karen L. Shanton. , by Karen L. Shanton.

17 For more on voter registration list maintenance, see CRS Report R46943, 17 For more on voter registration list maintenance, see CRS Report R46943, Voter Registration Records and List
Maintenance for Federal Elections, by Sarah J. Eckman. , by Sarah J. Eckman.
18 52 U.S.C. §§21101-21102 and 52 U.S.C. §21085. 18 52 U.S.C. §§21101-21102 and 52 U.S.C. §21085.
19 52 U.S.C. §§21111-21112. HAVA requires states that receive funding under any of its grant programs to establish a 19 52 U.S.C. §§21111-21112. HAVA requires states that receive funding under any of its grant programs to establish a
state-based administrative complaint procedure. That requirement applies to all states in practice because all have state-based administrative complaint procedure. That requirement applies to all states in practice because all have
received HAVA funding. received HAVA funding.
20 Unlike some other federal statutes, such as the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 (NVRA), HAVA does not 20 Unlike some other federal statutes, such as the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 (NVRA), HAVA does not
provide for an explicit private right to sue for violations of its requirements. The question of whether there is a private provide for an explicit private right to sue for violations of its requirements. The question of whether there is a private
right of action for any of HAVA’s right of action for any of HAVA’s ~~title~~Title III requirements on other grounds has been the subject of litigation and III requirements on other grounds has been the subject of litigation and
academic debate. For a discussion of that issue, see Daniel P. Tokaji, “Public Rights and Private Rights of Action: The academic debate. For a discussion of that issue, see Daniel P. Tokaji, “Public Rights and Private Rights of Action: The
Enforcement of Federal Election Laws,” Enforcement of Federal Election Laws,” Indiana Law Review, vol. 44, no. 113 (2010). , vol. 44, no. 113 (2010).
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service

7 7

The Help America Vote Act of 2002: Overview and Ongoing Role

  Requirements ~~Payments Program~~payments program. Grants to states for meeting Grants to states for meeting ~~federal election~~
~~administration requirements~~requirements for the administration of federal elections. Administered by the EAC.. Administered by the EAC.21 States are required States are required by HAVA to to
provide a match for provide a match for ~~funds~~funding they receive under this program and a state plan for they receive under this program and a state plan for
use of the funds.use of the funds.2122 Funding was initially authorized for this grant program Funding was initially authorized for this grant program
primarily for helping states comply with HAVA’s primarily for helping states comply with HAVA’s ~~title~~Title III requirements. III requirements.2223 The The
Military and Overseas Voter Empowerment (MOVE) Act of 2009 amended Military and Overseas Voter Empowerment (MOVE) Act of 2009 amended
HAVA to authorize additional funding for the program to help states meet new HAVA to authorize additional funding for the program to help states meet new
~~requirements established by the MOVE Act~~requirements for military and overseas voting for military and overseas voting~~.23~~
 ~~General Improvements Grant Program~~ established by the MOVE Act.24  General improvements grant program. Grants to states for making Grants to states for making certain general general
improvements to improvements to ~~the~~election administration administration ~~of federal elections.24~~.25 Administered by the Administered by the
U.S. General Services Administration (GSA) and the EAC.U.S. General Services Administration (GSA) and the EAC.2526
  Lever and ~~Punch Card Voting System Replacement Grant Program~~punch card voting system replacement grant program. Grants . ~~Grants~~
to states to states that used lever or punch card voting systems in the November 2000 that used lever or punch card voting systems in the November 2000
election for replacing those systems. Administered by GSA and the EAC. States election for replacing those systems. Administered by GSA and the EAC. States
that accepted funding under this grant program were required to either replace all that accepted funding under this grant program were required to either replace all
of their lever and punch card voting systems by a deadline specified by of their lever and punch card voting systems by a deadline specified by ~~the act~~HAVA or or
repay a portion of the funds they received.repay a portion of the funds they received.26
 ~~Voting Technology Improvements Research Grant Program~~27  Voting technology improvements research grant program. Grants for . ~~Grants for~~
researching researching and developing improvements to the quality, reliability, accuracy, and developing improvements to the quality, reliability, accuracy,
accessibility, affordability, and security of election systems. Administered by the accessibility, affordability, and security of election systems. Administered by the
EAC with support from the National Institute of Standards and Technology EAC with support from the National Institute of Standards and Technology
(NIST).(NIST).2728

21 21 The Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2004 (P.L. 108-199) authorized the U.S. General Services Administration (GSA) to make requirements payments while the EAC was being established but provided for expiration of that authority by the earlier of (1) June 30, 2004, or (2) the end of the three-month period after appointment of all members of the EAC. 22 52 U.S.C. §21003. The match amount is “5 percent of the total amount to be spent for [activities for which the 52 U.S.C. §21003. The match amount is “5 percent of the total amount to be spent for [activities for which the
requirements payment is made] (taking into account the requirements payment and the amount spent by the State).” requirements payment is made] (taking into account the requirements payment and the amount spent by the State).”
2223 52 U.S.C. §21001. States could also use requirements payments for more general improvements to the administration 52 U.S.C. §21001. States could also use requirements payments for more general improvements to the administration
of federal elections if they had already met the of federal elections if they had already met the ~~title~~Title III requirements or limited their spending on such activities to a III requirements or limited their spending on such activities to a
specified amount. specified amount.
2324 52 U.S.C. §21001. The MOVE Act was enacted as Subtitle H of Title V of the National Defense Authorization Act 52 U.S.C. §21001. The MOVE Act was enacted as Subtitle H of Title V of the National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2010 (P.L. 111-84). for Fiscal Year 2010 (P.L. 111-84).
2425 HAVA lists HAVA lists ~~some examples of~~specific permissible uses of this grant funding. The listed uses are permissible uses of this grant funding. The listed uses are: complying with HAVA’s complying with HAVA’s
~~title~~Title III requirements; improving the administration of federal elections; educating voters about voting procedures, III requirements; improving the administration of federal elections; educating voters about voting procedures,
rights, and technology; training election officials and volunteers; developing the state plan for requirements payments; rights, and technology; training election officials and volunteers; developing the state plan for requirements payments;
improving, acquiring, or modifying voting systems and technology and vote casting and counting methods; improving improving, acquiring, or modifying voting systems and technology and vote casting and counting methods; improving
polling place accessibility and quantity; and establishing toll-free hotlines for reporting voting fraud and rights polling place accessibility and quantity; and establishing toll-free hotlines for reporting voting fraud and rights
violations and accessing election information (52 U.S.C. §20901). violations and accessing election information (52 U.S.C. §20901).
2526 HAVA assigned initial responsibility for administering the general improvements and lever and punch card voting HAVA assigned initial responsibility for administering the general improvements and lever and punch card voting
system replacement grant programs to system replacement grant programs to ~~the U.S. General Services Administration (GSA)~~GSA but authority for overseeing but authority for overseeing
audits and repayments of the funds to the EAC (52 U.S.C. §§20901-20906 and 52 U.S.C. §21142). The EAC audits and repayments of the funds to the EAC (52 U.S.C. §§20901-20906 and 52 U.S.C. §21142). The EAC ~~was~~has also also
been charged with administering the funding Congress appropriated under the general improvements grant program for charged with administering the funding Congress appropriated under the general improvements grant program for
FY2018FY2018, FY2020, and FY2022 ~~and FY2020~~ (P.L. 115-141; P.L. 116-93 (P.L. 115-141; P.L. 116-93; P.L. 116-136; and P.L. ; and P.L. ~~116-136).~~
26117-103). 27 52 U.S.C. §20902. The deadline for replacing voting systems was originally the regularly scheduled federal general 52 U.S.C. §20902. The deadline for replacing voting systems was originally the regularly scheduled federal general
election in November 2004, with an optional waiver to the first federal election after January 1, 2006. Congress election in November 2004, with an optional waiver to the first federal election after January 1, 2006. Congress
extended the waiver deadline twice (P.L. 110-28 and P.L. 111-8). The final deadline was the first federal election after extended the waiver deadline twice (P.L. 110-28 and P.L. 111-8). The final deadline was the first federal election after
November 1, 2010. November 1, 2010.
2728 HAVA charged NIST with recommending topics for projects funded under this grant program and the voting HAVA charged NIST with recommending topics for projects funded under this grant program and the voting
technology pilot program grant program as well as reviewing grant applications for both grant programs and, on EAC technology pilot program grant program as well as reviewing grant applications for both grant programs and, on EAC
request, monitoring grant activities (52 U.S.C. §21041 and 52 U.S.C. §21051). request, monitoring grant activities (52 U.S.C. §21041 and 52 U.S.C. §21051).
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service

8 8

link to page 13 link to page 14 link to page 14 link to page 14 link to page 14 link to page 14 link to page 14 link to page 13 link to page 14 link to page 14 link to page 14 link to page 14 link to page 14 link to page 14 link to page 14 The Help America Vote Act of 2002: Overview and Ongoing Role

  Voting ~~Technology Pilot Program Grant Program~~technology pilot program grant program. Grants for conducting pilot Grants for conducting pilot
programs to test new voting technologies and implement them on a trial basis. programs to test new voting technologies and implement them on a trial basis.
Administered by the EAC with support from NIST. Administered by the EAC with support from NIST.
  Polling ~~Place Accessibility Grant Program~~place accessibility grant program. Grants to states and localities for Grants to states and localities for
improving the accessibility of polling places and sharing information about improving the accessibility of polling places and sharing information about
polling place accessibility. Administered by the U.S. Department of Health and polling place accessibility. Administered by the U.S. Department of Health and
Human Services (HHS).Human Services (HHS).2829
  Protection and ~~Advocacy (P&A) System Grant Program~~advocacy (P&A) system grant program. Grants to P&A Grants to P&A
systems—systems— state-level systems charged with empowering and advocating for state-level systems charged with empowering and advocating for
individuals with disabilities—for conducting activities related to electoral accessindividuals with disabilities—for conducting activities related to electoral access for individuals with disabilities. .
Administered by HHS. Administered by HHS.
  Mock ~~Elections Grant Program~~elections grant program. Grants for conducting voter education Grants for conducting voter education
activities for activities for students and their parents. Administered by the EAC. students and their parents. Administered by the EAC.
  Help America Vote College Program. Grant-making, among other program Grant-making, among other program
activities, for encouraging students at institutions of higher education to serve as activities, for encouraging students at institutions of higher education to serve as
poll workers and election officials to use their services. Administered by the poll workers and election officials to use their services. Administered by the
EAC. HAVA also authorized creation of a Help America Vote Foundation to EAC. HAVA also authorized creation of a Help America Vote Foundation to
perform a similar function for secondary school students, although the act’s perform a similar function for secondary school students, although the act’s
description of the foundation does not explicitly list grant-making among its description of the foundation does not explicitly list grant-making among its
authorized activities.activities.2930
Table 2. Funding Authorized and Appropriated for HAVA Grant Programs
(as of the publication date of this report) (as of the publication date of this report)
Grant Program
Amounts Authorized by HAVAa
Amounts Appropriated
Requirements payments Requirements payments
FY2003: $1.4 bil ion FY2003: $1.4 bil ion
FY2003: $830.0 mil ion FY2003: $830.0 mil ion
program program
FY2004: $1.0 bil ion FY2004: $1.0 bil ion
FY2004: $1.5 bil io FY2004: $1.5 bil ionc
52 U.S.C. §§21001-21008 52 U.S.C. §§21001-21008
FY2005: $600.0 mil ion FY2005: $600.0 mil ion
FY2008: $115.0 mil ion FY2008: $115.0 mil ion
FY2010 and subsequent fiscal years: FY2010 and subsequent fiscal years:
FY2009: $100.0 mil ion FY2009: $100.0 mil ion
Such sums as may be necessar Such sums as may be necessaryb
FY2010: $70.0 mil ion FY2010: $70.0 mil ion
~~FY2011:~~ FY2011:d
General improvements grant General improvements grant
FY2003: $650.0 mil ion (for FY2003: $650.0 mil ion (for
program program
combination of general combination of general
52 U.S.C. §§20901, 20903-20906 52 U.S.C. §§20901, 20903-20906
improvements grant program and improvements grant program and
lever and punch card voting system lever and punch card voting system
Lever and punch card voting Lever and punch card voting
~~$650.0 mil ion (to be divided evenly~~
replacement grant progrreplacement grant program)e
system replacement grant system replacement grant
~~between the two grant programs)~~$650.0 mil ion (to be divided evenly
FY2018: $380.0 mil ion (for general FY2018: $380.0 mil ion (for general
program program
between the two grant programs) improvements grant progrimprovements grant program)f
52 U.S.C. §§20902-20906 52 U.S.C. §§20902-20906
FY2020: $825.0 mil ion (for general FY2020: $825.0 mil ion (for general
improvements grant program)improvements grant program)f,g,h FY2022: $75 mil ion (for general improvements grant program)h

2829 As authorized, HAVA’s polling place accessibility grant program was available to localities. However, the As authorized, HAVA’s polling place accessibility grant program was available to localities. However, the
appropriations acts that have funded the program have limited grant funds to states. See, for example, P.L. 108-7. appropriations acts that have funded the program have limited grant funds to states. See, for example, P.L. 108-7.
2930 President George W. Bush named nominees to the Help America Vote Foundation’s board of directors on July 9, President George W. Bush named nominees to the Help America Vote Foundation’s board of directors on July 9,
2004. The White House, “Personnel Announcement,” press release, July 9, 2004, at https://georgewbush-2004. The White House, “Personnel Announcement,” press release, July 9, 2004, at https://georgewbush-
whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2004/07/text/20040709-6.html. CRS has not been able to locate additional whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2004/07/text/20040709-6.html. CRS has not been able to locate additional
information about activities of the foundation. information about activities of the foundation.
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service

9 9

link to page 13 link to page 14 link to page 14 link to page 14 link to page 14 link to page 14 link to page 13 link to page 14 link to page 14 link to page 14 link to page 14 link to page 14 The Help America Vote Act of 2002: Overview and Ongoing Role

Grant Program
Amounts Authorized by HAVAa
Amounts Appropriated
Voting technology Voting technology
FY2003: $20.0 mil ion FY2003: $20.0 mil ion
FY2009: $5.0 mil ion FY2009: $5.0 mil ion
improvements research grant improvements research grant
FY2010: $3.0 mil ion FY2010: $3.0 mil ion
program program
52 U.S.C. §§21041-21043 52 U.S.C. §§21041-21043
Voting technology pilot program Voting technology pilot program
FY2003: $10.0 mil ion FY2003: $10.0 mil ion
FY2009: $1.0 mil ion FY2009: $1.0 mil ion
grant program grant program
FY2010: $2.0 mil ion FY2010: $2.0 mil ion
52 U.S.C. §§21051-21053 52 U.S.C. §§21051-21053
Pol ing place accessibility grant Pol ing place accessibility grant
FY2003: $50.0 mil ion FY2003: $50.0 mil ion
FY2003: $13.0 mil ion FY2003: $13.0 mil ion
program program
FY2004: $25.0 mil ion FY2004: $25.0 mil ion
FY2004: $10.0 mil ion FY2004: $10.0 mil ion
52 U.S.C. §§21021-21025 52 U.S.C. §§21021-21025
FY2005: $25.0 mil ion FY2005: $25.0 mil ion
FY2005: $10.0 mil ion FY2005: $10.0 mil ion
FY2006: $11.0 mil ion FY2006: $11.0 mil ion
~~FY2007:~~ hFY2007:i
FY2008: $12.4 mil ion FY2008: $12.4 mil ion
FY2009: $12.2 mil ion FY2009: $12.2 mil ion
FY2010: $12.2 mil ion FY2010: $12.2 mil ion
FY2011:FY2011: hi
FY2014-FY2014-~~FY2021: i~~FY2022:j
Protection and advocacy (P&A) Protection and advocacy (P&A)
FY2003: $10.0 mil ion FY2003: $10.0 mil ion
FY2003: $2.0 mil ion FY2003: $2.0 mil ion
system grant program system grant program
FY2004: $10.0 mil ion FY2004: $10.0 mil ion
FY2004: $5.0 mil ion FY2004: $5.0 mil ion
52 U.S.C. §§21061-21062 52 U.S.C. §§21061-21062
FY2005: $10.0 mil ion FY2005: $10.0 mil ion
FY2005: $5.0 mil ion FY2005: $5.0 mil ion
FY2006: $10.0 mil ion FY2006: $10.0 mil ion
FY2006: $4.9 mil ion FY2006: $4.9 mil ion
Subsequent fiscal years: Such sums as Subsequent fiscal years: Such sums as
FY2007: FY2007: hi
may be necessary may be necessary
FY2008: $5.4 mil ion FY2008: $5.4 mil ion
FY2009: $5.3 mil ion FY2009: $5.3 mil ion
FY2010: $5.3 mil ion FY2010: $5.3 mil ion
FY2011:FY2011: hi
FY2012: $5.2 mil ion FY2012: $5.2 mil ion
FY2013: $5.2 mil ion FY2013: $5.2 mil ion
FY2014-FY2014-~~FY2021: i~~FY2022:j
Mock elections grant program Mock elections grant program
FY2003: $200,000 FY2003: $200,000
FY2004: $200, FY2004: $200,000j000k
52 U.S.C. §§21071-21072 52 U.S.C. §§21071-21072
Subsequent six fiscal years: Such sums FY2005: $200, Subsequent six fiscal years: Such sums FY2005: $200,~~000j~~000k
as may be necessary as may be necessary
FY2008: $200,000 FY2008: $200,000
FY2009: $300,000 FY2009: $300,000
FY2010: $300,000 FY2010: $300,000
Help America Vote Col ege Help America Vote Col ege
FY2003: $5.0 mil ion FY2003: $5.0 mil ion
FY2003: $1.5 mil ion FY2003: $1.5 mil ion
Progr Progr~~amk~~aml
Subsequent fiscal years: Such sums as Subsequent fiscal years: Such sums as
FY2004: $750, FY2004: $750,~~000j~~000k
52 U.S.C. §§21121-21123 52 U.S.C. §§21121-21123
may be necessary may be necessary
FY2005: $200, FY2005: $200,~~000j~~
~~FY2006:~~ l000k FY2006:m
FY2008: $750,FY2008: $750,~~000j~~000k
FY2009: $750,000 FY2009: $750,000
FY2010: $750,000 FY2010: $750,000
Source: CRS, based on review of the CRS, based on review of the U.S. Code and relevant appropriations measures. and relevant appropriations measures.
Notes: Figures are rounded and do not account for rescissions or sequestration reductions. Figures are rounded and do not account for rescissions or sequestration reductions.
a. Authorized amounts are listed here as they are presented in statutory language. a. Authorized amounts are listed here as they are presented in statutory language.
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service

10 10

The Help America Vote Act of 2002: Overview and Ongoing Role

b. Appropriations for the requirements payments program for FY2010 and subsequent fiscal years were b. Appropriations for the requirements payments program for FY2010 and subsequent fiscal years were
authorized only for complying with requirements established by the Military and Overseas Voter authorized only for complying with requirements established by the Military and Overseas Voter
Empowerment (MOVE) Act of 2009. Empowerment (MOVE) Act of 2009.
c. Report language accompanying the FY2004 appropriations act (H.Rept. 108-401; P.L. 108-199) indicated that c. Report language accompanying the FY2004 appropriations act (H.Rept. 108-401; P.L. 108-199) indicated that
$750,000 of this funding was for the Help America Vote Foundation, $750,000 was for the Help America $750,000 of this funding was for the Help America Vote Foundation, $750,000 was for the Help America
Vote Col ege Program, and $200,000 was for the National Student Parent Mock Election. Vote Col ege Program, and $200,000 was for the National Student Parent Mock Election.
d. HAVA required states that had not replaced all of their lever and punch card voting systems by the relevant d. HAVA required states that had not replaced all of their lever and punch card voting systems by the relevant
deadline to return some of the funds they received under this grant program and directed the U.S. Election deadline to return some of the funds they received under this grant program and directed the U.S. Election
Assistance Commission (EAC) to redistribute the returned funds as requirements payments. The EAC Assistance Commission (EAC) to redistribute the returned funds as requirements payments. The EAC
made some funding for requirements payments available for FY2011 from returned funds. EAC, made some funding for requirements payments available for FY2011 from returned funds. EAC,
Memorandum Re: 2011 Requirements Payments Disbursements, May 13, 2014, at https://www.eac.gov/sites/, May 13, 2014, at https://www.eac.gov/sites/
default/files/eac_assets/1/6/default/files/eac_assets/1/6/
Instructions_for_Requesting_FY_2011_Requirements_Payments_Memo.2014.pdf. Instructions_for_Requesting_FY_2011_Requirements_Payments_Memo.2014.pdf.
e. The FY2003 appropriations resolution (P.L. 108-7) did not specify a distribution of appropriations between e. The FY2003 appropriations resolution (P.L. 108-7) did not specify a distribution of appropriations between
these two grant programs. It indicated that some of the funding—not to exceed $500,000—was to be these two grant programs. It indicated that some of the funding—not to exceed $500,000—was to be
available to the U.S. General Services Administration (GSA) for expenses associated with administering the available to the U.S. General Services Administration (GSA) for expenses associated with administering the
funds. funds.
f. f.
The $380 mil ion appropriated under this program for FY2018 was provided by the Consolidated The $380 mil ion appropriated under this program for FY2018 was provided by the Consolidated
Appropriations Act, 2018 (P.L. 115-141), and $425 mil ion of the $825 mil ion appropriated for FY2020 was Appropriations Act, 2018 (P.L. 115-141), and $425 mil ion of the $825 mil ion appropriated for FY2020 was
provided by the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2020 (P.L. 116-93). Explanatory statements provided by the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2020 (P.L. 116-93). Explanatory statements
accompanying those two appropriations acts listed some election security-specific purposes for which the accompanying those two appropriations acts listed some election security-specific purposes for which the
funds may be used. funds may be used.
g. This figure includes $425 mil ion from the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2020, and $400 mil ion from g. This figure includes $425 mil ion from the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2020, and $400 mil ion from
the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act (P.L. 116-136). The CARES Act restricted the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act (P.L. 116-136). The CARES Act restricted
use of its HAVA funds to preventing, preparing for, and responding to coronavirus, domestically and use of its HAVA funds to preventing, preparing for, and responding to coronavirus, domestically and
internationally, in the 2020 federal election cycle. internationally, in the 2020 federal election cycle.
h. h. The appropriations acts that provided this funding extended eligibility for the funding to the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI). i. Appropriations for FY2007 and FY2011 for the HAVA grant programs administered by the U.S. Department Appropriations for FY2007 and FY2011 for the HAVA grant programs administered by the U.S. Department
of Health and Human Services (HHS) were included in general budget authority for the Administration for of Health and Human Services (HHS) were included in general budget authority for the Administration for
Children and Families’ Children and Families Services programs. Information about the funding HHS Children and Families’ Children and Families Services programs. Information about the funding HHS
reported awarding for grants for those fiscal years is available in congressional budget justifications from the reported awarding for grants for those fiscal years is available in congressional budget justifications from the
Administration for Children and Families. Administration for Children and Families, Administration for Children and Families. Administration for Children and Families, Archived Congressional
Budget Justifications FY 2012-2004, June 29, 2012, at https://www.acf.hhs.gov/archive/olab/resource/archived-, June 29, 2012, at https://www.acf.hhs.gov/archive/olab/resource/archived-
congressional-budget-justifications-fy-2012-2004. congressional-budget-justifications-fy-2012-2004.
ij. .
Starting with the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2014 (P.L. 113-76), appropriations for new funding for Starting with the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2014 (P.L. 113-76), appropriations for new funding for
HAVA grant programs administered by HHS have been included in general budget authority for the HAVA grant programs administered by HHS have been included in general budget authority for the
Administration for Community Living’s Aging and Disability Services programs. The appropriations acts Administration for Community Living’s Aging and Disability Services programs. The appropriations acts
reference both the pol ing place accessibility grant program and the P&A system grant program, but, reference both the pol ing place accessibility grant program and the P&A system grant program, but,
according to HHS, only the P&A system grant program has been funded during that period. The specific according to HHS, only the P&A system grant program has been funded during that period. The specific
totals HHS has reported awarding for P&A system grants each year are available from the Administration totals HHS has reported awarding for P&A system grants each year are available from the Administration
for Community Living at https://acl.gov/about-acl/help-america-vote-act-hava. for Community Living at https://acl.gov/about-acl/help-america-vote-act-hava.
j.
k. These figures are from report language rather than appropriations bil text. The report language indicated These figures are from report language rather than appropriations bil text. The report language indicated
that these amounts were to be appropriated from funds provided to an EAC account: the Election Reform that these amounts were to be appropriated from funds provided to an EAC account: the Election Reform
Programs account for FY2004 and the Salaries and Expenses account for FY2005 and FY2008. Programs account for FY2004 and the Salaries and Expenses account for FY2005 and FY2008.
k. l. The amounts listed here are for the Help America Vote Col ege Program as a whole. Grant-making is one The amounts listed here are for the Help America Vote Col ege Program as a whole. Grant-making is one
of a number of activities, including developing materials and sponsoring seminars and workshops, that of a number of activities, including developing materials and sponsoring seminars and workshops, that
HAVA authorizes the EAC to conduct as part of the program (52 U.S.C. §21122). HAVA authorizes the EAC to conduct as part of the program (52 U.S.C. §21122).
l.
m. The joint explanatory statement accompanying the FY2006 appropriations act (H.Rept. 109-307; P.L. 109-The joint explanatory statement accompanying the FY2006 appropriations act (H.Rept. 109-307; P.L. 109-
115) stated that the conferees encouraged the EAC to apply $250,000 of the funding it received for Salaries 115) stated that the conferees encouraged the EAC to apply $250,000 of the funding it received for Salaries
and Expenses to the Help America Vote Col ege Program.and Expenses to the Help America Vote Col ege Program.
To help ensure that grant funds are used as intended, HAVA provides for funding audits and To help ensure that grant funds are used as intended, HAVA provides for funding audits and
repayments. repayments. ~~The act gives the agencies that are charged with administering its grant programs~~
~~general authority to audit their grantees and provides for~~It includes provisions for audits by the agencies that administer its grant programs, as well as regular audits of requirements payments regular audits of requirements payments
and special audits of any HAVA funding on a and special audits of any HAVA funding on a ~~vote of the Commissioners of the EAC.30 Grantees~~

~~30 As enacted, HAVA also required an audit by the Comptroller General of all HAVA funds at least once during the~~
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service

11 11

The Help America Vote Act of 2002: Overview and Ongoing Role

vote of the Commissioners of the EAC.31 Grantees who are found to be out of compliance with the terms of their grant programs or to have received who are found to be out of compliance with the terms of their grant programs or to have received
excess payments are required to repay corresponding portions of the grant funds they received.excess payments are required to repay corresponding portions of the grant funds they received.3132
U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC)
Federal agency support for Federal agency support for ~~general election administration~~the general administration of elections was provided in 2000 by a small office was provided in 2000 by a small office
at the Federal Election Commission (FEC) known as the Office of Election Administration at the Federal Election Commission (FEC) known as the Office of Election Administration
(OEA).(OEA).3233 The scope of the issues with the The scope of the issues with the ~~administration~~conduct of the 2000 elections prompted calls for of the 2000 elections prompted calls for
an expanded federal agency role in an expanded federal agency role in ~~elections issues~~election administration. .
Some proposed assigning any new responsibilities to the existing OEA, while others wanted to Some proposed assigning any new responsibilities to the existing OEA, while others wanted to
create a new agency that would be fully dedicated to election administration.create a new agency that would be fully dedicated to election administration.3334 There was also There was also
debate among Members about whether a new elections agency should have the debate among Members about whether a new elections agency should have the ~~power~~authority to issue to issue
regulations.regulations.3435
Congress struck a balance in HAVA by providing for a new agency, the EAC, but positioning it as Congress struck a balance in HAVA by providing for a new agency, the EAC, but positioning it as
a support agency.a support agency.3536 The EAC’s rulemaking authority is explicitly limited by the act to regulations The EAC’s rulemaking authority is explicitly limited by the act to regulations
about two responsibilities it inherited from the FEC—maintaining the federal mail voter about two responsibilities it inherited from the FEC—maintaining the federal mail voter
registration form established by the NVRA and reporting to Congress registration form established by the NVRA and reporting to Congress onabout the impact of the NVRA the impact of the NVRA
on the administration of federal on the administration of federal ~~elections36~~elections37—and its other duties are assistance-oriented. Those —and its other duties are assistance-oriented. Those
duties include the following: duties include the following:
 ~~Grant Programs~~ Administering grant programs. The EAC has been charged with administering The EAC has been charged with administering most of the most of the
grant programs authorized by HAVA, as well as other grant funding Congress has grant programs authorized by HAVA, as well as other grant funding Congress has
~~provided for conducting election data collection pilot programs.37~~provided for improving the collection of election data.38 The agency’s The agency’s
grants administration responsibilities have included dispersing funds to grantees, grants administration responsibilities have included dispersing funds to grantees,
~~responding to inquiries about use of the funds, collecting and reconciling~~
~~required grant reporting, negotiating indirect cost rates, and auditing grant~~
~~spending.38~~

31 As enacted, HAVA also required an audit by the Comptroller General of all HAVA funds at least once during the lifetime of the corresponding grant program. That provision was repealed by the Government Reports Elimination Act lifetime of the corresponding grant program. That provision was repealed by the Government Reports Elimination Act
of 2014 (P.L. 113-188). of 2014 (P.L. 113-188).
3132 52 U.S.C. §21142. Information about audits of HAVA funds conducted by the EAC is available on the agency’s 52 U.S.C. §21142. Information about audits of HAVA funds conducted by the EAC is available on the agency’s
website at https://www.eac.gov/inspector-general/hava-fund-audits. website at https://www.eac.gov/inspector-general/hava-fund-audits.
3233 EAC, EAC, History of the National Clearinghouse on Election Administration, at https://www.eac.gov/assets/1/28/, at https://www.eac.gov/assets/1/28/
History%20of%20the%20National%20Clearinghouse%20on%20Election%20Administration.pdf. Support for military History%20of%20the%20National%20Clearinghouse%20on%20Election%20Administration.pdf. Support for military
and overseas voting was provided at the time—and continues to be provided—by DOD’s FVAP. For more on FVAP, and overseas voting was provided at the time—and continues to be provided—by DOD’s FVAP. For more on FVAP,
see CRS In Focus IF11642, see CRS In Focus IF11642, Absentee Voting for Uniformed Services and Overseas Citizens: Roles and Process, In
Brief, by R. Sam Garrett; and CRS Report RS20764, , by R. Sam Garrett; and CRS Report RS20764, The Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act:
Overview and Issues, by R. Sam Garrett. , by R. Sam Garrett.
3334 See, for example, U.S. Congress, House Committee on the Judiciary, See, for example, U.S. Congress, House Committee on the Judiciary, Help America Vote Act of 2001, 107th Cong., 1st , 107th Cong., 1st
sess., December 5, 2001, pp. 6-7; and The National Commission on Federal Election Reform, sess., December 5, 2001, pp. 6-7; and The National Commission on Federal Election Reform, To Assure Pride and
Confidence in the Electoral Process, pp. 71-72. , pp. 71-72.
3435 See, for example, Daniel J. Palazzolo and Fiona R. McCarthy, “State and Local Government Organizations and the See, for example, Daniel J. Palazzolo and Fiona R. McCarthy, “State and Local Government Organizations and the
Formation of the Help America Vote Act,” Formation of the Help America Vote Act,” Publius, vol. 35, no. 4 (Fall 2005), p. 533; and Sarah F. Liebschutz and , vol. 35, no. 4 (Fall 2005), p. 533; and Sarah F. Liebschutz and
Daniel J. Palazzolo, “HAVA and the States,” Daniel J. Palazzolo, “HAVA and the States,” Publius, vol. 35, no. 4 (Autumn 2005), p. 505. , vol. 35, no. 4 (Autumn 2005), p. 505.
35 36 See, for example, U.S. Congress, House Committee on House Administration, See, for example, U.S. Congress, House Committee on House Administration, Mark up of H.R. 3295, the Help
America Vote Act of 2001, 107th Cong., 1st sess., November 15, 2001 (Washington, DC: GPO, 2003), p. 2. , 107th Cong., 1st sess., November 15, 2001 (Washington, DC: GPO, 2003), p. 2.
3637 52 U.S.C. §20929. 52 U.S.C. §20929.
3738 52 U.S.C. §20981 note. For more on the election data collection grant program, see CRS Report R46646, 52 U.S.C. §20981 note. For more on the election data collection grant program, see CRS Report R46646, Election
Administration: Federal Grant Funding for States and Localities, by Karen L. Shanton. , by Karen L. Shanton.
~~38 See, for example, EAC, Grants Management and Oversight, at https://www.eac.gov/payments-and-grants/grants-~~
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service

12 12

link to page 10 link to page 10 The Help America Vote Act of 2002: Overview and Ongoing Role

~~ Voluntary Voting System Guidelines (VVSG). The FEC issued the first~~
responding to inquiries about use of the funds, collecting and reconciling required grant reporting, negotiating indirect cost rates, and auditing grant spending.39  Overseeing the voluntary federal voting system testing and certification program. The FEC issued voluntary federal guidelines for voting systems in 1990voluntary federal guidelines for voting systems in 1990 and 2002, and the National , and the National
Association of State Election Directors (NASED) Association of State Election Directors (NASED) ~~developed~~operated a program to test a program to test
and qualify and qualify voting systems to the systems to the FEC guidelines.guidelines.3940 HAVA reassigned both HAVA reassigned both of those sets of tasks to the sets of tasks to the
EAC. The EAC—with assistance from NIST and the EAC advisory bodies EAC. The EAC—with assistance from NIST and the EAC advisory bodies
described below—is described below—is ~~responsible for developing the VVSG and providing for~~
~~testing and certification of voting systems to them.40~~charged with developing federal Voluntary Voting System Guidelines (VVSG) and overseeing a program to test and certify voting systems to them.41 The agency’s Commissioners ~~The agency’s~~
~~Commissioners, who vote on adoption of the VVSG,~~ have adopted three versions have adopted three versions
of the guidelines to date: VVSG 1.0 in 2005, VVSG 1.1 in 2015, and VVSG 2.0 of the guidelines to date: VVSG 1.0 in 2005, VVSG 1.1 in 2015, and VVSG 2.0
in 2021.in 2021.41
 Voluntary Guidance. 42  Issuing voluntary guidance for implementing HAVA’s Title III requirements. HAVA left discretion over how to meet its HAVA left discretion over how to meet its ~~title~~Title III III
requirements to the states but directed the EAC to offer voluntary guidancerequirements to the states but directed the EAC to offer voluntary guidance about implementation. It . It
charged the agency with issuing guidance for implementing charged the agency with issuing guidance for implementing ~~the~~HAVA’s voting systems voting systems
standards by January 1, 2004, and the other standards by January 1, 2004, and the other ~~title~~Title III requirements by October 1, III requirements by October 1,
2003.2003.4243
  ~~Research~~Conducting research and sharing best practices. HAVA grants the EAC broad HAVA grants the EAC broad authority to conduct research and issue authority to conduct research and issue
best practices on elections topics.best practices on elections topics.4344 It also directed the agency to produce studies It also directed the agency to produce studies
on the following topics: facilitating military and overseas voting (in consultation on the following topics: facilitating military and overseas voting (in consultation
with DOD); human factor research (in consultation with NIST); mail registration with DOD); human factor research (in consultation with NIST); mail registration
and use of Social Security information; electronic voting and the electoral and use of Social Security information; electronic voting and the electoral
process; and free absentee ballot postage [in consultation with the United States process; and free absentee ballot postage [in consultation with the United States
Postal Service (USPS)].Postal Service (USPS)].44
 45  Operating the Help America Vote College Program. HAVA charged the EAC with HAVA charged the EAC with
establishing and overseeing a program to encourage students at institutions of establishing and overseeing a program to encourage students at institutions of
higher education to serve as poll workers and election officials to use their higher education to serve as poll workers and election officials to use their
services. In addition to the grant-making described in the services. In addition to the grant-making described in the “Grant Programs”
section of this report, section of this report, ~~the agency is authorized to conduct activities like~~

~~management-and-oversight.~~
39 39 See, for example, EAC, Grants Management and Oversight, at https://www.eac.gov/payments-and-grants/grants-management-and-oversight. 40 Federal Election Commission (FEC), Federal Election Commission (FEC), Performance and Test Standards for Punchcard, Marksense, and Direct
Recording Electronic Voting Systems, January 1990, at https://www.eac.gov/sites/default/files/eac_assets/1/28/, January 1990, at https://www.eac.gov/sites/default/files/eac_assets/1/28/
FEC_1990_Voting_System_Standards1.pdf; EACFEC_1990_Voting_System_Standards1.pdf; EAC, Voluntary Voting System Guidelines, at https://www.eac.gov/, at https://www.eac.gov/
voting-equipment/voluntary-voting-system-guidelines/; and U.S. Congress, House Committee on Science, voting-equipment/voluntary-voting-system-guidelines/; and U.S. Congress, House Committee on Science, Voting
Technology Standards Act of 2001, report to accompany H.R. 2275, 107th Cong., 1st sess., October 31, 2001, H.Rept. , report to accompany H.R. 2275, 107th Cong., 1st sess., October 31, 2001, H.Rept.
107-263 (Washington, DC: GPO, 2001). 107-263 (Washington, DC: GPO, 2001).
4041 52 U.S.C. §20922; 52 U.S.C. §§20961-20962; and 52 U.S.C. §20971. 52 U.S.C. §20922; 52 U.S.C. §§20961-20962; and 52 U.S.C. §20971.
4142 EAC, EAC, Voluntary Voting System Guidelines. For more on the adoption of VVSG 2.0, see CRS Insight IN11592, . For more on the adoption of VVSG 2.0, see CRS Insight IN11592,
Voluntary Voting System Guidelines (VVSG): An Overview, by Karen L. Shanton. , by Karen L. Shanton.
4243 52 U.S.C. §§21101-21102. Delays in establishing the EAC prevented it from meeting those statutory deadlines. 52 U.S.C. §§21101-21102. Delays in establishing the EAC prevented it from meeting those statutory deadlines.
Nominees for the Commission were not confirmed to their seats until December 9, 2003. Nominees for the Commission were not confirmed to their seats until December 9, 2003.
4344 The agency produces parts of its biennial Election Administration and Voting Survey (EAVS) under this authority. The agency produces parts of its biennial Election Administration and Voting Survey (EAVS) under this authority.
The EAVS includes general research on election administration data and policies, in addition to congressionally The EAVS includes general research on election administration data and policies, in addition to congressionally
mandated reporting on the NVRA that the EAC inherited from the FEC and on military and overseas voters that it mandated reporting on the NVRA that the EAC inherited from the FEC and on military and overseas voters that it
conducts as part of a Memorandum of Understanding with FVAP. For more on the EAVS, see CRS In Focus IF11266, conducts as part of a Memorandum of Understanding with FVAP. For more on the EAVS, see CRS In Focus IF11266,
The Election Administration and Voting Survey: Overview and 2018 Findings, by Karen L. Shanton. , by Karen L. Shanton.
4445 52 U.S.C. §§20982-20986. For studies the EAC has published on these and other topics, see EAC, 52 U.S.C. §§20982-20986. For studies the EAC has published on these and other topics, see EAC, Other Topics¸ ¸
https://www.eac.gov/research-and-data/other-topics; and EAC, https://www.eac.gov/research-and-data/other-topics; and EAC, Archives - Other Topics, https://www.eac.gov/research-, https://www.eac.gov/research-
and-data/archives-other-topics. and-data/archives-other-topics.
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service

13 13

The Help America Vote Act of 2002: Overview and Ongoing Role

the agency is authorized to conduct activities like developing materials and sponsoring seminars and workshops as part of this developing materials and sponsoring seminars and workshops as part of this
program.program.4546
The structure of the EAC also reflects its positioning as a support agency. The EAC’s four- The structure of the EAC also reflects its positioning as a support agency. The EAC’s four-
member Commission, Office of Inspector General, and professional staff member Commission, Office of Inspector General, and professional staff ~~are~~were paired paired by HAVA with three with three
advisory bodies—described below—that are designed to play advisory bodies—described below—that are designed to play a central central ~~roles~~role in the direction and in the direction and
functioning of the agency. The memberships of those advisory bodies include state and local functioning of the agency. The memberships of those advisory bodies include state and local
election officials and a range of other elections stakeholders. election officials and a range of other elections stakeholders.
  Board of Advisors. 35 35 ~~members46~~members representing a range of election administration representing a range of election administration
stakeholders, stakeholders,47 including state and local officials, federal agencies, science and including state and local officials, federal agencies, science and
technology experts, and voters.technology experts, and voters.4748 The Board of Advisors is responsible for The Board of Advisors is responsible for
reviewing voluntary guidance and draft VVSG before they are presented to the reviewing voluntary guidance and draft VVSG before they are presented to the
EAC’s Commissioners for EAC’s Commissioners for a vote on adoption; appointing a search committee in the event adoption; appointing a search committee in the event
of a vacancy for Executive Director of the agency; and consulting on of a vacancy for Executive Director of the agency; and consulting on ~~NIST’s~~
~~monitoring and review of voting system testing laboratories (VSTLs) and the~~
~~EAC’s research efforts, program goals, and long-term planning.48~~the EAC’s research efforts, program goals, and long-term planning and NIST’s monitoring and review of laboratories accredited by the EAC to test voting systems to the VVSG.49
  Standards Board. 110 members, with one state official and one local official 110 members, with one state official and one local official
from from each of the 50 states, DC, American Samoa, Guam, Puerto Rico, and the each of the 50 states, DC, American Samoa, Guam, Puerto Rico, and the
U.S. Virgin Islands and a nine-member Executive Board chosen by the Standards U.S. Virgin Islands and a nine-member Executive Board chosen by the Standards
Board from among its membership.Board from among its membership.4950 Like the Board of Advisors, the Standards Like the Board of Advisors, the Standards
Board or its Executive Board is responsible for reviewing voluntary guidance and Board or its Executive Board is responsible for reviewing voluntary guidance and
draft VVSG before they are presented to the EAC’s Commissioners for draft VVSG before they are presented to the EAC’s Commissioners for a vote on adoption; adoption;
appointing a search committee in the event of a vacancy for Executive Director appointing a search committee in the event of a vacancy for Executive Director
of the agency; and consulting on of the agency; and consulting on ~~NIST’s monitoring and review of VSTLs and~~
~~the EAC’s research efforts, program goals, and long-term planning.50~~the EAC’s research efforts, program goals, and long-term planning and NIST’s monitoring and review of laboratories accredited by the EAC to test voting systems to the VVSG.51
  Technical Guidelines Development Committee (TGDC). 15 members, with the 15 members, with the
Director of NIST as chair and 14 other members representing a range of election Director of NIST as chair and 14 other members representing a range of election
~~administration stakeholders, including state and local officials, individuals with~~

4546 The agency has tended to use the funding Congress has provided for this program for grant-making. For more on The agency has tended to use the funding Congress has provided for this program for grant-making. For more on
grant funding provided under the program, see CRS Report R46646, grant funding provided under the program, see CRS Report R46646, Election Administration: Federal Grant Funding
for States and Localities, by Karen L. Shanton. , by Karen L. Shanton.
4647 The Board of Advisors initially had 37 members, but its membership was reduced to 35 with the 2016 merger of two The Board of Advisors initially had 37 members, but its membership was reduced to 35 with the 2016 merger of two
of the organizations responsible for appointing members. The National Association of County Recorders, Election of the organizations responsible for appointing members. The National Association of County Recorders, Election
Officials and Clerks and the International Association of Clerks, Recorders, Election Officials and Treasurers merged Officials and Clerks and the International Association of Clerks, Recorders, Election Officials and Treasurers merged
to form the International Association of Government Officials. Doug Chapin, “Fewer Letters in the Alphabet Soup: to form the International Association of Government Officials. Doug Chapin, “Fewer Letters in the Alphabet Soup:
NACRC, IACREOT to Merge,” NACRC, IACREOT to Merge,” Election Academy, July 7, 2015, at http://editions.lib.umn.edu/electionacademy/2015/, July 7, 2015, at http://editions.lib.umn.edu/electionacademy/2015/
07/07/fewer-letters-in-the-alphabet-soup-nacrc-iacreot-to-merge/. 07/07/fewer-letters-in-the-alphabet-soup-nacrc-iacreot-to-merge/.
4748 The membership of the Board of Advisors includes the Director of FVAP; the chiefs or designees of the chiefs of The membership of the Board of Advisors includes the Director of FVAP; the chiefs or designees of the chiefs of
DOJ’s Office of Public Integrity and Civil Rights Division’s Voting Section; four members representing science and DOJ’s Office of Public Integrity and Civil Rights Division’s Voting Section; four members representing science and
technology professionals; eight members representing voter interests; and two members appointed by each of the technology professionals; eight members representing voter interests; and two members appointed by each of the
National Governors Association, National Conference of State Legislatures, National Association of Secretaries of National Governors Association, National Conference of State Legislatures, National Association of Secretaries of
State, National Association of State Election Directors (NASED), National Association of Counties, United States State, National Association of State Election Directors (NASED), National Association of Counties, United States
Conference of Mayors, Election Center, United States Commission on Civil Rights, Architectural and Transportation Conference of Mayors, Election Center, United States Commission on Civil Rights, Architectural and Transportation
Barriers Compliance (Access) Board, and International Association of Government Officials (52 U.S.C. §20944). Barriers Compliance (Access) Board, and International Association of Government Officials (52 U.S.C. §20944).
4849 52 U.S.C. §20924; 52 U.S.C. §20942; 52 U.S.C. §20962; and 52 U.S.C. §20971. 52 U.S.C. §20924; 52 U.S.C. §20942; 52 U.S.C. §20962; and 52 U.S.C. §20971.
4950 According to HAVA, the Standards Board members serving as local officials for the 50 states, Puerto Rico, and the According to HAVA, the Standards Board members serving as local officials for the 50 states, Puerto Rico, and the
U.S. Virgin Islands are to be selected by the local election officials of the corresponding state or territory. The members U.S. Virgin Islands are to be selected by the local election officials of the corresponding state or territory. The members
serving as local officials for DC, American Samoa, and Guam are to be selected according to a procedure established serving as local officials for DC, American Samoa, and Guam are to be selected according to a procedure established
by the corresponding jurisdiction’s chief election official (52 U.S.C. §20943). by the corresponding jurisdiction’s chief election official (52 U.S.C. §20943).
5051 52 U.S.C. §20924; 52 U.S.C. §20942; 52 U.S.C. §20962; and 52 U.S.C. §20971. 52 U.S.C. §20924; 52 U.S.C. §20942; 52 U.S.C. §20962; and 52 U.S.C. §20971.
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service

14 14

~~link to page 32~~ The Help America Vote Act of 2002: Overview and Ongoing Role

administration stakeholders, including state and local officials, individuals with disabilities, and~~disabilities, and experts in~~ science and technology science and technology~~.51~~ experts.52 The TGDC is responsible for The TGDC is responsible for
assisting the Executive Director of the EAC with developing draft VVSG for assisting the Executive Director of the EAC with developing draft VVSG for
consideration by the agency’s Commissioners.consideration by the agency’s Commissioners.5253 In 2021, the EAC used its authority to establish a fourth advisory body, the Local Leadership Council, to offer the agency advice and recommendations and help it carry out its responsibilities. The Local Leadership Council consists of two local election officials from each of the 50 states who are appointed by the EAC and, if applicable, serve or have served in a leadership role in a professional association for election officials in their state.54
For more on the duties and structure of the EAC, see CRS Report R45770, For more on the duties and structure of the EAC, see CRS Report R45770, The U.S. Election
Assistance Commission: Overview and Selected Issues for Congress, by Karen L. Shanton. , by Karen L. Shanton.
Ongoing Role in Election Administration Policy
No new federal election laws as multifaceted as HAVA have been enacted since 2002, as of this No new federal election laws as multifaceted as HAVA have been enacted since 2002, as of this
writing. Congress has also made only relatively minor changes to HAVA, extending the deadline writing. Congress has also made only relatively minor changes to HAVA, extending the deadline
for replacing voting systems under the act’s lever and punch card voting system replacement for replacing voting systems under the act’s lever and punch card voting system replacement
grant program, authorizing new funding for the requirements payments program, eliminating grant program, authorizing new funding for the requirements payments program, eliminating ~~one~~
~~type of~~certain grant program grant program ~~audit~~audits, and revising provisions related to the contents, and revising provisions related to the contents of and public notice and public notice of
about states’ plans for states’ plans for use of requirements payments.requirements payments.5355
New developments and continuing concerns have combined, however, to ensure ongoing New developments and continuing concerns have combined, however, to ensure ongoing
congressional interest in election administration. The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic congressional interest in election administration. The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic
introduced novel introduced novel ~~challenges~~complications for administration of the 2020 elections, for example, and foreign for administration of the 2020 elections, for example, and foreign
interference in 2016 drew attention to the challenges of securing election systems. There interference in 2016 drew attention to the challenges of securing election systems. There ~~have~~
~~also been~~ are also long-standing efforts among Members to ensure that eligible voters have access to the long-standing efforts among Members to ensure that eligible voters have access to the
ballot ballot or and ineligible voters do not. ineligible voters do not.
HAVA and the agency it created have played a role in much of that congressional activity. The HAVA and the agency it created have played a role in much of that congressional activity. The
EAC-administered HAVA fundsEAC-administered HAVA funds ~~that~~ Congress provided in response to foreign interference in the Congress provided in response to foreign interference in the
2016 2016 ~~election cycle~~elections and the and the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in COVID-19 pandemic in the 2020 cycle offer some~~2020 offer~~ notable recent examples. notable recent examples.
~~Proposals~~Members have also have also ~~been offered~~introduced proposals to revisit HAVA or the EAC or to extend them to to revisit HAVA or the EAC or to extend them to other new aspects of new aspects of
election administration. election administration.
Proposals to Revisit HAVA or the EAC
There was broad agreement among MembersThere was broad agreement among Members, during the HAVA debate, that Congress should consider a legislative response that Congress should consider a legislative response
~~to the problems with the administration of the 2000 elections.54 Members disagreed, however,~~
~~about exactly what that legislative response should look like. The HAVA debate highlighted~~
~~disagreements about which issues should be addressed in election administration legislation and~~
~~how they should be addressed.55~~
~~The enacted legislation reflects compromises on some of those disagreements. Some of the act’s~~
~~provisions represent compromises about the treatment of particular elections issues. HAVA’s~~
~~requirement that certain first-time voters who register by mail provide identification was a~~to the problems with the administration of the 2000 elections.56

5152 In addition to the Director of NIST, the members of the TGDC include an equal number of members of the Access In addition to the Director of NIST, the members of the TGDC include an equal number of members of the Access
Board, Board of Advisors, and Standards Board; representatives of the American National Standards Institute and Board, Board of Advisors, and Standards Board; representatives of the American National Standards Institute and
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers; two representatives of NASED who are not members of the Board of Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers; two representatives of NASED who are not members of the Board of
Advisors or Standards Board; and other individuals with technical and scientific expertise relating to voting systems Advisors or Standards Board; and other individuals with technical and scientific expertise relating to voting systems
and equipment (52 U.S.C. §20961). and equipment (52 U.S.C. §20961).
5253 52 U.S.C. §§20961-20962. 52 U.S.C. §§20961-20962.
5354 For more on the Local Leadership Council, see EAC, Local Leadership Council, at https://www.eac.gov/about-eac/local-leadership-council. 55 P.L. 110-28; P.L. 111-8; P.L. 111-84; P.L. 112-74; and P.L. 113-188. P.L. 110-28; P.L. 111-8; P.L. 111-84; P.L. 112-74; and P.L. 113-188.
5456 Close to 100 election administration bills were introduced between the November 2000 general election in the 106th Close to 100 election administration bills were introduced between the November 2000 general election in the 106th
Congress and the enactment of HAVA in the 107th Congress, according to a CRS review of data from Congress.gov. Congress and the enactment of HAVA in the 107th Congress, according to a CRS review of data from Congress.gov.
~~55 For a timeline of congressional deliberations on election administration between the 2000 general election and~~
~~HAVA’s enactment, see Appendix C.~~
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service

15 15

link to page 5 link to page 5 link to page 32 The Help America Vote Act of 2002: Overview and Ongoing Role Members disagreed, however, about exactly what that legislative response should look like. The HAVA debate highlighted disagreements about which issues should be addressed in election administration legislation and how they should be addressed.57 The enacted legislation reflects compromises on some of those disagreements. Some of HAVA’s provisions reflect compromises about the treatment of particular elections topics. The requirement that certain first-time voters who register by mail provide identification in order to cast a regular ballot was a ~~The Help America Vote Act of 2002: Overview and Ongoing Role~~

compromise, for example, between Members who preferred a more expansive voter ID compromise, for example, between Members who preferred a more expansive voter ID
requirement and Members who opposed requiring any voters to show ID.requirement and Members who opposed requiring any voters to show ID.5658
Another compromise is built into the structure of the act. Some Members favored limiting federal Another compromise is built into the structure of the act. Some Members favored limiting federal
involvement in the response to the 2000 elections to voluntary guidelines and grant programs, involvement in the response to the 2000 elections to voluntary guidelines and grant programs,
while others wanted a regulatory agency and binding national standards.while others wanted a regulatory agency and binding national standards.5759 As noted in the As noted in the
“Overview of Major Provisions” section of this report, HAVA ended up setting some standards in section of this report, HAVA ended up setting some standards in
its its ~~title~~Title III but leaving III but leaving ~~certain~~many decisions about how to implement and enforce them to the states decisions about how to implement and enforce them to the states
~~and creating~~. It created a new federal agency but strictly a new federal agency but strictly ~~limiting~~limited its regulatory authority and its regulatory authority and ~~involving~~gave states states
and localities and localities ininput into its work. its work.
The compromises struck in HAVA did not necessarily resolve the underlying disagreements that The compromises struck in HAVA did not necessarily resolve the underlying disagreements that
prompted them, however. New developments prompted them, however. New developments ~~have also emerged~~ since 2002—both due to since 2002—both due to HAVA and and
independently independently of it—have also~~of HAVA—that have~~ changed the election administration landscape. changed the election administration landscape.
As a result, some Members have proposed revisiting the act or the agency it created. Some of As a result, some Members have proposed revisiting the act or the agency it created. Some of
those post-HAVA proposals would revise the act’s treatment of particular those post-HAVA proposals would revise the act’s treatment of particular ~~issues. Bills have been~~
~~introduced, for example, to expand or limit voter identification requirements, establish standards~~
~~for matching voter registration data, and set specifics for the manually auditable paper records~~
~~voting systems produce.~~
elections topics, while others would revise the structure of HAVA or the EAC. Examples of proposals to revise HAVA’s treatment of particular elections topics include bills that would:  Expand or limit voter identification requirements. The voter ID debate is often ~~The voter ID debate is often~~ characterized as a debate about how to balance ensuring access to the characterized as a debate about how to balance ensuring access to the
ballot for eligible voters against preventing access by ineligible voters. Proponents of ID ballot for eligible voters against preventing access by ineligible voters. Proponents of ID
~~requirements~~ laws argue that they help guard against voter fraud, while opponents sayargue that they help guard against voter fraud, while opponents say that they can they can
disenfranchise eligible voters. Disagreements about how to prioritize those two considerations disenfranchise eligible voters. Disagreements about how to prioritize those two considerations
persisted persisted ~~post-HAVA~~after HAVA was enacted, and there have been proposals both to expand , and there have been proposals both to expand ~~HAVA~~the act’s ID requirement and ’s ID requirement and
to set federal limits on ID laws. to set federal limits on ID laws. ~~Legislation has been introduced~~Members have introduced legislation to require all voters to show ID, to require all voters to show ID,
for example, as well as to require states to accept sworn written statements as ID for example, as well as to require states to accept sworn written statements as ID for voter ID purposes or or submit submit
proposed ID laws for federal preclearance.proposed ID laws for federal preclearance.58
60  Establish standards for matching voter registration data. HAVA directs certain HAVA directs certain officials to enter intoofficials to enter into database-matching agreements for purposes of verifying voter registration agreements for purposes of verifying voter registration
data.data.5961 As election law professor Daniel P. Tokaji has argued, however, As election law professor Daniel P. Tokaji has argued, however, ~~the wording of the~~
~~relevant provision leaves open questions about exactly how voter registration data matching~~
~~should work and what the consequences of a failed match should be.60 Those questions could~~
~~have practical implications—different answers could affect who appears on the rolls and which~~
~~ballots are counted61—and some Members have proposed offering more definitive guidance. Bills~~

56 57 For a timeline of congressional deliberations about election administration between the November 2000 general election and the enactment of HAVA in October 2002, see Appendix C. 58 52 U.S.C. §21083(b). See, for example, Sarah F. Liebschutz and Daniel J. Palazzolo, “HAVA and the States,” pp. 52 U.S.C. §21083(b). See, for example, Sarah F. Liebschutz and Daniel J. Palazzolo, “HAVA and the States,” pp.
501, 505; and Sen. Christopher Dodd, “Help America Vote Act of 2002—Conference Report,” 501, 505; and Sen. Christopher Dodd, “Help America Vote Act of 2002—Conference Report,” Congressional Record, ,
vol. 148, part 136 (October 16, 2002), p. S20854. vol. 148, part 136 (October 16, 2002), p. S20854.
5759 See, for example, Rep. Robert Ney, Comments, See, for example, Rep. Robert Ney, Comments, Congressional Record, vol. 147, part 172 (December 12, 2001), p. , vol. 147, part 172 (December 12, 2001), p.
H9287; and Daniel J. Palazzolo and Fiona R. McCarthy, “State and Local Government Organizations and the H9287; and Daniel J. Palazzolo and Fiona R. McCarthy, “State and Local Government Organizations and the
Formation of the Help America Vote Act,” p. 533. Formation of the Help America Vote Act,” p. 533.
5860 See, for example, the Promoting Election Integrity by Proving Voter Identity Act (117th Congress, S. 1130), the See, for example, the Promoting Election Integrity by Proving Voter Identity Act (117th Congress, S. 1130), the
America Votes Act of 2021 (H.R. 1059), and the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act of 2021 (H.R. 4/S. 4). America Votes Act of 2021 (H.R. 1059), and the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act of 2021 (H.R. 4/S. 4).
~~59 52 U.S.C. §21083.~~
~~60 Daniel P. Tokaji, “Voter Registration and Institutional Reform: Lessons from a Historic Election,”~~ ~~Harvard Law and~~
~~Policy Review Online, vol. 3 (January 22, 2009). For more on~~61 52 U.S.C. §21083. Congressional Research Service 16 The Help America Vote Act of 2002: Overview and Ongoing Role the wording of the relevant provisions leaves open questions about exactly how voter voter registration data matching should work and what the consequences of a failed match should be.62 Those questions could have significant practical implications—Tokaji notes that different answers could affect who appears on the voter rolls and which ballots are counted—and some have proposed offering more definitive guidance. Members have introduced bills to prohibit rejecting voter~~registration data matching procedures, see CRS~~
~~Report R46406, Voter Registration: Recent Developments and Issues for Congress, by Sarah J. Eckman.~~
~~61 Daniel P. Tokaji, “Voter Registration and Institutional Reform: Lessons from a Historic Election.”~~
~~Congressional Research Service~~

16

~~The Help America Vote Act of 2002: Overview and Ongoing Role~~

~~have been introduced to prohibit rejecting~~ registration applications solely on the basis of a failed registration applications solely on the basis of a failed
match, for example, match, for example, ~~and to~~or set set (or direct a federal agency to set) standards for matching registration data.63  Set specifics for the manually auditable paper records voting systems produce.~~or direct agencies to set standards for matching registration data.62~~
Voting systems used in federal elections are required, under HAVA, to produce manually Voting systems used in federal elections are required, under HAVA, to produce manually
auditable permanent paper records.auditable permanent paper records.~~63 That requirement has~~64 As those provisions have been been interpreted and implemented, they do not specifically require production of ~~interpreted as permitting use of~~
~~electronic voting machines that do not produce~~ individual paper records that voters can verifyindividual paper records that voters can verify~~.64~~ before casting their ballots.65
Technology experts raised concernsTechnology experts raised concerns during the HAVA debate about voting machines that do not produce voter-verifiable paper records ~~about such machines during the HAVA debate~~, however, and , however, and
subsequent events and reporting have drawn further attention to their potential for technical faults subsequent events and reporting have drawn further attention to their potential for technical faults
and security vulnerabilities.and security vulnerabilities.6566 Research since 2002 has also produced new Research since 2002 has also produced new ~~options~~ methodologies for auditing for auditing
election election ~~results~~outcomes, such as risk-limiting audits., such as risk-limiting audits.6667 Some Some ~~Members~~ have responded to such have responded to such
developments by proposing more specific developments by proposing more specific ~~requirements for audits~~versions of HAVA’s audit and and paper record provisions. Members have introduced legislation ~~paper records. Legislation~~
~~has been introduced~~ to require voting systems to produce voter-verifiable paper records, for to require voting systems to produce voter-verifiable paper records, for
example, and to require, example, and to require, facilitate, or incentivize use of certain types of post-election audit.68 62 Daniel P. Tokaji, “Voter Registration and Institutional Reform: Lessons from a Historic Election,” Harvard Law and Policy Review Online, vol. 3 (January 22, 2009). For more on voter registration data-matching procedures, see CRS Report R46406, Voter Registration: Recent Developments and Issues for Congress, by Sarah J. Eckman. 63~~facilitate, or incentivize use of certain types of post-election audits.67~~
~~In addition to such proposals to revisit HAVA’s treatment of particular elections issues, there have~~
~~been proposals to revisit the structure of the act or the agency it created. Legislation has been~~
~~offered to terminate the EAC or expand its authority, for example, and to revise HAVA’s~~
~~enforcement mechanisms.~~
~~The National Association of Secretaries of State (NASS) adopted in 2005—and renewed in 2010~~
~~and 2015—a resolution aimed at preventing the EAC from evolving into a regulatory agency.68~~
~~That resolution, which asked Congress not to reauthorize or fund the agency, was one of the~~
~~rationales cited for proposals to terminate the EAC in the 112th through 115th Congresses.69 There~~

62 See, for example, the Count Every Vote Act of 2007 (H.R. 1381/S. 804), the Voting Opportunity and Technology See, for example, the Count Every Vote Act of 2007 (H.R. 1381/S. 804), the Voting Opportunity and Technology
Enhancement Rights Act of 2005 (H.R. 533/S. 17), and the Protection Against Wrongful Voter Purges Act (111th Enhancement Rights Act of 2005 (H.R. 533/S. 17), and the Protection Against Wrongful Voter Purges Act (111th
Congress, H.R. 3835). Congress, H.R. 3835).
6364 52 U.S.C. §21081. 52 U.S.C. §21081.
6465 See, for example, EAC, See, for example, EAC, EAC Advisory 2005-004: How to Determine if a Voting System is Compliant with Section
301(a) - A Gap Analysis Between 2002 Voting System Standards and the Requirements of Section 301(a), July 20, , July 20,
2005, https://web.archive.org/web/20051225131913/http://www.eac.gov/docs/EAC%20Advisory%2005-2005, https://web.archive.org/web/20051225131913/http://www.eac.gov/docs/EAC%20Advisory%2005-
004%20(%204%20page%20fit%20).pdf; and U.S. Congress, House Committee on House Administration, 004%20(%204%20page%20fit%20).pdf; and U.S. Congress, House Committee on House Administration, Hearing on
Oversight of HAVA Implementation, 109th Cong., 1st sess., February 9, 2005 (Washington, DC: GPO, 2006). , 109th Cong., 1st sess., February 9, 2005 (Washington, DC: GPO, 2006).
6566 See, for example, U.S. Congress, House Committee on Science, See, for example, U.S. Congress, House Committee on Science, Improving Voting Technologies: The Role of
Standards, 107th Cong., 1st sess., May 22, 2001 (Washington, DC: GPO, 2001); Tadayoshi Kohno, Adam Stubblefield, , 107th Cong., 1st sess., May 22, 2001 (Washington, DC: GPO, 2001); Tadayoshi Kohno, Adam Stubblefield,
Aviel D. Rubin, et al., “Analysis of an Electronic Voting System,” Aviel D. Rubin, et al., “Analysis of an Electronic Voting System,” Johns Hopkins Information Security Institute
Technical Report TR-2003-19, July 23, 2003; Maryland Department of Legislative Services, , July 23, 2003; Maryland Department of Legislative Services, A Review of Issues
Relating to the Diebold AccuVote-TS Voting System in Maryland, January 2004; and The Pew Center on the States, , January 2004; and The Pew Center on the States,
Back to Paper: A Case Study, Washington, DC, February 2008, https://web.archive.org/web/20080306020841/http://, Washington, DC, February 2008, https://web.archive.org/web/20080306020841/http://
www.pewcenteronthestates.org/uploadedFiles/EB21Brief.pdf. www.pewcenteronthestates.org/uploadedFiles/EB21Brief.pdf.
6667 See, for example, Mark Lindeman and Philip B. Stark, “A Gentle Introduction to Risk-Limiting Audits,” See, for example, Mark Lindeman and Philip B. Stark, “A Gentle Introduction to Risk-Limiting Audits,” IEEE
Security and Privacy, Special Issue on Electronic Voting, March 16, 2012. , March 16, 2012.
For more on risk-limiting audits, see CRS In Focus IF11873, Election Administration: An Introduction to Risk-Limiting Audits, by Karen L. Shanton. 68 67 The Voter Confidence and Increased Accessibility Act of 2003 (H.R. 2239/S. 1980), for example, would have The Voter Confidence and Increased Accessibility Act of 2003 (H.R. 2239/S. 1980), for example, would have
required voter-verifiable paper ballots. A version of that bill has been introduced in every Congress since its initial required voter-verifiable paper ballots. A version of that bill has been introduced in every Congress since its initial
introduction in the 108th Congress, including as part of the Freedom to Vote Act (117th Congress, S. 2747)introduction in the 108th Congress, including as part of the Freedom to Vote Act (117th Congress, S. 2747), the Freedom to Vote: John R. Lewis Act (H.R. 5746), and the For and the For
the People Act of 2021 (H.R. 1/S. 1/S. 2093). For more on legislation related to risk-limiting audits, see CRS In Focus the People Act of 2021 (H.R. 1/S. 1/S. 2093). For more on legislation related to risk-limiting audits, see CRS In Focus
IF11873, IF11873, Election Administration: An Introduction to Risk-Limiting Audits, by Karen L. Shanton. Congressional Research Service 17 The Help America Vote Act of 2002: Overview and Ongoing Role Examples of proposals to revisit the structure of HAVA or the EAC include bills that would:  Terminate the EAC or expand its authority. The National Association of Secretaries of State (NASS) adopted in 2005—and renewed in 2010 and 2015—a resolution it described as aimed at preventing the EAC from evolving into a regulatory agency.69 That resolution, which asked Congress not to reauthorize or fund the agency, was one of the rationales cited for proposals to terminate the EAC in the 112th through 115th Congresses.70 Members have also introduced bills that would take the opposite approach, intentionally expanding the agency’s regulatory role. HAVA’s explicit restriction on EAC rulemaking ~~Risk-Limiting Audits, by Karen L. Shanton.~~
~~68 National Association of Secretaries of State,~~ ~~Resolution Reaffirming the NASS Position on Funding and~~
~~Authorization of the U.S. Election Assistance Commission, July 2015, at https://www.nass.org/sites/default/files/~~
~~resolutions/2015/nass-resolution-eac-summer15-_0.pdf.~~
~~69 See, for example, the Election Support Consolidation and Efficiency Act (112th Congress, H.R. 672) and the Election~~
~~Assistance Commission Termination Act (115th Congress, H.R. 634). For more on proposals to terminate the EAC, see~~
~~CRS Report R45770, The U.S. Election Assistance Commission: Overview and Selected Issues for Congress, by Karen~~
~~L. Shanton.~~
~~Congressional Research Service~~

17

~~The Help America Vote Act of 2002: Overview and Ongoing Role~~

~~have also been proposals intentionally to expand the agency’s regulatory role. The explicit~~
~~restriction on EAC rulemaking in HAVA~~ means that the agency has limited authority beyond means that the agency has limited authority beyond
voluntary guidance to clarify ambiguities in the act, such as the open questions about voter voluntary guidance to clarify ambiguities in the act, such as the open questions about voter
registration data matching described above, or fill in details of future federal elections policies registration data matching described above, or fill in details of future federal elections policies
that Congress might not want to enshrine in that Congress might not want to enshrine in ~~legislative text. Some~~statutory text. As a result, some have proposed lifting the have proposed lifting the
restriction in certain contexts or repealing it entirely.restriction in certain contexts or repealing it entirely.70
71  Revisit HAVA’s enforcement mechanisms. The limit on EAC rulemaking has also The limit on EAC rulemaking has also been cited by some as a reason to revisit HAVA’s been cited by some as a reason to revisit HAVA’s
enforcement mechanisms.enforcement mechanisms.71 72 Without the option of agency regulations—and barring new federal Without the option of agency regulations—and barring new federal
legislation—the primary federal forum for resolving ambiguities in HAVA is the courts.legislation—the primary federal forum for resolving ambiguities in HAVA is the courts.7273 HAVA HAVA
expressly authorizes expressly authorizes ~~the Attorney General~~DOJ to bring civil action under to bring civil action under ~~the law pertaining to certain~~
~~provisions. Some have proposed legislation that would~~certain provisions of the law, and some have proposed also explicitly also explicitly ~~authorize~~authorizing individuals to individuals to
bring suit for relief under the act. bring suit for relief under the act. ~~Bills have been introduced~~Members have introduced bills to add an explicit private right of to add an explicit private right of
action for existing HAVA requirements, for example, or action for existing HAVA requirements, for example, or ~~when amending the act with new~~
~~requirements.73~~for new requirements that would be established by amendments to the act.74
Proposals to Extend HAVA or the EAC
HAVA marked a departure from previous federal elections statutes in at least two ways: (1) it was HAVA marked a departure from previous federal elections statutes in at least two ways: (1) it was
more wide-ranging in the topics it aimed to address than elections measures Congress had tended more wide-ranging in the topics it aimed to address than elections measures Congress had tended
to approve in the recent past, with (2) a greater emphasis on federal assistance for states and to approve in the recent past, with (2) a greater emphasis on federal assistance for states and
localities. Other recent federal election laws had tended localities. Other recent federal election laws had tended primarily to set requirements and to focus on particular aspects of election to focus on particular aspects of election
administration or administration or ~~ensuring access to~~the accessibility of the electoral process to 69 National Association of Secretaries of State, Resolution Reaffirming the NASS Position on Funding and Authorization of the U.S. Election Assistance Commission, July 2015, at https://www.nass.org/sites/default/files/resolutions/2015/nass-resolution-eac-summer15-_0.pdf. The resolution does not appear to have been renewed since its expiration in 2020. 70 See, for example, the Election Support Consolidation and Efficiency Act (112th Congress, H.R. 672) and the Election Assistance Commission Termination Act (115th Congress, H.R. 634). For more on proposals to terminate the EAC, see CRS Report R45770, The U.S. Election Assistance Commission: Overview and Selected Issues for Congress, by Karen L. Shanton. 71 ~~the electoral process for particular groups of voters and on~~
~~setting requirements.74 HAVA, by contrast, spans multiple issues and groups of voters—from~~
~~voter registration to voting information and voters with disabilities to young voters—and pairs its~~
~~requirements with grant programs and the assistance-oriented EAC.~~
~~Those features have made HAVA and the agency it created common vehicles for congressional~~
~~proposals to engage with new elections issues. First, the broad scope of the act has made it a~~
~~common choice for proposals to set requirements for aspects of election administration that are~~
~~not addressed by other, more specific federal election laws. New HAVA requirements have been~~
~~proposed in response to events in particular election cycles. Following the onset of the COVID-~~
~~19 pandemic in the 2020 cycle, for example, some Members proposed amending HAVA to require~~
~~states and localities to offer no-excuse absentee registration and voting during emergencies,~~

70 See, for example, the Polling Place Protection Act of 2019 (S. 955), the Early Voting Act (116th Congress, S. 957), See, for example, the Polling Place Protection Act of 2019 (S. 955), the Early Voting Act (116th Congress, S. 957),
and the Election Integrity Act of 2016 (H.R. 6072). and the Election Integrity Act of 2016 (H.R. 6072).
7172 See, for example, Daniel P. Tokaji, “Public Rights and Private Rights of Action: The Enforcement of Federal See, for example, Daniel P. Tokaji, “Public Rights and Private Rights of Action: The Enforcement of Federal
Election Laws.” Election Laws.”
7273 Daniel P. Tokaji, “Public Rights and Private Rights of Action: The Enforcement of Federal Election Laws.” Daniel P. Tokaji, “Public Rights and Private Rights of Action: The Enforcement of Federal Election Laws.”
7374 See, for example, the Streamlined and Improved Methods at Polling Locations and Early (SIMPLE) Voting Act of See, for example, the Streamlined and Improved Methods at Polling Locations and Early (SIMPLE) Voting Act of
2019 (H.R. 118), the Count the Vote Act (116th Congress, H.R. 1513), the People Over Long Lines (POLL) Act (117th 2019 (H.R. 118), the Count the Vote Act (116th Congress, H.R. 1513), the People Over Long Lines (POLL) Act (117th
Congress, S. 2117), the For the People Act of 2021 (H.R. 1/S. 1/S. 2093), and the Voter Empowerment Act of 2021 Congress, S. 2117), the For the People Act of 2021 (H.R. 1/S. 1/S. 2093), and the Voter Empowerment Act of 2021
(H.R. 2358/S. 954). (H.R. 2358/S. 954).
~~74 The NVRA sets requirements for voter registration, for example, and the VRA, as amended, primarily addresses the~~
~~accessibility of the electoral process to members of racial and language minority groups. For more on those statutes, see~~
~~CRS Report R45030,~~ ~~Federal Role in Voter Registration: The National Voter Registration Act of 1993 and Subsequent~~
~~Developments, by Sarah J. Eckman; and CRS Testimony TE10033,~~ ~~History and Enforcement of the Voting Rights Act~~
~~of 1965, by L. Paige Whitaker.~~
~~Congressional Research Service~~

18

~~link to page 18~~ ~~The Help America Vote Act of 2002: Overview and Ongoing Role~~

Congressional Research Service 18 link to page 18 The Help America Vote Act of 2002: Overview and Ongoing Role particular groups of voters.75 HAVA, by contrast, spans multiple issues and voter groups—from voter registration to voting information and voters with disabilities to young voters—and pairs its requirements with grant programs and the assistance-oriented EAC. Those features have made HAVA and the agency it created common choices of vehicles for congressional proposals to engage with elections issues. First, the broad scope of the act has made it a common choice for proposals to set requirements for aspects of election administration that are not addressed by other, more specialized federal election laws. New HAVA requirements have been proposed in response to developments in particular election cycles. Following the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in the 2020 cycle, for example, some Members proposed amending HAVA to require states and localities to offer no-excuse absentee voting and registration during emergencies, to require election officials to conduct public education campaigns about election changes due to election officials to conduct public education campaigns about election changes due to
emergencies, or emergencies, or to require states to conduct their 2020 elections entirely by mail.states to conduct their 2020 elections entirely by mail.75
~~Some~~ 76 Members have also proposed new HAVA requirements as part of broader efforts to advance Members have also proposed new HAVA requirements as part of broader efforts to advance
general general ~~election administration objectives. Requiring states to offer early voting has been~~
~~presented as a way to increase eligible voters’ access to the ballot, for example, and requiring~~
~~states to allow~~objectives for election administration. For example, proposals to amend HAVA to require states to offer early voting and permit observation of ballot tabulation observation of ballot tabulation ~~has~~have been presented as been presented as ~~a way to secure~~ways of increasing access to the ballot for eligible voters and securing the integrity the integrity
of the electoral processof the electoral process~~.76~~
~~Second, the broad scope and assistance focus of the act have made HAVA~~, respectively.77 Second, HAVA’s emphasis on assistance has made it and the EAC common and the EAC common
~~choices~~vehicles for proposals to provide new federal support for election administration. Congress has for proposals to provide new federal support for election administration. Congress has
appropriated funding for appropriated funding for ~~existing~~existing EAC-administered HAVA grant programs to help address new election HAVA grant programs to help address new election
administration challenges. administration challenges. ItFor example, it provided funding for HAVA’s general improvements grant program provided funding for HAVA’s general improvements grant program
in in response to foreign interference in the 2016 elections and the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in the 2020 election cycle.78 Members have also introduced bills~~response to the COVID-19 pandemic, for example, using appropriations language to limit use~~
~~of the funds to elections-related COVID-19-related response and set conditions like a 20% state~~
~~match for federal funds.77~~
~~Bills have also been introduced~~ to authorize new EAC grant programs or other new agency to authorize new EAC grant programs or other new agency
activities. Grant programs have been proposed to help states meet new federal requirements, such activities. Grant programs have been proposed to help states meet new federal requirements, such
as a proposed requirement to use independent commissions for congressional redistricting, and to as a proposed requirement to use independent commissions for congressional redistricting, and to
facilitate or facilitate or ~~encourage~~incentivize voluntary policies, such as voluntary policies, such as ~~limiting ballot collection by third parties.78~~
~~Other proposals~~limits on third-party ballot collection.79 Other legislation would direct the EAC to offer nonfinancial support for election administration, would direct the EAC to offer nonfinancial support for election administration,
such as ballot design research or cybersecurity best practices for voting system vendors.such as ballot design research or cybersecurity best practices for voting system vendors.7980
Potential Considerations for Congress
As noted in the As noted in the “Ongoing Role in Election Administration Policy” section of this report, no new section of this report, no new
federal election laws as multifaceted as HAVA have been enacted as of this writing. As that might federal election laws as multifaceted as HAVA have been enacted as of this writing. As that might
~~suggest, Congress has generally tended to defer to state and local officials on policy responses to~~
~~election administration issues. The enactment of HAVA and other federal election laws and the~~
~~ongoing introduction of new election administration bills demonstrate, however, that Members~~
~~sometimes also see a role for the federal government.~~
~~HAVA and the EAC offer potential vehicles for any future federal involvement in election~~
~~administration policymaking. HAVA is perhaps the closest thing in federal law to a general~~
~~elections statute, and the EAC has subject matter expertise in election administration, existing~~
~~relationships with state and local election officials, and experience administering elections grants.~~
~~There are also other options, though, as well as various ways in which Congress might structure~~
~~federal involvement in election administration through HAVA or the EAC. The following are~~

75 75 The NVRA sets requirements for voter registration, for example, and the VRA, as amended, primarily addresses the accessibility of the electoral process to members of racial and language minority groups. For more on those statutes, see CRS Report R45030, Federal Role in Voter Registration: The National Voter Registration Act of 1993 and Subsequent Developments, by Sarah J. Eckman; and CRS Testimony TE10033, History and Enforcement of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, by L. Paige Whitaker, respectively. 76 See, for example, the Resilient Elections During Quarantines and Natural Disasters Act of 2020 (H.R. 6202/S. 3440), See, for example, the Resilient Elections During Quarantines and Natural Disasters Act of 2020 (H.R. 6202/S. 3440),
the Vote From Home America Act of 2020 (H.R. 7118), and Vote From Home America Act of 2020 (H.R. 7118), and the Voter Notice Act (116th Congress, H.R. 6512). Voter Notice Act (116th Congress, H.R. 6512).
7677 See, for example, the Expanding Access to Early Voting Act of 2021 (H.R. 640) and the Save Democracy Act (117th See, for example, the Expanding Access to Early Voting Act of 2021 (H.R. 640) and the Save Democracy Act (117th
Congress, H.R. 322/S. 459). Congress, H.R. 322/S. 459).
7778 P.L. 115-141; P.L. 116-93; and P.L. 116-136. P.L. 116-93; and P.L. 116-136.
7879 See, for example, the John Tanner Fairness and Independence in Redistricting Act (117th Congress, H.R. 80/H.R. See, for example, the John Tanner Fairness and Independence in Redistricting Act (117th Congress, H.R. 80/H.R.
4307) and the Election Protection Act of 2021 (H.R. 2844). 4307) and the Election Protection Act of 2021 (H.R. 2844).
7980 See, for example, the Protect our Elections Act (116th Congress, H.R. 4777) and the For the People Act of 2021 See, for example, the Protect our Elections Act (116th Congress, H.R. 4777) and the For the People Act of 2021
(H.R. 1/S. 1/S. 2093). (H.R. 1/S. 1/S. 2093).
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service

19 19

The Help America Vote Act of 2002: Overview and Ongoing Role

~~some issues that might be relevant to Members who are considering~~suggest, Congress has generally tended to defer to state and local officials on policy responses to election administration issues. The enactment of HAVA and other federal election laws and the ongoing introduction of new election administration bills demonstrate, however, that Members sometimes also see a role in elections policy for the federal government. HAVA and the EAC offer potential vehicles for any future federal involvement in election administration policymaking. HAVA is perhaps the closest thing in federal law to a general elections statute, and the EAC has subject matter expertise in election administration, existing relationships with state and local election officials, and experience administering elections grant programs. There are also other possible vehicles, however, as well as various ways Congress might structure federal involvement in election administration through HAVA or the EAC. The following issues might be relevant to Members who are weighing whether or how to engage whether or how to engage
with election administration with election administration ~~topics.~~
~~Consideration and~~ policy.  Prioritization of ~~Factors~~considerations. The HAVA debate was framed by many of its The HAVA debate was framed by many of its
participants as about making it “easier to vote and harder to cheat,” participants as about making it “easier to vote and harder to cheat,” ~~and that access-fraud~~
~~framework has often anchored other discussions of election administration policy.80 The 2016~~
or ensuring access to the ballot for eligible voters on one hand and preventing fraud in elections on the other.81 Foreign interference in the 2016 elections highlighted another possible elections highlighted another possible ~~consideration—security—however, and events in other~~
~~election cycles~~ consideration for elections policymaking—security—and state and local experiences and state and local experiences ~~with implementing HAVA have suggested~~suggest others. others.
For example, state and local officials factored considerations like accessibility, For example, state and local officials factored considerations like accessibility, ~~administrability,~~
ease of administration, and cost-effectiveness into their post-HAVA decisions about voting systems. As debates over and cost-effectiveness into their post-HAVA decisions about voting systems. As debates over
issues like voter ID requirements illustrate, different issues like voter ID requirements illustrate, different ~~decisions about which factors to consider~~
~~and how to prioritize them can lead to different policy choices.~~
~~Choice of Agency.~~ ~~As the only federal agency dedicated to election administration~~choices about how to prioritize such considerations can produce different policy preferences. An initial step in elections policymaking might, therefore, be to determine which considerations to factor into policy decisions and how to prioritize them.  Choice of agency. As the only federal agency dedicated to the general administration of elections, the EAC , the EAC
might often be a logical choice for new federal agency work on elections. might often be a logical choice for new federal agency work on elections. ~~Some~~However, some features of the features of the
~~agency—~~agency, such as its limited rulemaking authority and current size and funding such as its limited rulemaking authority and current size and funding ~~levels—~~level, could could
introduce challenges for certain types of workintroduce challenges for certain types of work~~, however~~. Other agencies might also have or . Other agencies might also have or
acquire acquire ~~experience or~~ expertise that is expertise that is particularly relevant to certain aspects of election administration. HHS relevant to certain aspects of election administration. HHS
has subject matter expertise in disability access, for example, and NIST has subject matter has subject matter expertise in disability access, for example, and NIST has subject matter
expertise in standards and technology. The U.S. Department of Homeland Securityexpertise in standards and technology. The U.S. Department of Homeland Security~~’s (DHS’s)~~
~~Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA~~ (DHS) has also taken on new election security ) has also taken on new election security
responsibilities responsibilities ~~following the department’s designation of~~since designating election systems as critical election systems as critical
infrastructure in January 2017.infrastructure in January 2017.8182 Congress might choose to delegate new elections tasks to the Congress might choose to delegate new elections tasks to the
EAC—either with or without EAC—either with or without ~~revising~~changing some of its features—or to assign them to other agencies some of its features—or to assign them to other agencies
~~instead of or in conjunction with the EAC.~~
Choice of Legislative Approach. Like the EAC, HAVA might often be a logical choice for
~~federal engagement with election administration. Also like the EAC, it might have some features~~
~~that are less logical fits for certain purposes. Members could choose to address such features in~~
~~new legislation. Congress used appropriations language to set new conditions for the HAVA~~
~~funding it provided in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, for example, and bills have been~~
~~introduced to revisit HAVA’s enforcement mechanisms.82 Members might also choose to create~~
~~new law with features they prefer or to amend other existing laws. For example, some recent~~
~~proposals to engage with election security and youth voter participation would amend the~~
~~Homeland Security Act of 2002 (HSA; P.L. 107-296) and the Higher Education Act of 1965~~
~~(HEA; P.L. 89-329), respectively.83~~instead of or in conjunction with the EAC.

8081 See, for example, David Nather, “Election Overhaul May Have to Wait in Line Behind Other ‘Crisis’ Issues,” See, for example, David Nather, “Election Overhaul May Have to Wait in Line Behind Other ‘Crisis’ Issues,” CQ
Weekly, July 27, 2002; Sen. Kit Bond, “Help America Vote Act of 2002—Conference Report,” , July 27, 2002; Sen. Kit Bond, “Help America Vote Act of 2002—Conference Report,” Congressional Record, ,
vol. 148, part 136 (October 16, 2002), p. S10488; and Sen. Christopher Dodd, “Help America Vote Act of 2002—vol. 148, part 136 (October 16, 2002), p. S10488; and Sen. Christopher Dodd, “Help America Vote Act of 2002—
Conference Report,” Conference Report,” Congressional Record, vol. 148, part 136 (October 16, 2002), p. S10505. , vol. 148, part 136 (October 16, 2002), p. S10505.
8182 U.S. Department of Homeland Security, “Statement by Secretary Jeh Johnson on the Designation of Election U.S. Department of Homeland Security, “Statement by Secretary Jeh Johnson on the Designation of Election
Infrastructure as a Critical Infrastructure Subsector,” press release, January 6, 2017, at https://www.dhs.gov/news/2017/Infrastructure as a Critical Infrastructure Subsector,” press release, January 6, 2017, at https://www.dhs.gov/news/2017/
01/06/statement-secretary-johnson-designation-election-infrastructure-critical. For more on the critical infrastructure 01/06/statement-secretary-johnson-designation-election-infrastructure-critical. For more on the critical infrastructure
designation and Election Infrastructure Subsector, see CRS In Focus IF10677, designation and Election Infrastructure Subsector, see CRS In Focus IF10677, The Designation of Election Systems as
Critical Infrastructure, by Brian E. Humphreys; and CRS In Focus IF11445, , by Brian E. Humphreys; and CRS In Focus IF11445, The Election Infrastructure Subsector:
Development and Challenges, by Brian E. Humphreys and Karen L. Shanton. , by Brian E. Humphreys and Karen L. Shanton.
~~82 P.L. 116-93 and P.L. 116-136. See also, for example, the Streamlined and Improved Methods at Polling Locations~~
~~and Early (SIMPLE) Voting Act of 2019 (H.R. 118), the Count the Vote Act (116th Congress, H.R. 1513), the People~~
~~Over Long Lines (POLL) Act (117th Congress, S. 2117), and the For the People Act of 2021 (H.R. 1/S. 1/S. 2093).~~
~~83 See, for example, the Election Protection Act of 2021 (H.R. 2844), the For the People Act of 2021 (H.R. 1/S. 1/S.~~
~~2093), and the Help Students Vote Act (117th Congress, H.R. 2232/S. 992).~~
~~Congressional Research Service~~

20

~~link to page 18~~ ~~The Help America Vote Act of 2002: Overview and Ongoing Role~~

~~Balance of Statute and Regulation~~Congressional Research Service 20 link to page 18 link to page 18 The Help America Vote Act of 2002: Overview and Ongoing Role  Choice of legislative approach. Like the EAC, HAVA might often be a logical choice of vehicle for congressional engagement with election administration policy. Also like the EAC, it might have some features that are less logical fits for certain purposes. Members have sometimes chosen to address such features by proposing amendments to HAVA or, in the case of grant programs in particular, including funding conditions in appropriations language.83 Members might also choose to create new law with features that are better suited to their purposes or to amend existing laws others than HAVA. For example, some election security and youth voter participation bills would amend the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (HSA; P.L. 107-296) and the Higher Education Act of 1965 (HEA; P.L. 89-329), respectively.84  Balance of statute and regulation. As noted in the “Proposals to Revisit HAVA or . ~~As noted in the~~ ~~“Proposals to Revisit HAVA or~~ the EAC”
section of this report, the wording of HAVAsection of this report, the wording of HAVA ~~left some open questions about voter registration data~~
~~matching, and proposals have been offered to provide more definitive guidance either in~~
~~legislative text or through agency action. That case illustrates~~’s voter registration data-matching provisions left some open questions about how data matching should work. Legislative proposals to provide more definitive guidance illustrate two of the options available for two of the options available for
federal policymakingfederal policymaking ~~on election administration~~: (1) specifying policy details in statute: (1) specifying policy details in statute or, and (2) (2)
delegating details to delegating details to ~~an agency. Each of those~~ a federal agency. Some bills would amend the text of HAVA’s data-matching provisions to add more specifics, for example, while others would direct a federal agency to set data matching standards. Either of those two options—or a combination of options—or a combination of ~~them~~both—might be a —might be a
better fit in certain circumstances. Specifyingbetter fit in certain circumstances. Specifying policy details in statute might details in statute might ~~fit~~be a better fit for cases in which Congress cases in which Congress
knows exactly how it wants a policy to be implemented, for example, knows exactly how it wants a policy to be implemented, for example, ~~and~~while delegating delegating ~~might be a~~
~~fit for~~details to an agency might better fit cases in which new developments are likely to change the policy landscape or more cases in which new developments are likely to change the policy landscape or more
information or expertise is required to determine how best to implement the policy. information or expertise is required to determine how best to implement the policy.
 Balance of ~~Federal Action and State or Local Action~~federal action and state or local action. The structure of HAVA The structure of HAVA highlights a third highlights a third
option for federal policymakingoption for federal policymaking ~~on election administration: deferring on some~~ , in addition to specifying policy details in statute and delegating them to a federal agency: deferring on some policy details to states details to states
and localities. HAVA set requirements for and localities. HAVA set requirements for ~~election~~the administration administration of federal elections, for example, but left states , for example, but left states
significant discretion over exactly how to implement discretion over exactly how to implement ~~some of~~ them. It established a them. It established a ~~new~~ federal elections federal elections
agency but limited its agency but limited its ~~power~~ authority to set regulations for states and localities and provided for state and to set regulations for states and localities and provided for state and
local input into local input into its work. Members who are interested in engaging with elections issues might similarly consider how they seek to distribute decisionmaking among federal, state, and local officials~~its work~~. States and localities have primary responsibility for administering . States and localities have primary responsibility for administering
elections in the United States, elections in the United States, ~~and~~so state and local officials might often be particularly state and local officials might often be particularly ~~well-~~
well positioned to identify the best positioned to identify the best policy options for their jurisdictions. options for their jurisdictions. ~~Deferring~~On the other hand, deferring to states and localities on to states and localities on
policy details policy details ~~could also~~might contribute, in some cases, to variations in contribute, in some cases, to variations in ~~a policy’s effectiveness~~the effectiveness of a policy across across
states or policy choices that are at odds with congressional objectives. states or policy choices that are at odds with congressional objectives. ~~Members might consider,~~
~~therefore, how they seek to distribute decisionmaking among federal, state, and local officials.~~
~~Congressional Research Service~~

21

83 See, for example, the proposals to revisit HAVA’s enforcement mechanisms in the Streamlined and Improved Methods at Polling Locations and Early (SIMPLE) Voting Act of 2019 (H.R. 118), the Count the Vote Act (116th Congress, H.R. 1513), the People Over Long Lines (POLL) Act (117th Congress, S. 2117), and the For the People Act of 2021 (H.R. 1/S. 1/S. 2093). See also the new match requirements for funding under HAVA’s general improvements grant program set by the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act (P.L. 116-136); the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018 (P.L. 115-141); the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2020 (P.L. 116-93); and the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2022 (P.L. 117-103). 84 See, for example, the Election Protection Act of 2021 (H.R. 2844), the For the People Act of 2021 (H.R. 1/S. 1/S. 2093), and the Help Students Vote Act (117th Congress, H.R. 2232/S. 992). Congressional Research Service 21 link to page 29 link to page 29 The Help America Vote Act of 2002: Overview and Ongoing Role

Appendix A. Major Provisions of HAVA by Issue
Area Table A-1. Major Provisions of HAVA by Issue
Area Issue
Area Corresponding Section of ~~Reporta~~
~~Provisionb~~Reporta Provisionb
Absentee Voting Absentee Voting
U.S. Election Assistance Commission U.S. Election Assistance Commission
Study and report on electronic voting and Study and report on electronic voting and
(EAC) (EAC)
the electoral process the electoral process
52 U.S.C. §20985 52 U.S.C. §20985

EAC EAC
Study and report on free absentee ballot Study and report on free absentee ballot
postage postage
52 U.S.C. §20986 52 U.S.C. §20986
Individuals with Individuals with
Requirements Requirements
Accessibility for individuals with disabilities Accessibility for individuals with disabilities
Disabilities and Older Disabilities and Older
52 U.S.C. §21081(a)(3) 52 U.S.C. §21081(a)(3)
Individuals Individuals

Requirements Requirements
Adoption of voluntary guidance by Adoption of voluntary guidance by
EAC EAC
Commission Commission
52 U.S.C. §§21101 52 U.S.C. §§21101

Grant Programs Grant Programs
Process for development and filing of plan Process for development and filing of plan
52 U.S.C. §21005 52 U.S.C. §21005

Grant Programs Grant Programs
Payments to states and units of local Payments to states and units of local
government to assure access to individuals government to assure access to individuals
with disabilities with disabilities
52 U.S.C. §§21021-21025 52 U.S.C. §§21021-21025

Grant Programs Grant Programs
Grants for research on voting technology Grants for research on voting technology
improvements improvements
52 U.S.C. §§21041-21043 52 U.S.C. §§21041-21043

Grant Programs Grant Programs
Pilot program for testing of equipment and Pilot program for testing of equipment and
technology technology
52 U.S.C. §§21051-21053 52 U.S.C. §§21051-21053

Grant Programs Grant Programs
Payments for protection and advocacy Payments for protection and advocacy
systems systems
52 U.S.C. §§21061-21062 52 U.S.C. §§21061-21062

EAC EAC
Membership of Board of Advisors Membership of Board of Advisors
52 U.S.C. §20944 52 U.S.C. §20944

EAC EAC
Technical Guidelines Development Technical Guidelines Development
Committee (TGDC) Committee (TGDC)
52 U.S.C. §20961 52 U.S.C. §20961

EAC EAC
Report on human factor research Report on human factor research
52 U.S.C. §20983 52 U.S.C. §20983

EAC EAC
Study and report on free absentee ballot Study and report on free absentee ballot
postage postage
52 U.S.C. §20986 52 U.S.C. §20986
Individuals with Limited Individuals with Limited
Requirements Requirements
Alternative language accessibility Alternative language accessibility
English Proficiency English Proficiency
52 U.S.C. §21081(a)(4) 52 U.S.C. §21081(a)(4)

Requirements Requirements
Adoption of voluntary guidance by Adoption of voluntary guidance by
EAC EAC
Commission Commission
52 U.S.C. §§21101 52 U.S.C. §§21101
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service

22 22

link to page 29 link to page 29 link to page 29 link to page 29 link to page 29 The Help America Vote Act of 2002: Overview and Ongoing Role

Issue
Area Corresponding Section of ~~Reporta~~
~~Provisionb~~Reporta Provisionb

Grant Programs Grant Programs
Grants for research on voting technology Grants for research on voting technology
improvements improvements
52 U.S.C. §§21041-21043 52 U.S.C. §§21041-21043

Grant Programs Grant Programs
Pilot program for testing of equipment and Pilot program for testing of equipment and
technology technology
52 U.S.C. §§21051-21053 52 U.S.C. §§21051-21053

EAC EAC
Report on human factor research Report on human factor research
52 U.S.C. §20983 52 U.S.C. §20983
Military and Overseas Military and Overseas
Requirements Requirements
Voting assistance programs Voting assistance programs
Citizens Citizens
Appendix Bc Appendix Bc
10 U.S.C. §1566 10 U.S.C. §1566

Requirements Requirements
Designation of single state office to provide Designation of single state office to provide
Appendix Bc Appendix Bc
information on registration and absentee information on registration and absentee
ballots for all voters in state ballots for all voters in state
52 U.S.C. §20302(b) 52 U.S.C. §20302(b)

Requirements Requirements
Report on absentee ballots transmitted and Report on absentee ballots transmitted and
Appendix Bc Appendix Bc
received after general elections received after general elections
52 U.S.C. §§20302(c), note 52 U.S.C. §§20302(c), note

Requirements Requirements
Extension of period covered by single Extension of period covered by single
Appendix Bc Appendix Bc
absentee ballot application absentee ballot application
52 U.S.C. §52 U.S.C. §~~20306d~~20306d

Requirements Requirements
Additional duties of Presidential Designee Additional duties of Presidential Designee
Appendix Bc Appendix Bc
under Uniformed and Overseas Citizens under Uniformed and Overseas Citizens
Absentee Voting Act Absentee Voting Act
52 U.S.C. §§20301-20302 52 U.S.C. §§20301-20302

Requirements Requirements
Prohibition of refusal of voter registration Prohibition of refusal of voter registration
Appendix Bc Appendix Bc
and absentee ballot applications on grounds and absentee ballot applications on grounds
of early submission of early submission
52 U.S.C. §20306 52 U.S.C. §20306

Requirements Requirements
Other requirements to promote Other requirements to promote
Appendix Bc Appendix Bc
participation of overseas and absent participation of overseas and absent
uniformed services voters uniformed services voters
52 U.S.C. §20302(d) 52 U.S.C. §20302(d)

Grant Programs Grant Programs
Authorization of appropriations for Authorization of appropriations for
requirements payments requirements payments
52 U.S.C. §21007(a)(4)e 52 U.S.C. §21007(a)(4)e

EAC EAC
Membership of Board of Advisors Membership of Board of Advisors
52 U.S.C. §20944 52 U.S.C. §20944

EAC EAC
Study, report, and recommendations on best Study, report, and recommendations on best
practices for facilitating military and overseas practices for facilitating military and overseas
voting voting
52 U.S.C. §20982 52 U.S.C. §20982
Pol Workers Pol Workers
Grant Programs Grant Programs
State plan State plan
52 U.S.C. §21004 52 U.S.C. §21004

Grant Programs Grant Programs
Help America Vote Foundation Help America Vote Foundation
36 U.S.C. §§90101-90112 36 U.S.C. §§90101-90112

Grant Programs Grant Programs
Help America Vote Col ege Program Help America Vote Col ege Program
EAC EAC
52 U.S.C. §§21121-21123 52 U.S.C. §§21121-21123
Provisional Voting Provisional Voting
Requirements Requirements
Provisional voting requirements Provisional voting requirements
52 U.S.C. §21082(a) 52 U.S.C. §21082(a)
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service

23 23

link to page 29 link to page 29 The Help America Vote Act of 2002: Overview and Ongoing Role

Issue
Area Corresponding Section of ~~Reporta~~
~~Provisionb~~Reporta Provisionb

Requirements Requirements
Voters who vote after the pol s close Voters who vote after the pol s close
52 U.S.C. §21082(c) 52 U.S.C. §21082(c)

Requirements Requirements
Fail-safe voting Fail-safe voting
52 U.S.C. §21083(b)(2)(B) 52 U.S.C. §21083(b)(2)(B)

Requirements Requirements
Adoption of voluntary guidance by Adoption of voluntary guidance by
EAC EAC
Commission Commission
52 U.S.C. §§21101 52 U.S.C. §§21101
Voter Identification Voter Identification
Requirements Requirements
Requirements for voters who register by Requirements for voters who register by
mail mail
52 U.S.C. §§21083(b)(1)-(3) 52 U.S.C. §§21083(b)(1)-(3)

Requirements Requirements
Adoption of voluntary guidance by Adoption of voluntary guidance by
EAC EAC
Commission Commission
52 U.S.C. §§21101 52 U.S.C. §§21101

EAC EAC
Study and report on voters who register by Study and report on voters who register by
mail and use of Social Security information mail and use of Social Security information
52 U.S.C. §20984 52 U.S.C. §20984
Voter Registration Voter Registration
Requirements Requirements
Computerized statewide voter registration Computerized statewide voter registration
list requirements implementation list requirements implementation
52 U.S.C. §21083(a)(1) 52 U.S.C. §21083(a)(1)

Requirements Requirements
Computerized list maintenance Computerized list maintenance
52 U.S.C. §21083(a)(2) 52 U.S.C. §21083(a)(2)

Requirements Requirements
Technological security of computerized list Technological security of computerized list
52 U.S.C. §21083(a)(3) 52 U.S.C. §21083(a)(3)

Requirements Requirements
Minimum standard for accuracy of State Minimum standard for accuracy of State
voter registration records voter registration records
52 U.S.C. §21083(a)(4) 52 U.S.C. §21083(a)(4)

Requirements Requirements
Verification of voter registration information Verification of voter registration information
52 U.S.C. §21083(a)(5) 52 U.S.C. §21083(a)(5)

Requirements Requirements
Requirements for voters who register by Requirements for voters who register by
mail mail
52 U.S.C. §§21083(b)(1)-(3) 52 U.S.C. §§21083(b)(1)-(3)

Requirements Requirements
Contents of mail-in registration form Contents of mail-in registration form
52 U.S.C. §21083(b)(4) 52 U.S.C. §21083(b)(4)

Requirements Requirements
Adoption of voluntary guidance by Adoption of voluntary guidance by
EAC EAC
Commission Commission
52 U.S.C. §§21101 52 U.S.C. §§21101

EAC EAC
Study and report on voters who register by Study and report on voters who register by
mail and use of Social Security information mail and use of Social Security information
52 U.S.C. §20984 52 U.S.C. §20984

EAC EAC
Study and report on electronic voting and Study and report on electronic voting and
the electoral process the electoral process
52 U.S.C. §20985 52 U.S.C. §20985
Voting Information Voting Information
Requirements Requirements
Voting information requirements Voting information requirements
52 U.S.C. §21082(b) 52 U.S.C. §21082(b)

Requirements Requirements
Adoption of voluntary guidance by Adoption of voluntary guidance by
EAC EAC
Commission Commission
52 U.S.C. §§21101 52 U.S.C. §§21101
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service

24 24

link to page 29 link to page 29 The Help America Vote Act of 2002: Overview and Ongoing Role

Issue
Area Corresponding Section of ~~Reporta~~
~~Provisionb~~Reporta Provisionb

Grant Programs Grant Programs
State plan State plan
52 U.S.C. §21004 52 U.S.C. §21004

EAC EAC
Study and report on electronic voting and Study and report on electronic voting and
the electoral process the electoral process
52 U.S.C. §20985 52 U.S.C. §20985
Voting Systems Voting Systems
Requirements Requirements
Voting systems standards requirements in Voting systems standards requirements in
general general
52 U.S.C. §21081(a)(1) 52 U.S.C. §21081(a)(1)

Requirements Requirements
Audit capacity Audit capacity
52 U.S.C. §21081(a)(2) 52 U.S.C. §21081(a)(2)

Requirements Requirements
Accessibility for individuals with disabilities Accessibility for individuals with disabilities
52 U.S.C. §21081(a)(3) 52 U.S.C. §21081(a)(3)

Requirements Requirements
Alternative language accessibility Alternative language accessibility
52 U.S.C. §21081(a)(4) 52 U.S.C. §21081(a)(4)

Requirements Requirements
Error rates Error rates
52 U.S.C. §21081(a)(5) 52 U.S.C. §21081(a)(5)

Requirements Requirements
Uniform definition of what constitutes a Uniform definition of what constitutes a
vote vote
52 U.S.C. §21081(a)(6) 52 U.S.C. §21081(a)(6)

Requirements Requirements
Adoption of voluntary guidance by Adoption of voluntary guidance by
EAC EAC
Commission Commission
52 U.S.C. §§21101 52 U.S.C. §§21101

Grant Programs Grant Programs
State plan State plan
52 U.S.C. §21004 52 U.S.C. §21004

Grant Programs Grant Programs
Payments to states for replacement of punch Payments to states for replacement of punch
card and lever voting machines card and lever voting machines
52 U.S.C. §§20902-20906 52 U.S.C. §§20902-20906

Grant Programs Grant Programs
Grants for research on voting technology Grants for research on voting technology
improvements improvements
52 U.S.C. §§21041-21043 52 U.S.C. §§21041-21043

Grant Programs Grant Programs
Pilot program for testing of equipment and Pilot program for testing of equipment and
technology technology
52 U.S.C. §§21051-21053 52 U.S.C. §§21051-21053

EAC EAC
Technical Guidelines Development Technical Guidelines Development
Committee (TGDC) Committee (TGDC)
52 U.S.C. §20961 52 U.S.C. §20961

EAC EAC
Process for adoption of Voluntary Voting Process for adoption of Voluntary Voting
System Guidelines (VVSG) System Guidelines (VVSG)
52 U.S.C. §20962 52 U.S.C. §20962

EAC EAC
Certification and testing of voting systems Certification and testing of voting systems
52 U.S.C. §20971 52 U.S.C. §20971

EAC EAC
Report on human factor research Report on human factor research
52 U.S.C. §20983 52 U.S.C. §20983

EAC EAC
Study and report on electronic voting and Study and report on electronic voting and
the electoral process the electoral process
52 U.S.C. §20985 52 U.S.C. §20985
Young Voters Young Voters
Grant Programs Grant Programs
National Student and Parent Mock Election National Student and Parent Mock Election
52 U.S.C. §§21071-21072 52 U.S.C. §§21071-21072
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service

25 25

link to page link to page 29 link to page 29 link to page 5 link to page 30 5 link to page 30 The Help America Vote Act of 2002: Overview and Ongoing Role

Issue
Area Corresponding Section of ~~Reporta~~
~~Provisionb~~Reporta Provisionb

Grant Programs Grant Programs
Help America Vote Foundation Help America Vote Foundation
36 U.S.C. §§90101-90112 36 U.S.C. §§90101-90112

Grant Programs Grant Programs
Help America Vote Col ege Program Help America Vote Col ege Program
EAC EAC
52 U.S.C. §§21121-21123 52 U.S.C. §§21121-21123
Source: CRS, based on review of the CRS, based on review of the U.S. Code. .
Notes: Provisions of HAVA that relate to election administration generally—such as the act’s enforcement Provisions of HAVA that relate to election administration generally—such as the act’s enforcement
mechanisms, its general improvements grant program, most aspects of its requirements payments program, and mechanisms, its general improvements grant program, most aspects of its requirements payments program, and
the EAC’s general research authority—are not included in the EAC’s general research authority—are not included in ~~the~~this table. Provisions that address more than one issue table. Provisions that address more than one issue
area are listed for all of the are listed for all of the ~~provisions~~issue areas they address. they address.
a. Provisions are a. Provisions are ~~classified~~categorized here as they appear in the text of this report. For more on a given provision, see here as they appear in the text of this report. For more on a given provision, see
the corresponding section of the report. the corresponding section of the report.
b. Provisions are generally listed here as they are presented in statutory language. b. Provisions are generally listed here as they are presented in statutory language.
c. These provisions amended existing law on military and overseas voting. c. These provisions amended existing law on military and overseas voting. ~~The amendments~~They are discussed are discussed
briefly in thebriefly in the ~~“Requirements”~~ ~~section~~ “Requirements” section of this report and summarized in of this report and summarized in Appendix B.
d. This provision was repealed by the Military and Overseas Voter Empowerment (MOVE) Act of 2009, which d. This provision was repealed by the Military and Overseas Voter Empowerment (MOVE) Act of 2009, which
was enacted as Subtitle H of Title V of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 (P.L. was enacted as Subtitle H of Title V of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 (P.L.
111-84). 111-84).
e. The MOVE Act amended HAVA to authorize funding for the requirements payments program for FY2010 e. The MOVE Act amended HAVA to authorize funding for the requirements payments program for FY2010
and subsequent fiscal years. The funding was authorized to meet new requirements and subsequent fiscal years. The funding was authorized to meet new requirements ~~established by the~~
~~MOVE Act for military and overseas voting~~for military and overseas voting established by the MOVE Act. .
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service

26 26

link to page 31 The Help America Vote Act of 2002: Overview and Ongoing Role

Appendix B. HAVA Amendments to Military and
Overseas Voting Processes
Table B-1. HAVA Amendments to Military and Overseas Voting Processes

Summary of Changes
Voting Assistance Programs Voting Assistance Programs
Require voting assistance officers to be given sufficient time and Require voting assistance officers to be given sufficient time and
10 U.S.C. §1566 10 U.S.C. §1566
resources to perform specified voting assistance duties resources to perform specified voting assistance duties
Direct the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) to implement and Direct the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) to implement and
report on measures to ensure that postmarks or other official proofs report on measures to ensure that postmarks or other official proofs
of mailing date are provided for absentee ballots that are col ected of mailing date are provided for absentee ballots that are col ected
overseas or at sea overseas or at sea
Direct the Secretary of each military department to provide notice of Direct the Secretary of each military department to provide notice of
absentee ballot mailing deadlines; information about requirements and absentee ballot mailing deadlines; information about requirements and
deadlines for voter registration and absentee ballot applications and deadlines for voter registration and absentee ballot applications and
the availability of voting assistance officers; and federal voter the availability of voting assistance officers; and federal voter
registration forms registration forms
Require designation of day(s) for providing information at military Require designation of day(s) for providing information at military
installations about election timing, registration requirements, and installations about election timing, registration requirements, and
voting procedures voting procedures
Designation of Single State Office to Designation of Single State Office to
Require each state to designate a single state office to provide Require each state to designate a single state office to provide
Provide Information on Registration and Provide Information on Registration and
information about the voting and registration processes available to information about the voting and registration processes available to
Absentee Ballots for All Voters in State Absentee Ballots for All Voters in State
military and overseas voters military and overseas voters
52 U.S.C. §20302(b) 52 U.S.C. §20302(b)
Recommend that the designated office carry out the state’s Recommend that the designated office carry out the state’s
responsibilities under the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee responsibilities under the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee
Voting Act (UOCAVA) Voting Act (UOCAVA)
Report on Absentee Ballots Transmitted Report on Absentee Ballots Transmitted
Require states and localities to report to the U.S. Election Assistance Require states and localities to report to the U.S. Election Assistance
and Received After General Elections and Received After General Elections
Commission (EAC) and the public after each regular federal general Commission (EAC) and the public after each regular federal general
52 U.S.C. §§20302(c), note 52 U.S.C. §§20302(c), note
election on the number of absentee ballots transmitted to and election on the number of absentee ballots transmitted to and
received from military and overseas voters received from military and overseas voters
Direct the EAC and its Board of Advisors and Standards Board to Direct the EAC and its Board of Advisors and Standards Board to
develop a standardized format for the reports and make the develop a standardized format for the reports and make the
standardized format available to states and localities standardized format available to states and localities
Extension of Period Covered by Single Extension of Period Covered by Single
Extend the period covered by absentee ballot applications submitted Extend the period covered by absentee ballot applications submitted
Absentee Ballot Application Absentee Ballot Application
by military and overseas voters to the fol owing two regular federal by military and overseas voters to the fol owing two regular federal
52 U.S.C. §20306 52 U.S.C. §20306
general general ~~electionsa~~electionsa
Additional Duties of Presidential Additional Duties of Presidential
Direct the Presidential Designee under UOCAVA to ensure that Direct the Presidential Designee under UOCAVA to ensure that
Designee Under Uniformed and Designee Under Uniformed and
election officials are aware of the act’s requirements, develop a election officials are aware of the act’s requirements, develop a
Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act
standard oath affirming potential penalty of perjury for material standard oath affirming potential penalty of perjury for material
52 U.S.C. §§20301-20302 52 U.S.C. §§20301-20302
misstatements of fact on UOCAVA documents, and provide statistical misstatements of fact on UOCAVA documents, and provide statistical
analysis of voter participation by overseas voters analysis of voter participation by overseas voters
Require states that require oaths or affirmations for UOCAVA Require states that require oaths or affirmations for UOCAVA
documents to use the standard oath developed by the Presidential documents to use the standard oath developed by the Presidential
Designee Designee
Prohibition of Refusal of Voter Prohibition of Refusal of Voter
Prohibit states from refusing to accept or process an otherwise valid Prohibit states from refusing to accept or process an otherwise valid
Registration and Absentee Ballot Registration and Absentee Ballot
voter registration or absentee bal ot application from a military voter voter registration or absentee bal ot application from a military voter
Applications on Grounds of Early Applications on Grounds of Early
on the grounds that the application was submitted before the first on the grounds that the application was submitted before the first
Submission Submission
date on which the state otherwise accepts or processes such date on which the state otherwise accepts or processes such
52 U.S.C. §20306 52 U.S.C. §20306
applications applications
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service

27 27

The Help America Vote Act of 2002: Overview and Ongoing Role

Summary of Changes
Other Requirements to Promote Other Requirements to Promote
Require states to provide military and overseas voters with reasons Require states to provide military and overseas voters with reasons
Participation of Overseas and Absent Participation of Overseas and Absent
for rejecting their voter registration or absentee ballot applications for rejecting their voter registration or absentee ballot applications
Uniformed Services Voters Uniformed Services Voters
52 U.S.C. §20302(d) 52 U.S.C. §20302(d)
Source: CRS, based on review of the CRS, based on review of the U.S. Code. .
Notes: The requirements in this table generally apply to elections for federal office. The requirements in this table generally apply to elections for federal office.
a. This provision was repealed by the Military and Overseas Voter Empowerment (MOVE) Act of 2009, which a. This provision was repealed by the Military and Overseas Voter Empowerment (MOVE) Act of 2009, which
was enacted as Subtitle H of Title V of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 (P.L. was enacted as Subtitle H of Title V of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 (P.L.
111-84). 111-84).
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service

28 28

The Help America Vote Act of 2002: Overview and Ongoing Role

Appendix C. Timeline of Congressional
Deliberations on Election Administration
Table C-1. Timeline of Congressional Deliberations on Election Administration
(from the November 2000 general election to the enactment of HAVA (from the November 2000 general election to the enactment of HAVA in October 2002) )
Date
Action
November 7, 2000 November 7, 2000
November 2000 regular federal general elections are held. November 2000 regular federal general elections are held.
December 12, 2000 December 12, 2000
U.S. Supreme Court issues decision in U.S. Supreme Court issues decision in Bush v. Gore. .
February 14, 2001 February 14, 2001
House Committee on Energy and Commerce holds hearing on “Election Night House Committee on Energy and Commerce holds hearing on “Election Night
Coverage by the Networks.” Coverage by the Networks.”
March 7, 2001 March 7, 2001
Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation holds hearing on Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation holds hearing on
“Election Reform.” “Election Reform.”
March 14, 2001 March 14, 2001
Senate Committee on Rules and Administration holds hearing on “Election Senate Committee on Rules and Administration holds hearing on “Election
Reform.” Reform.”
March 19, 2001 March 19, 2001
Equal Protection of Voting Rights Act (S. 565) is introduced in Senate. Equal Protection of Voting Rights Act (S. 565) is introduced in Senate.
March 22, 2001 March 22, 2001
Equal Protection of Voting Rights Act (H.R. 1170) is introduced in House of Equal Protection of Voting Rights Act (H.R. 1170) is introduced in House of
Representatives. Representatives.
May 3, 2001 May 3, 2001
Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs holds hearing on “Federal Election Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs holds hearing on “Federal Election
Practices and Procedures.” Practices and Procedures.”
May 8, 2001 May 8, 2001
Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation holds hearing on Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation holds hearing on
“S. 368 and Election Reform.” “S. 368 and Election Reform.”
May 9, 2001 May 9, 2001
House Committee on Armed Services Subcommittee on Military Personnel holds House Committee on Armed Services Subcommittee on Military Personnel holds
hearing on “Department of Defense Voting Assistance and Military Absentee Ballot hearing on “Department of Defense Voting Assistance and Military Absentee Ballot
Issues.” Issues.”
Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs holds hearing on “Federal Election Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs holds hearing on “Federal Election
Practices and Procedures.” Practices and Procedures.”
May 10, 2001 May 10, 2001
House Committee on House Administration holds hearing on “Federal Election House Committee on House Administration holds hearing on “Federal Election
Reform.” Reform.”
May 17, 2001 May 17, 2001
House Committee on House Administration holds “Voting Technology Hearing.” House Committee on House Administration holds “Voting Technology Hearing.”
May 22, 2001 May 22, 2001
House Committee on Science holds hearing on “Improving Voting Technologies: House Committee on Science holds hearing on “Improving Voting Technologies:
The Role of Standards.” The Role of Standards.”
May 24, 2001 May 24, 2001
Bipartisan Federal Election Reform Act (S. 953) is introduced in Senate. Bipartisan Federal Election Reform Act (S. 953) is introduced in Senate.
House Committee on House Administration holds “Hearing on Technology and House Committee on House Administration holds “Hearing on Technology and
the Voting Process.” the Voting Process.”
June 27, 2001 June 27, 2001
Senate Committee on Rules and Administration holds hearing on “Report of the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration holds hearing on “Report of the
U.S. Commission on Civil Rights on the November 2000 Election and on Election U.S. Commission on Civil Rights on the November 2000 Election and on Election
Reform Issues.” Reform Issues.”
June 28, 2001 June 28, 2001
Senate Committee on Rules and Administration holds hearing on “Members of the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration holds hearing on “Members of the
House of Representatives on Election Reform Issues.” House of Representatives on Election Reform Issues.”
July 23, 2001 July 23, 2001
Senate Committee on Rules and Administration holds “Field Hearing in Atlanta, Senate Committee on Rules and Administration holds “Field Hearing in Atlanta,
Georgia on Election Reform Issues.” Georgia on Election Reform Issues.”
November 14, 2001 November 14, 2001
Help America Vote Act (H.R. 3295) is introduced in House of Representatives. Help America Vote Act (H.R. 3295) is introduced in House of Representatives.
November 15, 2001 November 15, 2001
House Committee on House Administration holds “Mark Up of H.R. 3295, the House Committee on House Administration holds “Mark Up of H.R. 3295, the
Help America Vote Act of 2001.” Help America Vote Act of 2001.”
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service

29 29

The Help America Vote Act of 2002: Overview and Ongoing Role

November 28, 2001 November 28, 2001
Senate Committee on Rules and Administration reports S. 565 to ful Senate. Senate Committee on Rules and Administration reports S. 565 to ful Senate.
December 5, 2001 December 5, 2001
House Committee on the Judiciary holds hearing on “Help America Vote Act of House Committee on the Judiciary holds hearing on “Help America Vote Act of
2001.” 2001.”
December 10, 2001 December 10, 2001
House Committee on House Administration reports H.R. 3295 to ful House of House Committee on House Administration reports H.R. 3295 to ful House of
Representatives. Representatives.
December 12, 2001 December 12, 2001
House of Representatives passes H.R. 3295 362-63. House of Representatives passes H.R. 3295 362-63.
February 13-15, 2002 February 13-15, 2002
Senate considers S. 565. Senate considers S. 565.
February 25-27, 2002 February 25-27, 2002
Senate considers S. 565. Senate considers S. 565.
March 1, 2002 March 1, 2002
Senate considers S. 565. Senate considers S. 565.
March 4, 2002 March 4, 2002
Senate considers S. 565. Senate considers S. 565.
April 10, 2002 April 10, 2002
Senate considers S. 565. Senate considers S. 565.
April 11, 2002 April 11, 2002
Senate passes S. 565 99-1, amends text of H.R. 3295 with text of S. 565, and Senate passes S. 565 99-1, amends text of H.R. 3295 with text of S. 565, and
requests conference with House of Representatives. requests conference with House of Representatives.
May 1, 2002 May 1, 2002
Senate appoints conferees. Senate appoints conferees.
May 16, 2002 May 16, 2002
House of Representatives appoints conferees. House of Representatives appoints conferees.
October 8, 2002 October 8, 2002
Conference report on H.R. 3295 (H.Rept. 107-730) is filed. Conference report on H.R. 3295 (H.Rept. 107-730) is filed.
October 10, 2002 October 10, 2002
Conference report on H.R. 3295 is agreed to in House of Representatives 357-48. Conference report on H.R. 3295 is agreed to in House of Representatives 357-48.
October 16, 2002 October 16, 2002
Conference report on H.R. 3295 is agreed to in Senate 92-2. Conference report on H.R. 3295 is agreed to in Senate 92-2.
October 29, 2002 October 29, 2002
H.R. 3295 is signed by President George W. Bush and becomes P.L. 107-252. H.R. 3295 is signed by President George W. Bush and becomes P.L. 107-252.
Source: CRS, based on review of data from Congress.gov, the CRS, based on review of data from Congress.gov, the Congressional Record, and the , and the U.S. Government Government
Publishing Office. Publishing Office.

Author Information

Karen L. Shanton Karen L. Shanton

Analyst in American National Government Analyst in American National Government

Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan
shared staff to congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and shared staff to congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and
under the direction of Congress. Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other under the direction of Congress. Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other
than public understanding of information that has been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in than public understanding of information that has been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in
connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the United States Government, are not connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the United States Government, are not
subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be reproduced and distributed in subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be reproduced and distributed in
its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include copyrighted images or its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include copyrighted images or
material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you wish to material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you wish to
copy or otherwise use copyrighted material. copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.

Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service
R46949 R46949 · VERSION ~~1 · NEW~~3 · UPDATED
30 30