link to page 1 
Updated June 14, 2019
The U.S. Election Assistance Commission: An Overview
The 2000 presidential election exposed weaknesses in state
The EAC has helped establish the new Election
election systems. Congress responded with the Help
Infrastructure Subsector (EIS). For example, it has served
America Vote Act of 2002 (HAVA; P.L. 107-252). Among
as an intermediary between DHS and state and local
other changes, such as setting certain national requirements
election officials, helped launch the EIS’s Government and
for election administration, HAVA created a federal agency
Sector Coordinating Councils, and participated in EIS
to help states, territories, and localities administer federal
training exercises. For more on the EIS, see CRS In Focus
elections: the U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC).
IF10677, The Designation of Election Systems as Critical
Infrastructure, by Eric A. Fischer.
Proposals have since been introduced both to terminate the
EAC and to extend or expand it. Most recently, the agency
Structure
has taken on new roles as part of the federal response to
The EAC consists of a four-member commission, an Office
attempted foreign interference in the 2016 elections.
of Inspector General (OIG), and a staff, assisted by three
advisory bodies: a Standards Board, a Board of Advisors,
Duties
and a Technical Guidelines Development Committee.
States, territories, and localities have traditionally had
primary responsibility for administering elections. Some
The Standards Board and Board of Advisors review
were concerned that creating a federal election
proposed voluntary guidance, including the VVSG, and
administration agency would shift that balance.
consult on tasks like research and long-term planning. The
Technical Guidelines Development Committee, which
Congress responded by restricting the EAC’s ability to
includes representatives of the two boards and is chaired by
compel state, territorial, or local action. The EAC is not
the Director of the National Institute of Standards and
charged with enforcing HAVA’s national requirements, and
Technology (NIST), helps develop the VVSG.
its rulemaking authority is limited to the voter registration
form and reports required by the National Voter
The members of the commission, who are required to have
Registration Act of 1993 (P.L. 103-31).
elections experience or expertise, are recommended by
congressional leaders, nominated by the President, and
Most of the EAC’s duties are aimed instead at incentivizing
subject to Senate confirmation. No more than two of the
action via funding or facilitating action by collecting and
four may be affiliated with the same political party, and
sharing information. HAVA assigned the agency a number
each may serve up to two four-year terms.
of responsibilities, including
HAVA mandates a three-vote majority for actions that
administering formula payments to states, territories,
require commission approval, such as adopting the VVSG.
and the District of Columbia (D.C.) to make general
The EAC lacked that policymaking quorum from December
improvements to election administration, replace lever
2010 to January 2015 and again for just over 10 months
and punch card voting systems, and comply with
following the departure of Commissioner Matthew
HAVA’s national requirements;
Masterson in March 2018; see Figure 1 for details.
awarding grants for youth voter participation initiatives
and voting technology research and pilot programs;
Figure 1. EAC Commissioner Terms of Service
certifying voting systems and accrediting voting system
testing laboratories;
adopting voluntary voting system guidelines (VVSG)
and voluntary guidance for complying with HAVA’s
national requirements;
collecting and sharing data and best practices; and
conducting election administration research.
The EAC has also taken on new roles in response to foreign
election interference efforts. According to the U.S.
Intelligence Community, Russian hackers targeted state
Source: CRS, based on data from the EAC and Congress.gov.
election systems in 2016. The U.S. Department of
Homeland Security (DHS) responded in January 2017 by
In 2018, President Donald Trump nominated Donald
designating election systems as critical infrastructure.
Palmer to succeed Commissioner Masterson and Benjamin
Hovland to the seat vacated by Commissioner Rosemary
Rodriguez in 2009. Both nominees were confirmed by the
https://crsreports.congress.gov
link to page 2 link to page 2 link to page 2 link to page 2 The U.S. Election Assistance Commission: An Overview
Senate in January 2019 and took office in February 2019,
restoring the commission’s quorum.
Table 1. Proposed and Enacted Funding for EAC Operations from FY2006 to FY2019 (nominal $, in millions)
Figures for the House and Senate reflect chamber-passed, committee-reported, or other proposed levels, as indicated
Fiscal Year
06
07
08
09
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
Enacted
11.4
11.3
13.1
12.9
13.4
13.1
8.8
8.8
8.1
8.1
8.1
8.2
8.6
8.0
President
14.8
12.0
12.2
12.7
13.3
13.6
10.5
8.8
8.3
8.1
8.1
8.3
7.7
7.7
Housea
13.1
12.0
12.2
12.9
13.4
12.7
5.2
4.4
0.0
0.0
4.8
4.9
5.5
8.6b
Senatea
9.9
12.1
12.2
12.7
13.3
13.6
11.5
8.8
8.3
8.1
8.1
8.1
7.7
7.7
Source: CRS, based on data from the President’s budget requests and appropriations bil s, drafts, and reports.
Notes: Figures are from appropriations for EAC salaries and expenses, including funds designated for the OIG. They are rounded and do not
reflect rescissions, sequestration reductions, or funds designated for NIST, mock election grants, or the Help America Vote College Program.
a. Figures for the House and Senate indicate the latest chamber-specific action: bold for a chamber-passed bil and regular text for a
measure that did not pass the chamber. With the exception of the Senate figures for FY2015 and FY2018, which are from the
subcommittee bil and committee chairman’s draft, respectively, figures in regular text are from committee-reported measures.
b. This figure reflects the level in House-passed bil H.R. 6147. The House later passed other bil s that would have provided other funding
levels.
Funding
Legislative Activity
The EAC has received funding for operational expenses,
HAVA explicitly authorized funding for EAC operations
such as staff salaries, and for the payments and grants it
for three years, but it provided for commissioners to serve
administers. The majority of its funding to date has been for
up to two four-year terms and did not include a sunset
formula payments to states, territories, and D.C.
provision for the agency. That has left room for debate
about how permanent the EAC should be.
HAVA authorized $3.65 billion for formula payments.
Congress appropriated close to $3 billion of that total—
Some say that the duties the EAC performs are essential to
including some for the U.S. General Services
assuring fair and accurate elections and that they could not
Administration to distribute while the EAC was being set
be carried out as effectively by other agencies. Emphasizing
up—in the first two fiscal years after HAVA was enacted. It
that the EAC is the only federal agency dedicated to helping
appropriated another $285 million to the EAC for formula
states, territories, and localities administer elections, they
payments between FY2008 and FY2010.
have called for it to be officially reauthorized. In some
cases, they have also proposed expanding its duties or
Almost 90% of the HAVA funding for formula payments
authority. Such proposals have ranged from adding new
had been appropriated by the end of FY2010. Citing the
versions of its existing responsibilities, such as
distribution of most of that funding, as well as concerns
administering new grants, to making more extensive
about the EAC’s efficiency and effectiveness, the House
changes, such as striking the limit on EAC rulemaking.
Appropriations Committee recommended reducing the
President’s FY2012 request for EAC operations by 50%.
Others have viewed the agency as more temporary.
Legislation to terminate the EAC was introduced in each
The committee recommended similar or more substantial
Congress from the 112th through the 115th. When legislation
cuts in subsequent years. The House approved some of the
to terminate the EAC was first introduced, the agency was
committee’s recommendations, although the enacted
nearing the end of some of the bigger projects it had been
appropriations bills have hewed more closely to presidential
assigned by HAVA. The National Association of
and Senate proposals; see Table 1 for details.
Secretaries of State, which represents many states’ top
Congress appropriated additional funding to the EAC for
election officials, had also renewed a resolution the
HAVA formula payments in March 2018, following the
previous year calling for the EAC’s elimination. As a result,
reports of 2016 foreign interference efforts. According to
some Members of Congress said at the time that the agency
the explanatory statement accompanying the bill, Congress
had outlived its usefulness and should be disbanded, with
intended the $380 million appropriation to be used to help
outstanding duties transferred to other entities.
secure elections. For more on this funding, see CRS In
The 115th Congress saw legislative activity on both sides of
Focus IF10925, State Election Reform Payments: FY2018
the debate. Legislation to terminate the EAC was
Appropriations, by Karen L. Shanton.
reintroduced in January 2017. There were also proposals to
In the following funding cycle—for FY2019—the House
extend or expand the agency, including bills that would
Appropriations Committee recommended increasing
have directed it to award grants for post-election audits and
funding for EAC operations above the President’s $7.7
to form an election cybersecurity advisory panel. None of
million budget request, to $8.6 million. The enacted bill
that legislation was enacted.
included $8.0 million for EAC operations.
For more on the EAC, see CRS Report R45770, The U.S.
Election Assistance Commission: Overview and Selected
Issues for Congress, by Karen L. Shanton.
https://crsreports.congress.gov
The U.S. Election Assistance Commission: An Overview
Karen L. Shanton, Analyst in American National
Government
IF10981
Disclaimer
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 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 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 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 copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.
https://crsreports.congress.gov | IF10981 · VERSION 6 · UPDATED