INSIGHTi
Elections Grant Funding for States: Recent
Appropriations and Legislative Proposals
September 18, 2020
The emergence of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and reports of attempted election
interference have introduced new chal enges for election administration that are ongoing, difficult for
states and localities to manage alone, or both. Election security threats evolve, for example, and election
officials’ defenses have to evolve with them. Securing election systems against potential interference and
protecting voters and election workers against a pandemic may involve significant changes to election
processes and correspondingly significant financial investments.
Congress has responded to such chal enges, in part, with funding for elections grant programs. As of this
writing, Congress has appropriated more than $1.2 bil ion to the U.S. Election Assistance Commission
(EAC) for grant funding for states, territories, and the District of Columbia (DC) since FY2018 and
considered proposals that would authorize or fund further grant programs.
Recent Appropriations
Congress has provided the EAC with appropriations for grant funding for states, territories, and DC in
three recent acts:
 Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018 (P.L. 115-141): $380 mil ion (hereinafter,
“FY2018 funds”)
 Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2020 (P.L. 116-93): $425 mil ion (“FY2020 funds”)
 Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act (P.L. 116-136): $400
mil ion (“CARES Act funds”)
Funding was provided for the FY2018 and FY2020 funds following reports of attempted election
interference and for the CARES Act funds in response to the emergence of COVID-19.
In al three cases, the funding was appropriated under a grant program authorized by Sections 101, 103,
and 104 of the Help America Vote Act of 2002 (HAVA; 52 U.S.C. §§20901-21145). As authorized by
HAVA, the program was set up to make grant funds available to the 50 states, DC, American Samoa,
Guam, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands (hereinafter, “HAVA states”) for general improvements to
the administration of federal elections. However, the appropriations acts that provided the funding
Congressional Research Service
https://crsreports.congress.gov
IN11508
CRS INSIGHT
Prepared for Members and
Committees of Congress

---

link to page 2 link to page 2 link to page 2 link to page 2 link to page 2 link to page 2 link to page 2 link to page 2 link to page 2 link to page 2 link to page 2 link to page 2 link to page 2 link to page 2 Congressional Research Service
2
included substantive provisions that modified or supplemented some parameters of the program and the
use of funds. For details of those changes, see Table 1.
Table 1. Comparison of Original HAVA General Improvements Grant Program with
FY2018, FY2020, and CARES Act Grant Funds
Original General

Improvements
FY2018 Funds
FY2020 Funds
CARES Act Funds
Grant Program
Uses
Making general
Making general
Making general
Preventing, preparing
improvements to
improvements to the
improvements to the
for, and responding
the administration
administration of
administration of
to the coronavirus in
of federal elections
federal elections,
federal elections,
the 2020 federal
including enhancing
including enhancing
election cycle
election technology and election technology and
making election
making election
security improvementsa
security improvementsa
Guaranteed minimum




award amounts




50 states and DC:
$5 mil ionb
$3 mil ion
$3 mil ion
$3 mil ionc
Eligible territories:
$1 mil ionb
$600,000
$600,000
$600,000c
Eligible recipients
HAVA states
HAVA states
HAVA states and the
HAVA states and
Commonwealth of the
CNMIc
Northern Mariana
Islands (CNMI)
Spending deadlined
—
—
—
December 31, 2020
Match requiremente
—
5%
20%
20%c
Reporting
—f
—f
—f
Within 20 days of an
requirement
election in the 2020
federal election cycle
Source: CRS, based on review of the U.S. Code and relevant appropriations measures.
Notes: This table compares selected parameters of the general improvements grant program as original y authorized by
HAVA to corresponding parameters of the FY2018, FY2020, and CARES Act funds.
a. Explanatory statements accompanying these acts listed some election security-specific purposes for which recipients
may use the funds. Guidance from the EAC fol owing the emergence of COVID-19 clarified that these funds—as wel
as some other funding previously appropriated under HAVA—may be used to cover certain costs incurred as a result
of the pandemic.
b. These minimums were for the combination of grant awards under HAVA’s general improvements and lever and
punch card voting system replacement grant programs.
c. A general provision of the CARES Act (§23003) extended these parameters of the FY2020 funds to the CARES Act
funds.
d. Recipients are required to return any funds that have not been obligated as of this deadline.
e. According to the EAC, some eligible territories have been exempted from these match requirements.
f.
Recipients of these funds are subject to reporting requirements, as specified by the EAC, but the acts themselves did
not set financial reporting requirements.
Legislative Proposals
Other bil s related to EAC-administered grant funding for states, territories, and DC have been introduced
in the 116th Congress. Recent bil s include proposals to

---

Congressional Research Service
3

 Adjust the parameters of previously appropriated funds: Some have expressed
concern that certain conditions on funding, such as the CARES Act’s spending deadline
and match and reporting requirements, could make it difficult for states to use the funds
or for election officials to perform some of their other duties. Provisions of bil s such as
the Natural Disaster and Emergency Bal ot Act of 2020 (S. 4033), Secure Our Elections
Act (H.R. 6777), and State Elections Preparedness Act (S. 3778) would repeal some such
conditions, modify them, or permit them to be waived.
 Appropriate further funding: A House-passed FY2021 consolidated appropriations act
(H.R. 7617; passed 217-197) would provide $500 mil ion for grant funding for replacing
direct-recording electronic voting (DRE) machines and other elections-related purposes,
for example, and the Heroes Act (H.R. 6800; passed the House 208-199) would provide
$3.6 bil ion for elections contingency planning, preparation, and resilience.
Authorize new grant programs: Approximately 50 bil s have been introduced in the 116th
Congress that would authorize EAC-administered grant programs for states, territories, and DC.
Some of the proposed programs—including some that would be established by the
DemocracyCorps Act (S. 3822), Emergency Assistance for Safe Elections (EASE) Act (H.R.
7905), or VoteSafe Act of 2020 (H.R. 6807/H.R. 7068/S. 3725)—would provide funding
specifical y to help address election interference or COVID-19. Others, like some of the
programs in the Nonpartisan Bil for the People Act of 2019 (H.R. 1612) and Voter
Empowerment Act of 2019 (H.R. 1275/S. 549), would address other aspects of election
administration, such as more general efforts to improve pol worker recruitment and training.

Author Information

Karen L. Shanton

Analyst in American National Government




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.

IN11508 · VERSION 1 · NEW

---