{ "id": "R45549", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "number": "R45549", "active": true, "source": "EveryCRSReport.com", "versions": [ { "source": "EveryCRSReport.com", "id": 592567, "date": "2019-03-04", "retrieved": "2019-12-20T19:50:13.428600", "title": "The State and Local Role in Election Administration: Duties and Structures", "summary": "The administration of elections in the United States is highly decentralized. Elections are primarily administered by thousands of state and local systems rather than a single, unified national system.\nStates and localities share responsibility for most election administration duties. Exactly how responsibilities are assigned at the state and local levels varies both between and within states, but there are some general patterns in the distribution of duties. States typically have primary responsibility for making decisions about the rules of elections (policymaking). Localities typically have primary responsibility for conducting elections in accordance with those rules (implementation). Localities, with varying contributions from states, typically also have primary responsibility for paying for the activities and resources required to conduct elections (funding).\nThe structures of the state and local systems that conduct elections also vary between and within states. Common variations include differences related to the leadership of the system, the relationship between local election officials and the state, and the population size and density of the jurisdiction the system serves. The leadership of a state or local election system may be elected or appointed, and both the leaders and the methods used to select them may be partisan, bipartisan, or nonpartisan. State officials may have more or less direct influence over local election officials, and the extent of their influence may be affected by other structural features of the state\u2019s election systems, such as the methods used to select local officials. Finally, larger election jurisdictions have different administrative advantages and challenges than smaller ones, and more urban jurisdictions have different advantages and challenges than more rural ones. These differences between jurisdictions may be reflected in structural features of the election systems that serve them, such as how the systems allocate resources and where they find specialized expertise.\nUnderstanding the duties and structures of state and local election systems may be relevant to Congress for at least two reasons. First, the way state and local election systems work can affect how well federal action on election administration serves its intended purposes. The effectiveness of federal action depends in part on how it is implemented. How it is implemented can depend, in turn, on how the state and local election systems that implement it work. Second, Congress can make or incentivize changes to the way state and local election systems work. Congress has a number of policy tools it can use to affect the administration of federal elections. The use of these tools can\u2014either intentionally or unintentionally\u2014affect the state and local election systems that administer federal elections.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "active": true, "formats": [ { "format": "HTML", "encoding": "utf-8", "url": "https://www.crs.gov/Reports/R45549", "sha1": "3eadb8deab0b6ff9b2201986bb0aef925f2e969d", "filename": "files/20190304_R45549_3eadb8deab0b6ff9b2201986bb0aef925f2e969d.html", "images": {} }, { "format": "PDF", "encoding": null, "url": "https://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/R45549", "sha1": "24cb977993f4f4b2a1a7fbd7a3e2ba0e32aafbf6", "filename": "files/20190304_R45549_24cb977993f4f4b2a1a7fbd7a3e2ba0e32aafbf6.pdf", "images": {} } ], "topics": [ { "source": "IBCList", "id": 4833, "name": "Census, Redistricting, Voting, & Elections" } ] } ], "topics": [ "American Law" ] }