WASHINGTON — The federal government has tried for years to enhance election security through a popular grant program. But wildly fluctuating funding levels have made it arduous for state agencies to plan their budgets and projects.
Election officials say the grants are especially critical because of increasing misinformation and disinformation about elections, often fueled by conspiracy theories, as well as threats against poll workers.
But Republicans in the U.S. House of Representatives want to cut funding for election security grants – known as the “Help America Vote Act” or “HAVA grants” – in this year’s budget process. A plan they already failed to achieve last year.
“We continue to needlessly risk the integrity of our elections and American democracy,” Democratic Rep. Sanford Bishop of Georgia said Thursday during committee debate on the funding bill.
Bishop, a ranking member of the House Appropriations Committee, said he was “concerned about the outdated and insecure election systems across the country that pose a very, very serious threat to our national security and our democratic system.”
“It is irresponsible to ignore this wake-up call,” Bishop added. “Our nation’s electoral systems are currently and continually under attack from foreign actors who threaten our democratic values.”
The Republican-led House Budget Committee passed the bill but did not provide any funding for the grants.
Gideon Cohn-Postar, legislative director at Issue One & Issue One Action, said in an interview with States Newsroom that while the grants have traditionally been awarded by both parties, several factors have influenced support for the program in recent years.
“Many Republicans in the House and Senate continue to support this strategy,” Cohn-Postar said. “But I believe it is also implicated in some of the misinformation about the election that began to spread in 2020.”
Former President Donald Trump, now the likely Republican presidential candidate, has continued to falsely claim that the 2020 election was stolen.
Issue One’s website states that the organization strives to “unite Republicans, Democrats and independents in the movement to fix our broken political system and build an inclusive democracy that works for everyone.”
Reduction in subsidies
Congress approved $55 million in election security grants during the last budget process, which concluded this spring. The move came after the Republican-dominated House of Representatives, which had proposed zero dollars, conferred with the Democratic-dominated Senate, which had proposed $75 million in funding.
This final funding amount represented a decrease from the $75 million approved by Congress for both fiscal years 2023 and 2022.
Congress did not appropriate any funds for election grants in the fiscal year 2021 appropriations bill. However, Congress had already appropriated $425 million in last year’s bill and another $400 million in one of the COVID-19 emergency spending bills.
According to Cohn-Postar, several states have tried to keep their HAVA grants going for more than a year by spending less than they earned or saving the money for larger projects.
Louisiana, for example, has stopped spending grants on election security since 2018 in anticipation of reforming its electoral system. New Hampshire passed a state law that collects the grants in a foundation and then spends only a portion of them each year.
But that “cautious” budget planning and uncertainty about how much funding Congress could provide next year have led federal lawmakers to be skeptical about how states will operate the grants, Cohn-Postar said.
“The main thing we found is that about half of the states have only spent about half of their HAVA grants,” Cohn-Postar said. “And that’s brought up in every conversation Congress has about these grants. They say, ‘Hey, why should we approve more if you haven’t spent anything?'”
Congress, he said, sometimes uses states’ “careful and thoughtful budget planning as an excuse not to give them money.”
Republicans in Congress want to reduce federal spending overall and have made cuts to many of the 12 annual spending bills, including the Financial Services Act, which includes the HAVA grants, among other things.
“Incredibly important” in Maine
Shenna Bellows, Maine’s secretary of state, said in an interview that the grants were “incredibly important, especially given the lack of sustainable election funding from the federal government.”
“We have witnessed the rapid evolution of cybersecurity and election infrastructure threats over the past few years,” Bellows said. “As threats evolve, so must our preparedness. The election security grants are fundamental to our ability to invest in improvements to our central voter registration system and in cybersecurity protections for that system.”
The inability or unwillingness of Congress to create a predictable and stable funding program for the states to conduct federal elections is “regrettable,” she said.
“We are very proud that Maine has always had safe, free and secure elections,” Bellows said. “But make no mistake: The lack of sustainable, ongoing federal funding is a potential vulnerability going forward.”
Washington State Election Commissioner Stuart Holmes said in an interview that he plans his annual budget so that he does not receive HAVA grants for election security and would be pleasantly surprised if Congress did provide the funds.
“In my entire career, there have only been two rounds of HAVA that have been significant investments in elections,” Holmes said. “So getting an extra million dollars early in the year is a big surprise. But it makes it virtually impossible to prepare and plan anything when you need to spend it.”
The grants do not expire at the end of the fiscal year, and the federal government does not withdraw unspent funds, allowing states to operate the funds in different ways.
Holmes said in his interview with States Newsroom that the funds approved in fiscal year 2020 enabled the state to “build an entire team of cybersecurity experts dedicated to protecting our infrastructure.”
“In Washington state, we have a centralized voter registration and election management system, and never before have we had dedicated election professionals overseeing the protocols, preparing our system, testing our system and working with other professionals to conduct the testing,” Holmes said. “So we’re in a better position than we’ve ever been.”
Still, he said, “local election officials would certainly appreciate a stable source of funding from the federal government in connection with the federal elections.”
New Hampshire Election Fund
New Hampshire Secretary of State David M. Scanlan said that when Congress passed the HAVA program in 2002, states were told that the funds would primarily be used to build a statewide voter registration database, ensure that all polling places have accessible voting machines, train poll workers and implement voter education programs.
The New Hampshire State Legislature then asked the Secretary of State to operate the initial allocation from Congress to meet the requirements and to operate the remaining money to establish an election fund.
Originally, the Secretary of State could operate one-twentieth of the account’s total funds for annual costs associated with maintaining federal mandates, but currently this is one-twelfth of the fund’s total.
“New Hampshire has done a good job with the money we have, but there is no doubt that the funds have helped us implement security measures for our electronic systems,” Scanlan said.
The state used its federal election security grants to hire vendors specializing in electronic system security, he said.
When New Hampshire created a modern voter registration database, the state used the funds to ensure that the software did not contain any offensive substances.
“We’ve really taken care to make sure the systems we’re building are clean and that there’s nothing malicious lurking in the shadows,” Scanlan said. “We’ve taken some really good steps that give me real confidence that our systems are in good shape.”
Advocating for “continuous, reliable federal funding”
JP Martin, deputy communications director for the Arizona Secretary of State, declined States Newsroom’s request for an interview with the secretary of state and only offered to provide written answers to questions about the HAVA election security grants.
Martin wrote in an email that “the fluctuating level of federal funding has significantly impacted our strategic planning and budgeting.”
“The uncertainty of future allocations forces us to be cautious in spending and focus on priorities such as improving physical security measures for voting machines,” Martin wrote. “For example, securing the machines in cages — their increased weight now requires a truck equipped with a lift — highlights the challenges of addressing technological and financial constraints with limited HAVA funds.”
If Congress stops providing election security funding in the future, “it could place a significant burden on Arizona’s election infrastructure,” he wrote.
“A hiring freeze is currently in effect in the state, and our focus remains on supporting counties, especially given recent changes such as the date of the primary election and legislation extending ballot processing to weekends,” Martin wrote. “We value increased cybersecurity training and advocate for consistent, reliable federal funding to ensure the smooth conduct of elections, and stress the need for sustained financial support from Congress.”
