1	THE HELP AMERICA VOTE ACT OF 2002 AND GEORGIA’S ELECTION REFORM EFFORTS
2	Overview of Election Reform Initiatives Georgia’s Leadership and Compliance with Federal Mandates
3	I. Impetus for Change: 2000 Presidential Election 2000 Presidential Election, Florida experienced a 2.9% “under vote”; Georgia election revealed a 3.5% “under vote” rate with 93,991 ballots not registering a vote Election systems in Georgia counties were a patchwork of dated technologies: “paper ballots” - 2 counties; “lever machines” - 73 counties; “optical scan system” - 67 counties; and “punch card systems” - 17 counties (representing about one-third of the electorate)
4	I. Impetus for Change: 2000 Presidential Election Secretary of State Cathy Cox issued a report to the Governor and General Assembly entitled, “The 2000 Election: A Wake-up Call for Reform and Change” , 16 major areas of election-related concerns; Proposed reform initiatives to modernize elections and return voter confidence
5	II. Georgia Response: 2001 Election Reform Legislation In response to call for election reform, Senate Bill 213 introduced which: Proposed a statewide, uniform method of voting in county, state and federal elections by July 2004 Created the “21^st Century Voting Commission” Authorized a pilot project to evaluate electronic voting systems in the 2001 municipal General Elections Eliminated Non-Partisan Primaries (which allowed the Non-partisan elections to be completed in July and not added to the length of the General Election Ballot) Centralized removal of deceased Georgians from voting rolls Created a 15-word short title for constitutional amendments Final passage of SB 213 was 50-0 in the Senate and 165-1 in the House
6	III. 21^st Century Voting Commission & 13 City Pilot Project with DRE 18-member bi-partisan Commission charged with overseeing DRE pilot project and making election reform recommendations to Governor and General Assembly - Commission conducted five regional public meetings, numerous subcommittee meetings, observed elections in other states using DRE systems Pilot Project - Largest pilot project ever conducted in the nation - Tested six different certified DRE voting systems in 13 cities representing very diverse environments; - DRE voting systems rated by voters and election administrators as an overwhelming success (In Statesboro, blind voter casts independent ballot for first-time in state)
7	IV. Georgia Response - Part II: 2002 Election Reform Legislation ● Governor recommended and General Assembly approved $54 million for purchase of a statewide uniform electronic voting system - allocated voter education funding of $3.8 million (1^st time) - $500,000 for election official training & support at Kennesaw State University-Center for Elections (“KSU”) ● Legislation proposed in anticipation of federal mandates (Senate Bill 414) proposed: - Provisions for electronic voting - Establishment of “Provisional Voting” - Discontinued use of punch card voting systems (April 1, 2003) ● Final passage of SB 414 was 45-0 in the Senate and 155-8 in the House
8	V. SUEV Deployment & Voter Education - 159 Counties Voting Commission identifies the success of any DRE voting system depends on: - System Training; Voter education; Poll worker training; and election official Training Nine vendors submit bids to implement and deploy statewide voting system Evaluation committee recommends Diebold Election Systems, Inc. as best value for the State State enters contract with Diebold on May 3, 2002 (186 days prior to Election Day)
9	V. SUEV Deployment & Voter Education - 159 Counties State created uniform poll worker training video, voter education video and 30-second public service announcement Regional and county “Voter Education Coordinators” conduct hands-on DRE demonstrations in every county 22,015 Touch Screen voting stations; 160 absentee ballot systems; and 160 system servers deployed to each county Each Touch Screen tested at least 4 times Manufactures testing; KSU Warehouse testing Acceptance testing at county level and “logic and accuracy” testing by local election official with actual General Election ballot
10	V. SUEV Deployment & Voter Education - 159 Counties Election officials provided training - 2 day course offered by Diebold - On-site training conducted by the KSU - Regional “refresher” sessions conducted by SOS Poll worker training (2 per precinct for all 2,925 precincts) - Training in the county by Diebold - On demand training by KSU; repeat training by KSU Deployment plan, election official training, and voter education contribute to successful 2002 General Election 2002 Under vote rate in Senate election reduced to 0.86% (compared to 2000 Presidential election of 3.5% and 1998 U.S. Senate election of 4.8%)
11	VI. Federal Election Reform: “Help America Vote Act of 2002” After 2000 Presidential Election, Congress initiated federal election reform efforts - House Bill 3295 “Ney-Hoyer” adopted December 12, 2001 - Senate Bill 565 “Dodd-McConnell” adopted April 11, 2002 Congress reaches agreement on final version of federal election reform bill, HR 3295 the “Help America Vote Act of 2002” - Enacted October 29, 2002 - Authorized $3.86 billion over 3 year period - Established several federal mandates - No funding appropriated in the Bill; Unfunded mandate
12	VI. Federal Election Reform: “Help America Vote Act of 2002” ● On February 20, 2003, President Bush signed Omnibus Federal Appropriations Bill which included $1.5 billion as first-year funding for the Help America Vote Act. Funds allocated in the following manner: - Title I - $650 Million - Title II - $833 Million - Election Assistance Commission - $2 Million - Grants for Accessible Polling Places - $13 Million - Protection and Advocacy System - $2 Million - Help America Vote College Program - $1.5 Million - Help America Vote Foundation - $1.5 Million - Operational expenses for General Services Administration - $500,000.00
13	VI. Federal Election Reform: “Help America Vote Act of 2002” Title I: Section 101 - “Early Money” Reform Initiative Planning $325 million Election Assistance Funding $500,000.00 Section 102 - Replace Punch Card & Lever machines $325 million Title II: Section 251 – “Requirements Payments” $833 million
14	VII. HAVA Provisions & Mandates - Georgia Status
15	VII. HAVA Provisions & Mandates - Georgia Status
16	VII. HAVA Provisions & Mandates - Georgia Status
17	VII. HAVA Provisions & Mandates - Georgia Status
18	VII. HAVA Provisions & Mandates - Georgia Status
19	VII. HAVA Provisions & Mandates - Georgia Status
20	VII. HAVA Provisions & Mandates - Georgia Status
21	VII. HAVA Provisions & Mandates - Georgia Status
22	VII. HAVA Provisions & Mandates - Georgia Status
23	VII. HAVA Provisions & Mandates - Georgia Status
24	VII. HAVA Provisions & Mandates - Georgia Status
25	HAVA Provisions & Mandates - Georgia Status
26	VIII. Georgia’s Efforts to Conform to the “Help America Vote Act of 2002” To comply with the federal mandates and qualify for Title II requirements payments, the Secretary of State has proposed legislation to amend the current Election Code Senators Renee Unterman, Jeff Mullis, Jack Hill and Meyer von Bremen sponsored Senate Bill 258 to revise seven areas of law in the Election Code that are not currently in compliance with the Help America Vote mandates
27	VIII. Provisions Requiring Legislation for Georgia to Achieve HAVA Compliance SB 258 amends the Election Code in the following manner to fulfill the mandates of the Help America Vote Act: Define what constitutes a vote - Amends Code Section 21-2-31 to authorize the creation of a uniform vote definition for all systems used in Georgia; and establishes procedures to create a vote review panel in each County to review absentee ballots at the central voting precinct
28	VIII. Provisions Requiring Legislation for Georgia to Achieve HAVA Compliance Registration of first-time voters by mail - Amends Code Section 21-2-220 to require individuals registering by mail for the 1^st time, who have not previously voted to show identification when 1) registering, 2) voting by mail, or 3) voting in person Military and Overseas Ballots – Amends to Code Section 21-2-219 to allow applications for absentee ballots for military and overseas voters to be valid for two election cycles; also requires the State to compile data related to military and overseas ballots
29	VIII. Provisions Requiring Legislation for Georgia to Achieve HAVA Compliance Provisional Ballots Amends Code Section 21-2-418 requiring that ballots cast as a result of extended voting hours be treated as provisional ballots; also requires instructions regarding the results of provisional ballot counting, and access to a free information system be provided Absentee Ballot Instructions – Amends Code Section 21-2-384 requiring absentee ballot instructions to include explicit instructions on “over votes” and how “over votes” may be corrected
30	IX. Georgia Response-Part III: 2003 Conforming to HAVA Mandates Upon implementing the above amendments and performing a few administrative functions required by the Help America Vote Act, the State of Georgia will be eligible to receive its portion of the federal funding appropriated in the Help America Vote Act as described below:
31	X. Election Reform Funding HAVA allocates separate “pots” of funding to the respective titles; the amounts for each pot is calculated using different formulas; the funds in each pot must be utilized for specific purposes set forth in HAVA The table below outlines Georgia’s anticipated portion of the federal funding, the use and availability of the funding and an estimated timetable for when the funding will arrive:
32
33	X. Election Reform Funding Title I funding referred to as Early Money Out, will be available to the State, upon the State providing specific information to the General Services Administration through its Website as early as April 29, 2003 Title II funding will be available upon the State submitting its HAVA State Plan to the Election Assistance Commission before the end of the Federal Fiscal Year
34	XI. Steps to Claiming Federal Funding – Create State Plan Unlike any other state in the nation, Georgia has planned and implemented substantially (95 to 99%) of all reforms required by HAVA. As a result, our “State Plan” will represent a summary of the successful steps taken and events leading up to the November 2002 General Election, as well as plans for upgrading and improving the efficiency of the statewide voter registration system, and continuing the voter education and election official training for years to come
35	XI. Steps to Claiming Federal Funding - State Plan The State Plan shall be created by the Chief Election Official through a committee composed of: - the local election officials of the two most populous jurisdictions in the State - other elections officials - stake holders and interest groups - other citizens appointed by the Chief State Election Official The Plan must be published and made available for inspection and comment for at least 30 days prior to submission to the Election Assistance Commission for publication in the Federal Register. The Election Assistance Commission shall publish the Plan for 45 days in the Federal Register
36	XI. Steps to Claiming Federal Funding - State Plan The State Plan shall contain the following categories and descriptions of: 1. How the requirements payments will be used 2. How the state will distribute and monitor the spending of the funds, including criteria for receiving funds and performance measures 3. How the state will provide voter education, election official education, and poll worker training to meet Title III Requirements 4. How the State will adopt voting system guidelines and processes for meeting Title III requirements
37	XI. Steps to Claiming Federal Funding - State Plan 5. How the State will establish an Election Fund and manage the fund 6. Proposed budget for conducting the Title III compliance activities. (cost of activities, portion of requirements payments to meet and conduct these activities, and cost for other activities) 7. How the state will maintain its level of state spending prior to November 2000 in relation to spending of requirements payments
38	XI. Steps to Claiming Federal Funding - State Plan 8. How the State will adopt performance goals and measures that will be used to determine the success of the local government and county officials in carrying out the plan, including timetables for meeting elements of the plan; performance measures criteria, official responsible for measuring performance 9. A description of the administrative complaint procedure 10. A description of how Title I payments will affect activities to be carried out under the Plan, and an amount available for each activity
39	XI. Steps to Claiming Federal Funding - State Plan 11. A description of how the State will conduct ongoing management of the Plan 12. If applicable, the Plan must indicate changes made to any previously existing State plan prior to a requirements payment year and a report on the previous FY state plan success 13. A description of the committee that participated in the development of the State Plan
40	Summary of Georgia Elections and the Help America Vote Act of 2002 HAVA imposes a number of election reform mandates and provides federal funding to achieve the mandates The State of Georgia is approximately 95-99% in compliance with the HAVA mandates Legislation has been proposed to bring Georgia into full (100%) compliance with the HAVA mandates in 2003 The State Plan is currently in the Drafting phase The HAVA State Planning Committee has been convened The HAVA State Plan is scheduled to be available for publication as early as June 1, 2003
41	HAVA State Planning Committee Makeup Chief State Election Official for the State of Georgia and staff Chief Election Officials from the two largest counties: Gloria Champion - Fulton County Linda Latimore - DeKalb County Stakeholders: (One representative from each group) Asian Community Hispanic Community League of Women Voters Georgia Coalition of Black Women NAACP AARP Federation of the Blind Protection & Advocacy Group County Election Officials: Richmond County; Chatham County; Columbia County; Gwinnett County; Morgan County; Baldwin County; Hall County; Forsyth County; Chattahoochee County