Overview
Title
To amend the Help America Vote Act of 2002 to establish deadlines for States to count the ballots cast in elections for Federal office and to certify the results of elections for Federal office, and for other purposes.
ELI5 AI
H.R. 2694 wants to make sure that when people vote in big elections, most of the votes are counted quickly, kind of like a school race where they quickly declare a winner. If states don't follow these new rules, they might not get special money to help with voting in the future, unless they fix things.
Summary AI
H.R. 2694, also known as the "Election Results Accountability Act," proposes changes to the Help America Vote Act of 2002. It sets strict deadlines for states to count ballots and certify election results for federal offices, requiring that 90% of ballots be counted within 72 hours and results certified within two weeks of polling closure. The bill allows for certain exceptions, such as emergencies or technical issues, and seeks to enforce these rules by potentially withholding election administration funds from non-compliant states unless they present a corrective plan. These new rules would apply to elections occurring 90 days after the bill's enactment.
Published
Keywords AI
Sources
Bill Statistics
Size
Language
Complexity
AnalysisAI
General Summary of the Bill
The bill, titled the "Election Results Accountability Act," proposes amendments to the Help America Vote Act of 2002. Its main goal is to establish clear deadlines for counting ballots and certifying results in federal elections. Specifically, it mandates that states count at least 90% of votes within 72 hours after polls close and that final results be certified within two weeks. There are exceptions for states experiencing emergencies or technical difficulties. Non-compliant states risk losing federal election administration funds unless they present a plan for compliance.
Summary of Significant Issues
One of the primary issues with the bill is the feasibility of the 72-hour deadline for counting 90% of ballots. This requirement may be challenging for states with large populations or complex voting systems, which could lead to rushed processes and increased errors in vote counting. Another major concern is the potential penalty for non-compliance, as withholding election administration funds could disproportionately affect smaller or less well-resourced states, ultimately impacting voters in those areas.
The bill also presents broad exceptions for compliance, such as technical difficulties and bona fide emergencies, without offering a clear definition or criteria for these terms. This ambiguity may result in inconsistent application across states and potential misuse. Furthermore, the process for certifying compliance by the Commission and the Attorney General lacks detailed guidelines, risking inconsistencies in enforcement.
Impact on the Public
For the general public, the bill aims to create an efficient and timely election process by providing set deadlines for counting and certifying election results. Ideally, this could lead to quicker election outcomes and increased public confidence in the electoral system's transparency and reliability.
However, the strict deadlines may pressure election officials to prioritize speed over accuracy, leading to potential counting errors. States failing to meet deadlines could face financial penalties, potentially affecting election administration in future races. Such outcomes might inadvertently disenfranchise voters, especially in states with fewer resources.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
Election officials and workers would bear the brunt of implementing these changes, facing increased pressure to quickly process and certify results. While some stakeholders may welcome clear timelines to ensure timely election results, officials might struggle to meet the deadlines without adequate resources or support.
State governments could face financial penalties if deemed non-compliant, potentially affecting their ability to conduct future elections effectively. Conversely, the bill could encourage improvements in election infrastructure and procedures if states invest in enhancing their systems to meet the newly imposed deadlines.
Voters, particularly in smaller or financially constrained states, could experience negative consequences if funding cuts impact the quality and reliability of election processes. Clearer guidelines and more flexible timelines might minimize these risks.
Overall, while the bill aims to improve election accountability, its implementation could create challenges that require careful consideration and possible adjustments to ensure positive outcomes for all stakeholders involved.
Issues
The feasibility of the 72-hour deadline for counting 90% of ballots (Section 2(305)(a)(1)) may be unrealistic for many states, especially those with large populations or complex voting systems, potentially leading to rushed processes and errors.
Withholding election administration funds from non-compliant states (Section 2(305)(c)) could disproportionately penalize states that struggle to meet deadlines, impacting voters without addressing root causes of delays, which may be financial or structural.
The exceptions provided under Section 2(305)(b), such as 'technical difficulties' and 'bona fide emergencies', are broad and could lead to inconsistent application or potential abuse, with insufficient accountability mechanisms in place.
The process for certifying compliance by the Commission and the Attorney General lacks specificity (Section 2(305)(c)), which could lead to ambiguity and inconsistencies in how compliance is assessed and enforced across different states.
The bill's language lacks clarity on the criteria for assessing and verifying a 'bona fide emergency' (Section 2(305)(b)(1)), which could be prone to misuse or uneven application across different circumstances.
The absence of a mechanism for appealing fund withholding decisions (Section 2(305)(c)) leaves states without recourse if they believe they have been unfairly judged as non-compliant, potentially leading to political or legal challenges.
The criteria for what constitutes 'new election procedures or reforms' (Section 2(305)(b)(3)) are vague, providing limited guidance on compliance during the first election after such changes, raising concerns about what measures states must meet.
Sections
Sections are presented as they are annotated in the original legislative text. Any missing headers, numbers, or non-consecutive order is due to the original text.
1. Short title Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The first section of the act states that it will be known as the "Election Results Accountability Act."
2. Establishment of deadlines for counting ballots and certifying results of Federal elections Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The bill establishes deadlines for counting ballots and certifying election results for federal elections. States must count at least 90% of ballots within 72 hours after polls close and certify final results within two weeks, with exceptions for emergencies and technical issues. If a state fails to comply without valid reasons, it could lose election administration funding unless it presents a corrective plan.
305. Deadlines for counting ballots and certifying results Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The text outlines the deadlines for states to count and certify election results for federal elections. States must count 90% of ballots within 72 hours and certify the results within two weeks, unless exceptions like emergencies or technical difficulties occur. States failing to meet these deadlines without a certified exception may lose election administration funding unless they submit and implement a compliance plan.