▶ 0:02:45Elections of the committee on house administration will come to order. The title of today's hearing is examining potential updates to the nvra. I note that a quorum is present. Without objection, the chair may declare a recess at any time. Also, without objection, the hearing record will remain open for five legislative days, so members may submit any materials they wish to be included therein.
▶ 0:03:08Today, the committee on house administration subcommittee on elections will continue its oversight of federal election law. 32 years ago, the national voter registration act, or the nvra, was passed with the goal of increasing voter registration, removing bureaucratic barriers, and ensuring states accurately maintain their voter rolls. Today, we will discuss ways to strengthen those original goals of the nvra.
▶ 0:03:34According to the election assistance commission today, over 86% of the eligible voting population are active registered voters. Contrast that to 1992, right before the law's passage, when registration was at 68%. That is a great thing for our democracy.
▶ 0:03:52As a former secretary of state, I believe it is incumbent on us as policy makers to continuously seek feedback from elections officials on the ground about what works, what can be improved, and how changes in technology and resources affect elections. Administration. Throughout my time as florida secretary of state and as a member of congress, I have had many of those discussions, including with other secretaries of state and local elections officials.
▶ 0:04:19This hearing will examine opportunities to update the nvra to strengthen voter confidence in our election laws and improve election administration. Thoughtful review and modernization of the nvra will improve elections, administration and remove barriers to efficiency.
▶ 0:04:38Currently, the nvra requires that states conduct a general program that makes reasonable effort to remove the names of ineligible voters from the official list of eligible voters. This ambiguous language has left courts to issue broad rulings about what constitutes general and reasonable. This ultimately means states are not required, and sometimes not even permitted, to remove ineligible voters due to errors on their registration form. Lack of U.S.
▶ 0:05:07Citizenship, criminal conviction, mental incapacity, or other reasons consistent with their state laws for which a registration may be invalid. Election officials benefit from clear and unambiguous laws, which both help them to carry out their duties and to ensure voter lists are accurate and up to date.
▶ 0:05:26We have had witnesses testify in this very room about how the nvra language actually prevents election officials from conducting robust list maintenance in the manner they think appropriate. Examples include the blackout period for list maintenance and delays in removing voters who have moved to a new jurisdiction. In some cases, a voter who has moved must request removal, and an election official must wait two general election cycles to remove a now ineligible or relocated voter.
▶ 0:05:53We must also recognize that modern technology has made certain provisions of the nvra obsolete. While 30 years have passed since the vra's enactment, many of the functions that still need to be performed can now be done more efficiently. As another example, the nvra language requires states to make voter rolls available for inspection by photocopying.
▶ 0:06:16As a result, a court of appeals has found that the state of alabama can charge enormous amounts for printing copies of its voter rolls, as opposed to producing and delivering digital copies for a fraction of that cost. This is another example of how evolving technology has highlighted the need for updating the nvra to better reflect the practical realities of today.
▶ 0:06:39Before concluding, I'd also like to touch on the importance of reviewing and clarifying the nvra when it comes to confirming a registrant's citizenship. The nvra does not currently require an applicant to prove their citizenship beyond an attestation clause in a signature. One recent example of this, which generated significant media headlines, is the recent arrest of ian roberts, an illegal immigrant who successfully registered to vote in maryland twice.
▶ 0:07:03Last week, chairman steele and I sent a letter to the maryland state board of elections seeking a detailed assessment of how a non us citizen was able to register to vote. And that letter was sent in furtherance of protecting the integrity of the franchise. The committee will continue to review this case or any case happening across the country. Let me end with something.
▶ 0:07:25I think we can all agree on improving the administration of our elections and ensuring voters voices remain heard should be central to all of these discussions. Elections officials on the ground need access to the right tools and clear direction in order to do this. I look forward to further discussing ways to improve our system to bolster election integrity and efficiency across the country. I thank our witnesses for being here today and I look forward to our conversation.
▶ 0:07:54With that, I yield to ranking member sewell for an opening statement. >> thank you, madam chair. As ranking member of the election subcommittee and the representative of alabama civil rights district, there's nothing more important to me than ensuring that every eligible voter can register to vote and cast their ballot without facing unnecessary barriers. But far too often, americans have to jump through unnecessary hurdles to try to make their voices heard. Ever since the 2020 election, the american people have been bombarded with misinformation.
▶ 0:08:25Disinformation about the integrity of our elections, lied to about the rampant voter fraud, and misled by false claims that the 2020 election was stolen. To make matters worse, state legislatures have used every tool in their toolkit to dispose at their disposal to enact new barriers to ballot to the ballot box. Just this year, 47 state legislatures attempted to pass 469 restrictive bills to make it even harder to vote.
▶ 0:08:52Many of these new laws were created to fuel the false narrative that our elections are not secure. Today, we are here to talk about the potential updates to the national voter registration act, a law passed in 1993 with the goal to increase voter participation.
▶ 0:09:09The nvra is a critical component to our federal voting legislation, and it provides vital access and protections to voters, as well as guardrails for election officials to conduct voter maintenance.
▶ 0:09:24I believe that proper voter list maintenance is an integral part of an election administration, but too often we have seen anti-democratic purges of eligible voters conducted in the name of valid list maintenance, and extremists will stop at nothing to try to convince the american people that non-citizens and dead people are voting.
▶ 0:09:43For example, in my home state of alabama, our secretary of state proudly proclaimed one day, uh, day one of his administration that he was removing alabama from, uh, the electronic voter registration information center, or eric, a nonprofit, nonpartisan membership organization of states that has proven to be one of the most effective tools for helping election officials maintain accurate rolls.
▶ 0:10:06Unfortunately, our secretary of state gave in to conspiracy theories and withdrew alabama from that organization with no plans for how he was going to replace that level of voter list maintenance information. To make matters worse, secretary allen was sued in the fall of 2024 after he attempted to conduct an illegal voter purge program ahead of the 2024 election, one that threatened to deny thousands of qualified citizens in alabama their right to vote.
▶ 0:10:35As we discuss any potential updates to the nvra, we must ensure that they are balanced and that they are, and that we ensure that we balance protecting access to the variety of voter registration opportunities and ensuring eligible voters are not purged from the rolls with proper voter voter list maintenance. We all want cleaner voter rolls, and that requires thoughtful and deliberate approach.
▶ 0:11:01In july, this committee held a hearing reviewing voter list maintenance standards, during which one of the republican witnesses stated that, quote, it has never been easier in the united states to register to vote as it is today. Um, it is true that it's easier to register to vote today than it was in 1993, when the nvra was passed.
▶ 0:11:24However, at the same time that hearing, we heard from mary kay hilling of, uh, of, of north carolina, about just how many barriers she faced in trying to remove be to remain on the voter rolls despite being a lawfully registered voter. Uh, mary kay said that it told us a story of how long it took her to be counted as a, um, to to to stay on the voter registration rolls.
▶ 0:11:53I say all this to say that while there are many ways in which we can update the nvra, we must first acknowledge the fact that there is no widespread voter fraud and that the 2020 election was secure and that too many voters still face barriers to the ballot box. In fact, instead of making sure every voter can register to vote and cast their ballot, the president and this administration continues to undermine voter confidence in our election while attempting to circumvent the constitution and erect barriers to voting.
▶ 0:12:24Voters in alabama, like everywhere else, continue to face many barriers to the ballot box. Uh, than voters in other states. And that is not democracy at work. No one benefits when eligible voters are unlawfully purged from the rolls. Every effort should be made to ensure, before anyone is deprived of their right to vote, that all laws are followed, and that the persons being removed is a person who should be removed.
▶ 0:12:48I look forward to the hearing today, and I do look forward to, um, talking about some updates that we can have, like automatic voter registration and same, same day registration in states like alabama, which won't have it unless we actually mandate it nationally. But I want to commend the, uh, the chairwoman for having today's hearing and thank all the witnesses for being here. And I welcome your testimony. Thanks.
▶ 0:13:15>> without objection, all other members opening statements will be made part of the hearing record if they are submitted to the committee clerk by 5 p.m. Today. Today we have one witness panel. I will now introduce our witnesses. First, we have mark braden of counsel at baker and hostetler llp. Then we have professor michael morley, a professor of law and the faculty director of the election law center at florida state university college of law.
▶ 0:13:44Finally, we have sophia lynn larkin, the director of the aclu's voting rights project. Each witness will have five minutes to provide an opening statement. I now recognize Mr. braden for the purpose of giving an opening statement. >> I'm looking at this room, and I see a couple people that I used to work for, bill thomas and our rocket scientists for ours.
▶ 0:14:09Um, I've spent 50 years working on election related law questions, and it's certainly a pleasure to be invited to testify for this committee on an interest in an area where I've basically spent my whole professional life on. I used to be counsel to the ohio elections commission, the secretary of state.
▶ 0:14:31I used to work for the rnc, and then I was in private practice for a long time as outside counsel to this committee on election law matters and contests. This committee has always been composed of very serious individuals. Some of the most prominent individuals in the history of the congress have served on this committee.
▶ 0:14:52Many former speakers of the house, in fact, most recently, there was a republican speaker who used to be a staff director of this committee, kevin mccarthy. So this is a very distinguished committee, and I'm very happy to have the opportunity to be here.
▶ 0:15:11There was a time, uh, when election laws were viewed as an area of cooperation between the two political parties. If you look back at history, the most important election changes in my lifetime was the 1964 voting rights act, which was supported by a majority republicans and a majority of democrats, and had democrat and republican sponsors.
▶ 0:15:40All the revisions to that act were received substantial bipartisan support. Hava, to a large degree, had bipartisan support. We've even had campaign financing regulation, h.r. 5010 that came out of this committee. That was a bipartisan bill. Unfortunately, the the motor voter bill was not it ended up being passed on a partizan line.
▶ 0:16:11So what I would suggest to you is the value of cooperation between the two political parties, because as a starting point, that cooperation is vital to the confidence in the process. So two, as you've mentioned, there are really basically two things we're talking about here, which is increasing the level of voter registration and improving the quality of the registration list.
▶ 0:16:40And I have no dispute with the notion that the motor voter increased the number of people registered to vote. You have more people registering to vote post motor voter. Of course, there's some balance there. What motor voter did was invite into the registration business a whole variety of locations where it was secondary to their principal purpose.
▶ 0:17:04So it's by definition by putting voter registration activities in locations other than county clerks, secretaries of state and other election offices. You're going to have people who have other things to do. And then when they get to voter registration, they'll have to transmit that to the election authorities.
▶ 0:17:24So those two present problems, I would say that one can look at motor voter and be comfortable that it increased the number of people registered to vote. I'm not so sure you can be sure what its impact is on the actual voter turnout. Now, the quality of voter state lists is a mixed bag. Some states have very high quality voter lists and some don't.
▶ 0:17:50So this committee needs to be continue to be concerned about the quality of voter list because of the changes in our system. Our system is much more male centric than it used to be. The male systems all arise from a central core, the spine of that process are voter lists. If you have bad voter lists, then you have bad motor.
▶ 0:18:19You have bad voting processes. So we need to be more concerned about the quality of voter lists. We might have been in the past. The additional big change has been in the number of people who live in the country, who are resident aliens.
▶ 0:18:34Now, I personally have no knowledge of any significant number of nonresident aliens or illegal aliens, resident aliens, or illegal aliens voting, but I absolutely acknowledge that there are many people concerned about this issue. I have no doubt that it occasionally occurs. So we need to be concerned about the list, whether it's simply a question of perception or reality, frankly makes no difference.
▶ 0:19:03We need to have an election system with two prime directives one that the winner wins, the person with the most votes wins, and two, that rational supporters of the loser believe the winner won. >> and Mr. braden, with that, you are out of time. So we will come back to further discussion during questions. I now recognize professor morley for the purpose of giving an opening statement.
▶ 0:19:34>> thank you very much. It is an honor to testify before this committee, and I would be happy to assist the committee's important work, however I can. A sound electoral system is based on three principles. First, all eligible voters must have a reasonable opportunity to safely cast their ballots and have them counted without facing substantial burdens. Second, the system must ensure accurate results by minimizing the possibility of mistake, irregularity, illegality or fraud.
▶ 0:20:03And third, the system should bolster public confidence in the integrity of the elections. Results. The nvra and hava have promoted voter registration by requiring states to offer a range of convenient ways to register. They have also enhanced the system's accuracy and boosted public confidence by requiring election officials to ensure the accuracy of their voter rolls. Over the years, opportunities for further improvement have become inherent.
▶ 0:20:30There are three main types of issues this committee could address. First, the nvra allows states to seek only information which is, quote, necessary to determine a voter's eligibility and administer the election process. The nvra also specifies registration forms shall require voters to attest, under penalty of perjury, that they satisfy the state's eligibility requirements, including us citizenship.
▶ 0:20:57Several courts have held that because applicants swear they are citizens, it is presumptively unnecessary and therefore illegal for states to require them to submit additional information concerning their eligibility or citizenship status.
▶ 0:21:12To be sure, the extent to which non-citizen voting occurs has been exaggerated in many public debates, when states have identified potential cases of non-citizens being registered to vote, they invariably involve a fraction of 1% of all voter registrations in the jurisdiction. In a nation with approximately 28 million non-citizen residents, however, it is reasonable for the public to expect steps to be taken to ensure non-citizens are not inadvertently added to the voter registration rolls.
▶ 0:21:41A non-citizen might be registered, particularly through a lawful transaction at a motor vehicle agency or other government office, where voter registration is a potential part of the process. For a variety of reasons such as scrivener's errors, language barriers, errors in automatic voter registration systems, erroneous assistance misunderstandings, and hava allows a person to register even if they lack both a social security number and a driver's license.
▶ 0:22:08Even a few hundred or thousand votes can impact the outcome of the election. As we from florida know well as a result of bush v gore to say nothing, of course, of state level races, the nvra necessity standard seems unnecessarily stringent. The statute should be amended to instead allow states to request information reasonably related to confirming an applicant's eligibility.
▶ 0:22:32Second, relatedly, the nvra in hava do not currently appear to contemplate the possibility that voter registration records will erroneously be added to the database. The nvra currently allows records to be removed only when circumstances change. A person must ask for their registration to be canceled, be convicted of a crime, or declared incompetent. Move or die.
▶ 0:22:54The nvra does not expressly provide for the removal of records of people who were ineligible at the outset, and should not have been registered in the first place. This committee should amend the nvra to allow election officials to remove ineligible voters, as well as people who have subsequently registered to vote in another state, after affording them due process through notice and an opportunity to submit evidence.
▶ 0:23:19Likewise, when states conduct their nvra mandated list maintenance programs, they should be required to identify voters who are ineligible on any basis, rather than only people who have died or moved, as the nvra currently requires. Finally, the nvra and hava fail to define some key terms.
▶ 0:23:36For example, the nvra prohibits election officials from implementing a program to, quote, systematically remove the names of ineligible voters during the 90 day so-called quiet period before a federal election. This committee could clarify that the term removal does not include shifting a voter to the inactive list.
▶ 0:23:57A voter who is recently moved to an inactive list may still vote in an impending election, so long as they confirm their identity, address citizenship, or eligibility, depending on what the concern is, including at the polling place. The committee could likewise specify that systematically does not include measures that election officials take in response to information, suggesting that particular voters might be ineligible.
▶ 0:24:19I see my time is drawing to an end, so I'll simply say other terms in the statutes, such as uniform, nondiscriminatory are also undefined, and courts have defined them in a variety of ways that this committee could provide definitions for as well. Thank you very much. >> thank you. Professor morley. And I now recognize miss larkin for the purpose of giving an opening statement.
▶ 0:24:43>> chairwoman lee, ranking member sewell and members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to testify today. I'm sophia larkin, director of the aclu's voting rights project. The national voter registration act is a landmark piece of bipartisan legislation. Since congress enacted it over 30 years ago, it has transformed voter registration in this country for the better.
▶ 0:25:07The nvra makes registration easier for eligible americans by requiring registration opportunities via the dmvs. Public assistance agencies and by mail. And it has been an extraordinary success. Today, more than 50 million americans register or update their registration through nvra established processes every year.
▶ 0:25:32As the nvra expanded access, it also promoted more accurate voter rolls. In doing so, it struck a careful balance in creating processes for list maintenance while establishing establishing critical safeguards to ensure that eligible voters are not wrongly removed. We all want secure, free and fair elections.
▶ 0:25:58That means both maintaining accurate rolls and ensuring eligible voters can cast ballots that count. One of these central safeguards is requiring states to complete systematic list maintenance programs no later than 90 days before federal elections. This prevents last minute purges that leave voters little time to discover they've been removed and get back on the rolls in time to cast a ballot that will count.
▶ 0:26:24States have ample tools to keep their rolls accurate, and they're using them. Elections officials removed more than 21 million voters from the rolls in the last two years through routine, lawful maintenance. At the same time, almost 1 million voters have received nvra confirmation notices asking if they'd moved, responded that they hadn't and were properly registered and kept on the rolls. The system works.
▶ 0:26:52But too often, officials launch aggressive, sloppy or poorly timed purges that sweep in large swaths of eligible voters. These programs often rely on outdated data, dubious methodologies, and inflammatory claims about rampant fraud that doesn't exist.
▶ 0:27:10For example, in 2020, for just 84 days before the election, alabama secretary of state announced a purge targeting alleged non-citizens using a process he admitted would sweep in naturalized citizens. A federal court stopped it, and it was clear right off the bat that well over half of the targeted voters were eligible citizens. Most of these wrongly targeted were people of color in virginia.
▶ 0:27:37That same year, the governor ordered a purge based on dmv data up to 20 years old data that failed to reflect voters subsequent naturalization. A federal court found that many removed were eligible citizens, who were never even informed that they had been purged. In texas in 2019, state officials claimed nearly 100,000 registered voters were non-citizens within a week.
▶ 0:28:01That number collapsed in harris county alone, more than half the flagged voters were confirmed naturalized citizens, and an audit of the remaining names found no non-citizens at all. A federal court found that texas had, quote, created a mess meant to, quote, intimidate the least powerful among us.
▶ 0:28:19Despite the nvra success, the same voices who foment disinformation and undermine voter confidence seek to undermine the careful balance the nvra strikes, whether by erecting new registration barriers or weakening safeguards that protect voters from erroneous removal. One example is the so-called save act, which would require every eligible american to show up in person with documents like a passport, just to register to vote.
▶ 0:28:47This, and any similar effort could disenfranchize tens of millions of eligible voters, republicans and democrats alike. Instead, I urge congress to return to its bipartisan tradition of strengthening our voting system by advancing measures that expand access and improve accuracy, like online same day and automatic voter registration, all of which have been proposed in the freedom to vote act and to provide election officials with a stable federal funding.
▶ 0:29:16They need to administer elections effectively. The integrity of our elections isn't threatened by widespread non-citizen voting, a problem that simply doesn't exist. It is threatened by unnecessary aggressive purges that strike eligible voters from the rolls, and by barriers that prevent eligible americans from registering in the first place. Congress should reject measures that would weaken the protections and instead strengthen the systems that make our democracy work. Thank you.
▶ 0:29:44I look forward to your questions. >> thank you, miss larkin. I'll begin our questions today, followed by the ranking member. I now recognize myself for the purpose of questioning our witnesses. Professor morley, I'd like to begin by going back to you. Uh, you touched on something there at the end of your testimony that related to other terms in the nvra that you have observed to be interpreted differently or inconsistently by the courts. Would you elaborate, please? >> yes.
▶ 0:30:14Thank you very much, chairwoman. So the terms the, the nvra and hava in various places require uniform and nondiscriminatory treatment of voters, but have left those two key terms uniform and nondiscriminatory, undefined.
▶ 0:30:29There have been cases in which election officials have received information about particular voters, suggesting either they were ineligible or there was some other concern with regard to a particular group of voters and subjected them to additional information requests attempting to confirm their eligibility.
▶ 0:30:46And this was held to be to violate the uniform and nondiscriminatory requirements in hava and the nvra, because certain voters were being asked for information, or certain voters were being subjected to additional procedures to confirm their eligibility rather than all voters. And so they they were enjoined.
▶ 0:31:03And so, in part, I suggest that the that the term uniform specify that similarly situated voters need to be treated similarly, but nothing in the statute is meant to preclude election officials from confirming the eligibility of a particular voter or particular voters.
▶ 0:31:19If there's reason to believe that there might be a concern about their about about their status, and likewise the term discriminatory or nondiscriminatory in order to be given an independent definition, an independent, meaning, not just being redundant, should be defined in terms of the constitution's prohibitions on discrimination against various groups of voters. The 15th amendment, the 19th amendment, etc. Thank you very much. >> thank you, professor morley. And Mr. braden, I'd like to go back to something you touched on during your testimony as well.
▶ 0:31:47And it was the notion that, uh, now as as mail voting and voting by mail becomes more and more common, that the, uh, quality and accuracy of lists is all the more important. Would you please elaborate on the points you were making, uh, during that part of your testimony and why, uh, in today's date, that that the accuracy of those lists is so important? >> well, mail voting is pieces of mail go out to lists.
▶ 0:32:14If the list isn't any good, the people being asked to vote or trying to vote by mail will be bad. It's not more complicated than that. We have mail. Voting is definitely more dangerous process for the security of the ballot process than in-person voting. There's just no question about that, because you don't have the secrecy of the ballot.
▶ 0:32:44You don't have a polling place where you can be sure there isn't undue influence or there isn't coercion. So by voting for mail, we get rid of those safeguards. Then we're dependent upon the us mail. State of california sends out millions of ballots. What percentage of first class mail doesn't get delivered or doesn't get delivered timely? I've had a difficult time figuring out what that number is.
▶ 0:33:14I've seen everything from half a percent to 4%. What does that mean? That means tens of thousands of ballots in california sent hopefully to registered voters who are qualified to vote, won't make an appearance and won't get counted. That's a big problem.
▶ 0:33:35There is a reason why almost all the other western style democracies do not use mail voting. They only use mail voting for absentee. A mail voting system has problems. Now I, the president of the united states, issued an executive order attempting to ban mail voting. Didn't appear to me why he had authority to do that.
▶ 0:34:01I don't believe I can figure out where that authority is. I do think that authority resides here with the congress and or with the state. But I'm realistic. I don't think you can politically make that happen as much as I would. >> thank you, Mr. braden. Professor morley, back to you. Uh, if you would tell us you touched on the concept of the blackout period and ways in which you believe the blackout period could be improved.
▶ 0:34:29Uh, would you specify what you think we could do as congress to improve the clarity or process or timing of the blackout period? >> thank you very much. So one one, one of the issues which I'd already raised is clarifying what what does removal mean, right. The congress's original goal was to prevent a voter from being removed from the list. At the very last minute. They had no notice. They had no opportunity to prove their eligibility to vote.
▶ 0:34:56And so one potential issue is, is the current blackout period too long? Could the blackout currently, because it's based on each federal election, primary elections is treated as separate from the general elections in every even numbered year. 180 days of of that year is a blackout period. It is literally illegal for election officials for half of the year, every federal election year, to engage in a program to confirm that that their roles are. >> and thank you, professor morley. I asked you a question at the end of my five minutes. So we are out of time.
▶ 0:35:26Uh, at this point, I now recognize ranking member sewell for five minutes for the purpose of questioning our witnesses. >> uh, miss larkin, I know that, uh, section eight of the in vra basically gives states, uh, a certain number of days to finalize their voter list maintenance before the primaries and before general election. I think it's 90 days.
▶ 0:35:48Um, you mentioned in your testimony that far too often states that, uh, take advantage of this voter protection by conducting aggressive voter purges to remove certain groups of citizens from voting. Can you talk to us about the ways in which the, the the nvra protections have been used to stop improper voter purges? >> yes, absolutely.
▶ 0:36:13We've unfortunately seen, uh, overzealous list maintenance efforts often framed as, as as simple enforcement of existing voter requirements. But in practice, they rely on outdated data, flawed methodologies and bad proxies for eligibility. So, for example, states often use uh, government databases indicating that someone is not a citizen, but that data can be decades old.
▶ 0:36:40It and critically can fail to reflect someone's naturalization. So we've seen this time and time again, and unfortunately, we've needed to have concrete, um, protections for this.
▶ 0:36:53So, for example, the 90 day quiet period that you were mentioning ensures that this type of database, systemic list maintenance isn't occurring so close to the election such that voters aren't able to get notice of a problem, that they've been removed, and then subsequently fix the problem and therefore be able to vote. >> you know, you mentioned my state. I did in my opening remarks as well.
▶ 0:37:16Um, the fact that my, um, my secretary of state conducted a voter purge of list and it turns out that half of the voters that were on there were actually eligible voters. Can you talk to us a little bit about how the national voter registration act has protections against against that kind of illegal purging? >> well, exactly. It's the case that you you gave the example of alabama.
▶ 0:37:40I mentioned a similar situation in virginia, a similar situation in many other states in my written testimony. And because of this quiet period, um, that is in place, we individuals, organizations, civil rights organizations, the united states department of justice at the time actually went into court to sue and say, actually, you cannot engage in this this kind of systematic list maintenance during this period of time, and it needs to be halted.
▶ 0:38:08And that was good for voters because, as I mentioned, these particular flawed, aggressive purges inevitably flag eligible voters, sometimes in very substantial numbers. >> like in alabama. >> absolutely. >> so, um, now this hearing is about how we can update the national voter registration act. And so can you suggest, um, some you know, I think that access to the ballot box is critically important.
▶ 0:38:34And frankly, all the examples you gave also suggest that what we really should be focusing on is to make sure that people have access to the ballot box, not barriers and voter suppression. Um, can you talk a little bit about what kinds of updates you would do if you were sitting where we're sitting? >> absolutely. Um, I completely agree. We should be focused on ensuring that voters are able eligible voters, every single one is able to cast a ballot that is counted.
▶ 0:39:01So instead of focusing on policies that potentially could disenfranchize millions of voters, we should be focused on making it easier for americans to vote with measures like same day registration, online voter registration, automatic voter registration. And I would also add that congress should be prioritizing providing funding for election officials to be able to administer their elections. >> couldn't agree more.
▶ 0:39:26We need to definitely give more funding for election, um, procedures and administration. You know, I think that, um, the the the there are eight states that actually have vote by mail. And from what I can tell, oregon is one of them. They have 84% returns, uh, of their, of their voting.
▶ 0:39:49Um, um, I know that in this hearing, um, there's been an indictment against, uh, vote by mail, but, um, I was wondering if you could add, uh, add your take on this. >> yeah, absolutely. Mail voting has been a critical, uh, form of voting for for many, many voters who otherwise have, uh, for otherwise, it's very, very difficult for them to be able to cast a ballot, including voters with disabilities, voters who live in rural areas, um, and has been used increasingly by voters of color and the like to be able to exercise their right
▶ 0:40:20To vote. And we've not seen, um, problems with this in, in great numbers and certainly nothing to justify a mass removal of this really critical tool to vote. >> absolutely. Um, so I just think that at the end of the day, um, there are updates that we can make. Um, madam chairwoman, I look forward to working with you on trying to make sure that we have a balance between making sure that we're providing access and at the same time, making sure that no one who's ineligible can't, uh, vote.
▶ 0:40:48Um, before I yield back, I want to ask for unanimous consent to enter into the record a statement for um from the league of women voters, which highlights that the nvra must maintain its power to protect voters and and facilitate voter registration. >> without objection, so ordered. I now recognize the representative from illinois, miss miller, for five minutes.
▶ 0:41:13>> thank you, chairwoman lee and chairman style, for convening this hearing on the n vra, also known as the motor vehicle act. As a member of congress from a state that has a long history of election fraud and irregularities, that would be illinois. I am deeply concerned about the integrity of our elections, both in my state and nationally.
▶ 0:41:34As we discussed in a previous hearing, states like illinois systematically refused to establish standards to maintain clean voter rolls and prevent non-citizens from voting as states give driver's licenses and cdls to non-citizens and illegal aliens at record rates.
▶ 0:41:57I believe that envy our safeguards against these non-citizens being registered to vote are an are inadequate and need significant reforms. Congress must act to update the nvra to account for states that refuse to follow the law, and I appreciate the opportunity to speak with our witnesses about this critical issue.
▶ 0:42:18So first, professor morley, this past july, our full committee held a hearing on how the nvra can restrict best practices for clean voter rolls. In today's hearing, we want to look at which parts of the nvra should be amended to bring greater confidence to our elections. In the case of ian roberts, or the case of ian roberts makes us all the more pressing.
▶ 0:42:46In your opinion, what should be our highest priority in fixing motor voter? >> thank you very much, congresswoman, with specifically with regard to list maintenance, as as I mentioned before, one of the main reforms that the committee could consider making to the nvra would be expanding the list of criteria that election officials are required to use when conducting the federally mandated list maintenance.
▶ 0:43:12As of right now, they are only required to identify voters who have died or, I believe, who have moved. There are a variety of circumstances under which a person could be ineligible to vote. Particularly they've registered somewhere else. They're they're not a citizen, so shouldn't have been put on the list to begin with.
▶ 0:43:29And so the nvra could be amended in order to require election officials to identify during this already mandated list maintenance to to identify voters who are ineligible for any reason, rather than just two particular reasons as the statute is currently drafted. One other thing is to improve the quality of information. This committee could consider expanding the databases to which election officials are required to interact. And this was something more on the hava end than the nvra end.
▶ 0:43:57But currently, uh hava requires election officials to enter into agreements with their state motor vehicle agency in order to it to exchange data. They also require agreements with the social security administration to exchange data. There's at least one major source of information the federal save database, which has citizenship information. The state of florida was actually recently in litigation with the federal government to try to expand access to that.
▶ 0:44:25This committee could look at the possibility of either requiring states to enter into agreements to receive information from the save database, or potentially even other databases, to the extent that there are other agencies that have information concerning citizenship that could be shared with states. Alternatively, like cross, checking against such databases could be part of the mandatory list maintenance process that had that that states are required to engage in on an ongoing basis. Right.
▶ 0:44:53Election when election officials are updating their databases. Right. They're not looking to throw eligible voters off the rolls. And so to the extent this committee can make better quality information available to them, to the extent this committee could require the government to share citizenship related data with them, that will both help officials remove ineligible voters while protecting vulnerable voters, while protecting people from erroneously being flagged as potentially ineligible. >> thank you.
▶ 0:45:20Those are very helpful suggestions, Mr. braden. When I first considered motor voter, when first considered motor voter was written to remove barriers and facilitate voter registration. This unfortunately led some states to remove verification requirements for the answers that applicants provided.
▶ 0:45:40Just this year, the maryland state board of elections found that an illegal immigrant named ian roberts successfully registered to vote and requested absentee ballots in three different elections, with verification requirements such as documentary proof of citizenship have prevented in roberts from illegally voting. >> and the answer to that is probably yes, depends on the details.
▶ 0:46:05But we have a variety of technologies available to us that we're not using, which this committee could statutorily encourage or require. >> thank you very much. And I yield back. >> thank you. I now recognize the ranking member of the full committee, Mr. morelli, for five minutes. >> thank you, madam chair, and thank the witnesses for being here and for your interest in this important subject. And it is an important subject. I had an opening statement.
▶ 0:46:32I apologize for being delayed, uh, with other matters. Uh, so I'll just submit that to the record if I might. But I do want to just start, you know, fundamentally, um, this voting rights legislation, which we're talking about when it was signed into law, president clinton said the principle behind the legislation is clear voting should be about discerning the will of the majority and presumably of the people, not about testing the administrative capacity of a citizen.
▶ 0:47:02The sort of interesting that the whole notion of this is about making sure we make it as easy as possible for citizens to be able to discharge their rights, to be able to vote. It's fundamental to what we do as americans, fundamental to our democracy. And, you know, I want to continue to send the message that american elections are secure. State election officials, local election officials.
▶ 0:47:29I have not found one democrat or republican who isn't so devoted to the work that they do and recognize the serious role that they play in making sure that the democracy functions. And there's no one who wants people voting fraudulently. But I will say the the degree to which we look behind every tree and behind everything and make assumptions that fraud occurs, I find somewhat astonishing.
▶ 0:47:58I mean, I feel like there's a boogeyman everywhere. Um, and it has the obsession with it, the fascination with it, or if you're more cynical, the darkness behind it is really about limiting access that people might have to vote. And I know, for instance, I was recently with a number of members from oregon where voting by mail is been the case for decades.
▶ 0:48:25There's no widespread accusations that in oregon, elections aren't fair, but almost everyone vote by mail. I think that's true in the state of washington. It's true in the state of colorado. It's largely true in the state of arizona. It's all of a sudden it's like, oh, we have to be careful. All these people are voting fraudulently, but no one can ever identify anyone who is.
▶ 0:48:46And even when it comes to the notion that undocumented, uh, folks are voting in massive numbers to corrupt elections, it's extraordinary because you can't find any evidence that it happens. I mean, you could always I remember as a kid say, uh, have you ever seen a pink elephant and say, well, uh, there's no such thing as pink elephants, I don't know, have you ever seen one? So somehow that proves that there are pink elephants. The fact that no one ever seen one. It's kind of the same thing.
▶ 0:49:14And we should just remember that the point of this is to make it easy for people. Use technology, use the mail. Frankly, we file taxes by mail. That's one of the most important things we do, and people verify it. There's 100 things we do by mail where no one has ever suggested we should. Could you imagine if we made every single american file their taxes in person at a registrar somewhere in our local county? No one would even consider it. It would be absurd. Um, having said that, mail is safe.
▶ 0:49:42And frankly, you know, some of the arguments for doing some of the things that we've talked about sound awfully reminiscent of the 1930s and 40s and 50s, where people were given simple literacy tests before they could vote. Turned out it was like reciting word for word the united states constitution, or guessing the number of jellybeans in a jar, because it was vote, and it would certainly hope that's not what we're doing.
▶ 0:50:04I would always join with my colleagues in efforts to make sure that we make clear that there is no double voting, that people can, you know, that we know who's voting. But to the greatest extent possible, make sure that every single american uses not only their, um, their right, but their god given inalienable right to be able to cast a vote. Um, I do have a question. I'm sorry, I'm down to my last minute, but I wanted to get that off my chest.
▶ 0:50:32But, um, I appreciate what you said, Mr. braden, about, uh, your belief that there is no presidential authority to use an executive order, and I don't I don't want to misquote you. I think that's what you said, that you found that you thought it was congress's. >> I don't believe there is. >> yeah. And I wonder, miss miss larkin, and thank you all for your testimony for being here. Miss larkin. Would you agree with that as well, that the it's the states and the congress have the authority but not the president? >> um, yes, absolutely.
▶ 0:51:01The constitution is clear on that score. Only congress and the states can set the rules for elections. The president has no role in that. >> Mr. morley, would you concur or do you have a different opinion? >> I agree, yeah. >> thank you. Um, and let me. Well, I'm running out of time, so I've got five minutes goes by so quickly, doesn't it, madam chair? Um, but I'll, I'll follow up with, uh, the, uh, our, our witnesses and again, very much appreciate you being here and appreciate the hearing and, and all the good work. So thank you so much I yield back.
▶ 0:51:31>> thank you. I now recognize the representative from texas, miss johnson, for five minutes. >> thank you so much, madam chair. Um, I'm so happy that we're having this hearing today. Uh, voting is a fundamental and most important right that we have in this country. Uh, I come from a hail from the state of texas, where we have had our own fair share of challenges in voting.
▶ 0:51:53I see by the expressions on your face, uh, that you all agree, uh, the voting and the access to the ballot is particularly difficult in texas, you know, and I want to acknowledge, you know, none of us want voter fraud. I don't think any republican or democrat or anyone in this country support voter fraud. Uh, you know, if you only those who are eligible to vote should be able to vote.
▶ 0:52:19But just like my colleague was just saying, um, there's no evidence that there's widespread voter fraud. And that certainly has been the case in texas. But part of I want to reframe this notion of election integrity. Election integrity should be about making sure, ensuring that every eligible voter has the right to vote, not focusing on making sure that people who don't have access to vote, vote.
▶ 0:52:51It's it's the reverse of thought. It's the reverse of priority. It's making sure that those in rural texas can get access to a ballot box, making sure that those that don't have access to transportation can get to the ballot box, making sure that those who have disabilities or who are just working, or who can get to the ballot box, making sure that young people can get registered to vote, that they're not disenfranchized from that, but
▶ 0:53:22Our rules and our system of laws seem to focus more on how can we exclude people from participating in the process, more so than how can we encourage people from participating in the process? You know, I was part of the texas legislature and we I broke quorum over an elections bill, and we had a big old fight over election integrity.
▶ 0:53:50And one of the big issues was that republicans put in this bill a provision to make it a felony equal to kidnaping, rape, murder, a felony for driving more than three people to the poll. How is that even remotely appropriate?
▶ 0:54:13Now, we ultimately got that bill, that provision struck because we had to leave the state for six weeks and make a big thing about it, but that should have never been in a voting integrity bill. In fact, we should have had provisions of how can we make it for coworkers to get to the polls? How can we have voting hours? How can we have an online national registration? How can we?
▶ 0:54:43Because we had a hearing in this very committee over voter registration purges, roll purges. When people move state to state and we there wasn't any meaningful solution to how to address that. I think we should have a national voting registration act where you can register to vote, and that is just good. And if you're an american citizen, you can register to vote in this country and you should be able to do it online.
▶ 0:55:11If we have the ability to pay our taxes online, if the government can accept if it's safe enough to accept our money, it should be safe enough to accept our vote. Um, but I digress again. You're right, Mr. chairman. Mr. ranking member, time goes by way too fast. Um, but you know, I guess my question to you is, miss lincoln.
▶ 0:55:36You mean you were part of the voter purge case in texas, where our governor tried to kick hundreds of thousands of people wrongfully off the poll? What would online voter registration do to enable greater participation? Because one of the things I'm most concerned about is we don't have enough percentage of our country that actually votes, because we make it too hard for young people to go.
▶ 0:56:00If you can't do it on your phone, if you're under 25, you're incompetent to function outside of that. So, I mean, what can we do? What what what's your sense of voter registration online and how could that improve our process? >> thank you for the question. Online voter registration would expand the opportunity for voters to both register to vote in the first instance instance and update their registration. And I think that's also critical, just making just giving people more and more opportunities, more touch points to be able to get registered.
▶ 0:56:29But by allowing voters to have that opportunity to also provide their updated information and the like, it has the benefit of like the nvra asks for also improving uh, lists, accurate list maintenance, voter accurate voter rolls and the like. So you get both in this type of reform. >> thank you so much. Unfortunately I'm out of time. Thank you, madam chair. >> thank you. I'd like to thank our witnesses for appearing before us today.
▶ 0:56:56Members of the committee may have additional questions for you, and we ask that you please respond to those questions in writing. Without objection, each member will have five legislative days to insert additional material into the record, or to revise and extend their remarks if there is no further business. I thank the members for their participation, and without objection, the committee stands adjourned.