[Senate Hearing 117-268]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]





                                                        S. Hrg. 117-268
 
                  ADMINISTRATION OF UPCOMING ELECTIONS

=======================================================================

                                HEARING

                               before the

                 COMMITTEE ON RULES AND ADMINISTRATION
                          UNITED STATES SENATE

                    ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS

                             SECOND SESSION

                               __________

                         THURSDAY, MAY 19, 2022

                               __________

    Printed for the use of the Committee on Rules and Administration
    
    
    
 [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 
 


                  Available on http://www.govinfo.gov
                  
                  
                  
                  
                           ______                       


             U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE 
47-652PDF           WASHINGTON : 2022                 
                  
                  
                  
                 COMMITTEE ON RULES AND ADMINISTRATION

                             SECOND SESSION

                  AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota, Chairwoman

DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California         ROY BLUNT, Missouri
CHARLES E. SCHUMER, New York         MITCH McCONNELL, Kentucky
MARK R. WARNER, Virginia             RICHARD SHELBY, Alabama
PATRICK J. LEAHY, Vermont            TED CRUZ, Texas
ANGUS S. KING, JR., Maine            SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West 
JEFF MERKLEY, Oregon                     Virginia
ALEX PADILLA, California             ROGER WICKER, Mississippi
JON OSSOFF, Georgia                  DEB FISCHER, Nebraska
                                     CINDY HYDE-SMITH, Mississippi
                                     BILL HAGERTY, Tennessee

                    Elizabeth Peluso, Staff Director
             Rachelle Schroeder, Republican Staff Director
             
                         C  O  N  T  E  N  T  S

                              ----------                              
                                                                  Pages

                         Opening Statement of:

Hon. Amy Klobuchar, Chairwoman, a United States Senator from the 
  State of Minnesota.............................................     1
Hon. Roy Blunt, a United States Senator from the State of 
  Missouri.......................................................     3
Leigh M. Chapman, Acting Secretary of The Commonwealth, 
  Pennsylvania Department of State, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania.....     5
R. Kyle Ardoin, Louisiana Secretary of State, Louisiana 
  Department of State, Baton Rouge, Louisiana....................     7
Damon Hewitt, President and Executive Director, Lawyers' 
  Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, Washington, DC...........     9
Wesley Wilcox, Supervisor of Elections, Marion County, Ocala, 
  Florida........................................................    10
Tammy Patrick, Senior Advisor, Democracy Fund, Washington, DC....    12

                         Prepared Statement of:

Leigh M. Chapman, Acting Secretary of The Commonwealth, 
  Pennsylvania Department of State, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania.....    36
R. Kyle Ardoin, Louisiana Secretary of State, Louisiana 
  Department of State, Baton Rouge, Louisiana....................    50
Damon Hewitt, President and Executive Director, Lawyers' 
  Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, Washington, DC...........    55
Wesley Wilcox, Supervisor of Elections, Marion County, Ocala, 
  Florida........................................................    79
Tammy Patrick, Senior Advisor, Democracy Fund, Washington, DC....    81

                  Questions Submitted for the Record:

Hon. Amy Klobuchar, Chairwoman, a United States Senator from the 
  State of Minnesota to Leigh M. Chapman, Acting Secretary of The 
  Commonwealth, Pennsylvania Department of State, Harrisburg, 
  Pennsylvania...................................................    92
Hon. Angus S. King, Jr., a United States Senator from the State 
  of Maine to R. Kyle Ardoin, Louisiana Secretary of State, 
  Louisiana Department of State, Baton Rouge, Louisiana..........    94
Hon. Amy Klobuchar, Chairwoman, a United States Senator from the 
  State of Minnesota to Damon Hewitt, President and Executive 
  Director, Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, 
  Washington, DC.................................................    95
Hon. Amy Klobuchar, Chairwoman, a United States Senator from the 
  State of Minnesota to Tammy Patrick, Senior Advisor, Democracy 
  Fund, Washington, DC...........................................    97
Hon. Angus S. King, Jr., a United States Senator from the State 
  of Maine to Tammy Patrick, Senior Advisor, Democracy Fund, 
  Washington, DC.................................................    99


                  ADMINISTRATION OF UPCOMING ELECTIONS

                              ----------                              


                         THURSDAY, MAY 19, 2022

                               United States Senate
                      Committee on Rules and Administration
                                                     Washington, DC
    The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10 a.m., in Room 
301, Russell Senate Office Building, Hon. Amy Klobuchar, 
Chairwoman of the Committee, presiding.
    Present: Senators Klobuchar, Blunt, Warner, Merkley, 
Padilla, Ossoff, Cruz, Fischer, and Hagerty.

  OPENING STATEMENT OF HONORABLE AMY KLOBUCHAR, CHAIRWOMAN, A 
       UNITED STATES SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF MINNESOTA

    Chairwoman Klobuchar. Good morning. I call to order this 
hearing of the Rules Committee on the Administration of 
Upcoming Elections. I would like to thank Ranking Member Blunt 
and our colleagues who are here, with more to come, for being 
here.
    Our witnesses, who I will introduce shortly, are Acting 
Secretary of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Chapman, I want 
to thank you. You have a few things going on, I believe. Damon 
Hewitt, who is the President and Executive Director of the 
Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law. Tammy Patrick, 
the Senior Advisor for Elections at Democracy Fund. We are also 
going to hear from two witnesses who will be introduced by 
Senator Blunt. I thank you for being here. Louisiana Secretary 
of State Ardoin and Wesley Wilcox, Supervisor of Elections for 
Marion County, Florida.
    In 2020, we saw election officials across the country rise 
to the challenge of holding elections in a global pandemic, and 
we thank every one of you for that. Thanks in large part to the 
work of the local election officials and volunteers and 
everyone who took part, we had more options for Americans to 
cast a ballot. Because of that, more Americans voted than ever 
before in the middle of a global pandemic. It is kind of an 
extraordinary fact for our democracy and certainly a tribute to 
the work of local elections officials.
    At the time, the Department of Homeland Security declared 
the 2020 election the most secure election in our country. Now 
election officials are working to prepare for and administer 
this year's midterm elections. Ten states have already held 
primary elections, and dozens more will do so through the 
summer. As we know, one of our witnesses, Secretary Chapman, 
just held Pennsylvania's primary on Tuesday.
    With voting already underway, we have heard of a number of 
challenges facing election administrators, including the spread 
of misinformation, disinformation that continues to take a toll 
on both election officials and voters. Election after election, 
millions of Americans see inaccurate or misleading information 
about elections and the voting process on social media, and it 
is hurting our democracy. At the same time, investing in 
election security, including cybersecurity, continues to be a 
priority for many election officials, as intelligence officials 
warn that our elections remain a target for foreign 
adversaries.
    We also continue to hear about the need for a reliable 
stream of Federal funding for elections so officials can make 
improvements and keep pace with new technology. Newer 
challenges are emerging as well. Like the paper supply 
challenge, the shortages that we have heard are impacting 
Secretary Ardoin and other officials trying to secure needed 
election supplies.
    This Committee has also discussed the rise in threats and 
harassment targeting election officials from both parties. I 
appreciate Senator Blunt holding that hearing with me. They 
increased in 2020.
    At our last hearing in October, former Republican 
Philadelphia City Commissioner Al Schmidt testified about 
threats that he and his family had received, including a 
message that said, ``Tell the truth or your three kids will be 
fatally shot'', with the names of his 7 year old son and his 11 
year old and 14 year old daughters and a photo of their home.
    Now, in some Colorado counties, election officials facing 
attacks that they helped steal the last election have done 
active shooter training and gotten bulletproof vests. It is no 
surprise that a study from the Brennan Center found one in five 
election officials are unlikely to serve through 2024. I hope 
that is none of you. In light of these challenges, we must 
support the election officials working on the front lines of 
our democracy.
    This Committee has taken steps to work toward solutions. I 
have introduced legislation with Senator Padilla, Ossoff, and 
Merkley to put in place new protections for the election 
administrators who count and certify ballots.
    Based on a recent legal opinion, Senator Blunt and I have 
called on the Election Assistance Commission to ensure that 
Help America Vote Act funds can be used for physical security 
and social media threat monitoring, which we expect will--they 
will do shortly and is crucial given the dramatic rise in 
threats.
    In addition, yesterday with Senator Warren and several 
other Members of this Committee, Feinstein, King, Merkley, and 
Padilla, we introduced a new bill to provide significant 
Federal funding to support election administration and election 
security. More must be done. I look forward to hearing from our 
witnesses about how we can best ensure election administrators 
have the support that they need.
    Finally, I want to note that in many states, when voters 
cast a ballot this year, they will be confronted with new laws, 
making it harder to vote. That is why I continue to believe 
that we need basic Federal standards so all Americans can vote 
in the way that works best for them.
    Thank you again to our witnesses. I would also like to 
acknowledge, Senator Blunt, that our Chief Clerk, Cindy 
Qualley, who is with us for her last hearing today, and we want 
to thank Cindy for her service.
    [Clapping.]
    Chairwoman Klobuchar. Senator Blunt?

   OPENING STATEMENT OF HONORABLE ROY BLUNT, A UNITED STATES 
               SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF MISSOURI

    Senator Blunt. Well, thank you, Chairwoman Klobuchar, for 
holding this hearing, and our witnesses for joining us today. 
Senator Padilla and I are the two former Secretaries of State 
on this panel, so we particularly want to recognize our 
colleagues who are here today, Secretary Chapman and Secretary 
Ardoin, for being here, as well as everybody else on the panel. 
As a former election administrator, both as the Secretary of 
State, and Mr. Wilcox as a local election authority before 
that.
    I know what it takes to run elections, and for more than 
200 years, states have been responsible for elections. State 
and local election officials work tirelessly, often managing 
multiple elections in a year, working through the difficult 
logistical challenges that elections bring.
    As all of our election officials know, some of those 
challenges are even greater in the small turnout elections when 
you are dealing with a school board and a local election and 
the water district and maybe other things in addition to that.
    Thanks for all of our election officials and the largely 
volunteer people that come forward and make these elections 
work. Our role in the Congress is to support states in their 
administration of elections and give them assistance they need 
to innovate and serve the needs of their citizens.
    Today's hearing builds on a hearing I chaired, and really 
two hearings I chaired in 2018 and 2020 with Senator Klobuchar 
by my side on those hearings as we then and now have an 
opportunity to hear from election officials that are on the 
front lines of elections and others who are watching those 
front lines and giving advice, hear the highlights of the work 
they are doing, and learn more about what is happening as 
election officials prepare for this year's elections.
    While the 2020 elections brought an unprecedented set of 
new challenges to election officials, especially those that 
were uniquely based on the pandemic that we were facing and an 
increase of threats to election workers, the issues facing 
election officials that had been prevalent for years are still 
there.
    Cybersecurity remains a top concern for election officials. 
Our foreign and domestic adversaries have sought to sow 
distrust in our elections by attacking election infrastructure 
and spreading misinformation online. I often hear from election 
officials who would like increased and improved information 
sharing from their Federal counterparts or people who know 
things at the Federal level that state and local administrators 
need to know.
    Our state election administrators have access to more and 
better information than they ever have before but look forward 
to hearing your concerns about how that could continue to 
improve. States must also continue the important work of 
recruiting, training, and retaining poll workers, many of whom 
do this as basically a volunteer activity. It is pretty easy to 
unvolunteer if this is an activity you decide you do not want 
to be a part of. I look forward to hearing what our witnesses 
are doing about steps they have taken to encourage more people 
to play an active role in elections by serving as poll workers.
    The supply chain issues, as Senator Klobuchar mentioned, 
are also affecting elections like they are affecting much of 
the rest of the economy. With primary elections ongoing and the 
November general election rapidly approaching, it is vital that 
states have all the necessary supplies to ensure every voter 
has an opportunity to cast a ballot.
    Today, this Committee has an opportunity to come together 
in a bipartisan way to hear from officials about lessons 
learned over the past several years, how they are preparing to 
administer elections this year, and how, if possible, Congress 
can help the states better achieve their goals.
    I want to thank my colleagues, some of whom are with us 
virtually and paying attention that way, and I want to thank 
our witnesses for being here today, and I look forward to a 
productive discussion.
    Chairwoman Klobuchar. Thank you very much and thank you for 
your being such a good colleague, Senator Blunt. Our first 
witness is Leigh Chapman, Acting Secretary of the Commonwealth 
of Pennsylvania. Previously, she served as Executive Director 
of Deliver My Vote and held senior roles at the Leadership 
Conference on Civil and Human Rights. She earned her bachelor's 
degree from the University of Virginia and law degree from 
Howard University.
    Our second witness is Damon Hewitt, President and Executive 
Director of the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law. 
He has more than 20 years of civil rights, litigation, and 
policy experience, including over a decade at the NAACP Legal 
Defense Fund. He earned his degree, a bachelor's degree from 
Louisiana State and a law degree from the University of 
Pennsylvania.
    Tammy Patrick is also with us. She is a Senior Advisor to 
the elections program at Democracy Fund and an elections 
administration expert who served on the Presidential Commission 
on Election Administration under President Obama, as well as 
the Maricopa County Elections Department in Arizona. She is 
the--an Adjunct Professor at the University of Minnesota's 
Humphrey School of Public Policy, where she teaches courses for 
the certificate in election administration. Of course, we are 
very proud of our election system in Minnesota. Highest voter 
turnout in the country, need I go on? She earned her bachelor's 
degree from Purdue University.
    Senator Blunt will now introduce our other two witnesses, I 
will swear in our witnesses, and we will proceed to testimony, 
and we will go in the order that you are seated. Go ahead, 
Senator Blunt.
    Senator Blunt. Well, thank you, Senator. If you brag more 
about the Minnesota turnout, you would just be repeating 
yourself. It is a good thing to brag about and I am glad you 
are able to do that.
    I am glad again, all five of our witnesses are here today. 
Let me quickly introduce Secretary of State Kyle Ardoin from 
Louisiana and Mr. Wesley Wilcox, the Supervisor of Elections 
for Marion County, Florida. Secretary Ardoin has served as 
Louisiana Secretary of State since 2018, previously serving as 
the first Assistant Secretary of State in Louisiana for eight 
years prior to that. A long time being near this job and doing 
this job. He also currently serves as the President of the 
National Association of Secretaries of State and on the 
Election Infrastructure Subsector Coordinating Council.
    Mr. Wilcox has served as the Supervisor of Elections for 
Marion County, Florida since 2012, another decade of service in 
this job. He possesses more than 30 years of experience in the 
election industry. Currently serves as the President of the 
Florida Supervisors of Elections Association and as Chairman of 
the Election Infrastructure and Information Sharing and 
Analysis Center Executive Committee. We look forward to what 
all five of you have to say today.
    Chairwoman Klobuchar. If the witnesses could now stand and 
please raise your right hand. Do you swear that the testimony 
you will give before the Committee shall be the truth, the 
whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
    Ms. Chapman. I do.
    Mr. Ardoin. I do.
    Mr. Hewitt. I do.
    Mr. Wilcox. I do.
    Ms. Patrick. I do.
    Chairwoman Klobuchar. Thank you. You may be seated. We will 
proceed to your testimony and will recognize each witness for 
five minutes. Go ahead, Secretary Chapman.

OPENING STATEMENT OF LEIGH M. CHAPMAN, ACTING SECRETARY OF THE 
  COMMONWEALTH, PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF STATE, HARRISBURG, 
                          PENNSYLVANIA

    Ms. Chapman. Wonderful. Well, thank you, Chairwoman 
Klobuchar, Ranking Member Blunt, and other esteemed Members of 
the Senate Rules Committee for allowing me to offer remarks 
regarding the state of elections in the Commonwealth of 
Pennsylvania.
    I am Leigh Chapman, Acting Secretary of State of 
Pennsylvania and I was appointed to this role by Governor Tom 
Wolf on January 8th of this year. As Pennsylvania's Chief 
Election Officer, my role is to ensure that elections are 
secure and accessible and that every eligible voter in 
Pennsylvania can register, cast their ballot, and have it 
counted. I was asked today to speak to you regarding the 
current elections landscape in my state.
    First, I will provide a brief update on Tuesday's primary 
election. After that, I will share three concerns that are 
front of mind at the Department of State of Pennsylvania. You 
know, those three concerns are, one, the time for pre-
canvassing mail ballots, two, misinformation and disinformation 
surrounding elections, and three, the need for a robust, 
consistent funding of elections.
    Pennsylvania's primary election on Tuesday was successful 
with minimal issues. As of this morning, we have 50,000 ballots 
left to be counted. There were just a few counties who 
experienced unique issues, at least one which has been widely 
reported by the media.
    On Tuesday morning in Lancaster County, when election 
officials began pre-canvassing mail ballots, which is the 
process of reviewing the outer envelope and removing the inner 
secrecy envelope containing the ballot and tabulating but not 
recording votes, they discovered that an estimated 22,000 
ballots could not be read by the scanner due to an incorrect 
barcode.
    Teams are now hand marking new ballots, which entails one 
person reading out the markings from the original ballot, a 
second person marking the new ballot, while a third observes to 
ensure the remarked ballot is accurate before it is scanned and 
counted. This is a transparent process involving both political 
parties, and as of this morning, there are 3,800 ballots left 
to remark.
    This leads to the first concern. The incident in Lancaster 
County reinforces a request made by the Department of State and 
all the county election officials in Pennsylvania that the 
State Legislature extend the time for pre-canvassing of mail in 
and absentee ballots. An earlier start to pre-canvassing may 
have alerted Lancaster County to the barcode issue sooner than 
the morning of Election Day.
    Even where no problem presents, at least 15 days of pre-
canvassing would free election workers to focus on the many 
other obligations they have on Election Day. It would align 
Pennsylvania with the 37 other states that allow for pre-
canvassing of ballots and it would permit officials to publicly 
release unofficial results sooner, similar to states like 
Florida that was able to call the 2020 general election on 
election night because of pre-canvassing.
    That leads to my next point, which is that county and state 
election officials continue to bear the burden of addressing 
misinformation and disinformation regarding the integrity of 
our elections.
    It is especially disturbing that some disinformation has 
come from those with a sworn duty to defend our democratic 
process. The November 2020 election in Pennsylvania, like every 
election since, was free, fair, and secure.
    Allegations of illegal activity in Pennsylvania's 2020 
Presidential election have been repeatedly dismissed in more 
than two dozen Federal court cases and debunked by independent 
fact checkers. Repeating this falsehood over and over harms our 
democracy and voters' confidence in our elections process.
    Finally, and most significantly, counties consistently 
expressed another need for adequate consistent funding from the 
state and Federal Government. In Pennsylvania, counties bear 
virtually all costs to run elections at every level. The need 
for more consistent funding was especially apparent in 2020.
    In addition to the pandemic, counties were required to 
upgrade voting systems to incorporate a verifiable paper ballot 
and implement mail in voting for millions of voters. For some 
counties, there was virtually no way they could have counted 
mail ballots without significant financial investment for 
equipment and additional manpower.
    Despite some assistance from the Federal Government, many 
counties still face a discrepancy between available resources 
and their needs. It was only because of nonprofit grants that 
many counties were able to purchase automatic envelope openers, 
scanners, and mail sorters to process ballots.
    We thank the Chairwoman and her co-sponsors for introducing 
legislation that would create a permanent stream of funding for 
elections and support that effort. We also ask that Members of 
this Committee support any proposal that would shore up 
elections infrastructure and access to the ballot. Thank you 
for the opportunity to participate in this important 
conversation, and I welcome any questions that you may have.
    [The prepared statement of Ms. Chapman was submitted for 
the record.]
    Chairwoman Klobuchar. Very good. Thank you. Thank you for 
your good work. Secretary Ardoin?

  OPENING STATEMENT OF R. KYLE ARDOIN, LOUISIANA SECRETARY OF 
  STATE, LOUISIANA DEPARTMENT OF STATE, BATON ROUGE, LOUISIANA

    Mr. Ardoin. Chairwoman Klobuchar, Ranking Member Blunt, and 
distinguished Members of this Committee, good morning, and 
thank you for having me. I am Kyle Ardoin. I serve as 
Louisiana's 44th Secretary of State.
    I am especially pleased to be speaking before you today 
because Louisiana has a unique experience in election 
preparation. Not only did we have to deal with the challenges 
of COVID-19, as did my colleagues across the country, but in 
2020, we were faced with the running of a Presidential election 
in the aftermath of tropical storms Cristobal and Beta, and 
hurricanes Laura, Marco, Delta and Zeta, the last of which made 
landfall in Louisiana a mere six days prior to the Election 
Day.
    In 2021, we were faced with another major storm in 
hurricane Ida, which devastated parts of our state just six 
weeks prior to our statewide elections. Thankfully, we were 
able to execute all of these elections due to the hard work of 
our election staff across the state and in cooperation with 
other state agencies. However, this year's Federal election 
presents a new challenge: the supply chain backlog that has and 
will continue to affect paper supplies across the country.
    Let me be clear, this crisis--this is a crisis that demands 
immediate attention and bipartisan action. It is not an 
exaggeration to say that if this situation is not handled, it 
could lead to a serious erosion in the confidence in our 
elections. In Louisiana alone, we had to contact every paper 
producer in North America, not just the United States, to 
ensure we will have the supplies we need.
    Louisiana uses a much smaller amount of paper than other 
states for elections. In the 2020 Presidential election, 7 
percent of the 2.1 million votes cast in Louisiana were by 
paper. If we had to piecemeal the supplies we need to execute 
the election, how will other states with greater needs manage? 
In the most recent midterm election in 2018, the EAC's election 
administration and voting survey stated that over 42 million 
mail ballots were transmitted across the country.
    Additionally, over 85 percent of the Nation's jurisdictions 
used paper or a paper component in their voting system. 
Furthermore, we must consider that states need paper supplies 
for mail ballots, mail ballot envelopes, voter instructions, or 
poll books, and may need special types of paper to comply with 
their state's law.
    In 2017, the Department of Homeland Security declared 
election infrastructure as, ``critical infrastructure.'' Then-
Secretary of Department of Homeland Security Jeh Johnson said, 
``the designation makes it clear, both domestically and 
internationally, that election infrastructure enjoys all the 
benefits and protections of critical infrastructure that the 
United States Government has to offer.''
    That is why I have asked the Federal Government to activate 
the Defense Production Act to ensure that paper suppliers 
prioritize election related materials ahead of November's 
election. I also believe that there are other innovative ways 
to ensure ample supply for state and local jurisdictions, 
including the use of tax incentives to urge paper suppliers to 
prioritize election based supplies.
    The persistent supply chain issues are also affecting other 
aspects of our election administration efforts, especially as 
it relates to the transportation of election supplies and 
machines. In 2021, the vehicle shortage forced Louisiana to 
seek delivery trucks in states as far away as Georgia.
    With four months remaining until the Federal 45 day UOCOVA 
ballot deadline and less than six months until Election Day, 
there can be no delay for action. Additionally, we are 
continuing to work on shoring up our cybersecurity defenses 
against bad actors, both foreign and domestic.
    A recent advisory from the cybersecurity authorities in the 
United States and our allies have warned that we should expect, 
``malicious cyber actors, including state sponsored, advanced 
persistent threat groups, to step up their targeting.'' The 
advisory specifically warned that these groups or individuals 
should be targeted, managed--should be--would be targeting 
managed service providers or MSPs.
    I have long spoken out about the need for MSPs to be open 
and transparent with their Government partners, and in 
Louisiana, we championed legislation to require more 
accountability from MSPs that operate within our state. Without 
clear communications between MSPs and the jurisdictions they 
service, we cannot effectively fight those that wish to do so--
wish to harm us.
    In a world that is increasingly interconnected and with our 
enemies seeking to undermine our elections, it is more 
important than ever that we work together, public, private 
entities, local, state, and Federal Governments across agencies 
to protect critical infrastructure.
    These challenges are in addition to the aging population of 
poll workers, false information, and threats to election 
officials and staff. However, working as partners, we can 
devise solutions to these pressing issues. We have no choice 
but to succeed. The American people expect and deserve no less. 
Thank you very much.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Ardoin was submitted for the 
record.]
    Chairwoman Klobuchar. Thank you very much. Next up, Mr. 
Hewitt.

  OPENING STATEMENT OF DAMON HEWITT, PRESIDENT AND EXECUTIVE 
   DIRECTOR, LAWYERS' COMMITTEE FOR CIVIL RIGHTS UNDER LAW, 
                         WASHINGTON, DC

    Mr. Hewitt. Good morning, Chairwoman Klobuchar, Ranking 
Member Blunt, Members of the Senate Committee on Rules and 
Administration. My name is Damon Hewitt, President and 
Executive Director of the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights 
Under Law. Thank you for the opportunity to testify today.
    As I begin, I want to lift up the victims of the massacre 
in Buffalo, New York, who were killed this weekend. They were 
killed by a white supremacist who drove three hours to 
deliberately hunt down and kill explicitly black people who 
were shopping for groceries.
    As we learn more about that killer's terroristic attack, 
the deadliest mass shooting in America this year, we know that 
it was fueled by lies, misinformation, and disinformation. That 
makes it in many ways parallel to what we are seeing in the 
election and voting context.
    I am here to warn you of another effect of these lies, the 
rapid deterioration of our democracy, and unprecedented threats 
of violence and intimidation against election officials, black 
communities, and other communities of color all around this 
country.
    As President of the Lawyers' Committee, I lead an 
organization that uses legal advocacy to ensure that we fight 
for racial justice. We fight inside the courts, outside the 
courts, but we fight to ensure that black people and other 
people of color and every American has the voice, opportunity, 
and power to make the great promises of our democracy real and 
not illusory.
    As part of this work, we convene the Election Protection 
Coalition, the Nation's largest nonpartisan voter protection 
effort, and the 866-OUR-VOTE hotline, voter assistance hotline, 
which is also nonpartisan.
    Through that hotline, hundreds of thousands of voters call 
for information and assistance and to report problems in 
election administration, including problems with paper ballots, 
problems with mail in ballots, and even intimidation at the 
polls or even online or through the airwaves.
    Our work gives us unique insights into patterns at the 
state and local level. Too often what we are seeing is the 
erosion of election infrastructure and the democratic process, 
all based upon fallacies and misrepresentations and lies 
designed to divide us. My message for this Committee is simple: 
election laws that perpetuate attacks and harassment and impose 
criminal penalties or hefty fines on election administrators 
just trying to do their jobs are wrong.
    Voting laws and practices that impose unnecessary hurdles 
on voters, especially voters of color, in order to exercise 
their fundamental rights are also wrong. This is a vicious 
cycle. Undermining and harassing election workers also harms 
voters, and making it harder for voters to cast a ballot harms 
election workers by making their already difficult jobs that 
much harder, especially in the context of the last few years.
    What we learned in 2020 is that democracy works when you 
let it. We saw incredible energy and participation across party 
lines. Yet Legislatures have now introduced and enacted a wave 
of restrictive voting bills. Ironically, in response to those 
record levels of participation, throughout the 2021 year and 
beginning of this year, we have seen bills that are banning 
drop boxes, restricting early voting hours, shortening the 
window to request absentee ballots, threatening new criminal 
and financial penalties against election administrators, and 
privileging partisan poll watchers, granting them sometimes 
unfettered access to the polls.
    Now, many of these laws were passed in spite of universal, 
bipartisan opposition from election administrators around the 
country who warned legislators that the laws would have a 
chilling effect on election workers themselves and ultimately 
make it harder for voters to cast a ballot. In many instances, 
sadly, state lawmakers failed to heed the election 
administrator's warnings, and the impacts of these changes will 
come to light during this year's primary and midterm elections.
    In fact, in some states, they already have. These egregious 
laws are doing a number of things. They are heightening levels 
of racial discrimination, creating an environment rife with it. 
They are weaponizing the power of criminal law to sweep aside 
neutral and nonpartisan election administrators, functionally 
disenfranchising voters in the process.
    Furthermore, they are giving those who want to sow 
violence, doubt, and misdirection, and the election process is 
giving them political camouflage for their threats and their 
attacks. Put simply, these laws undermine our democracy and its 
promise.
    This week marks the 65th anniversary of Dr. Martin Luther 
King Jr.'s famous speech, ``Give Us The Ballot'' where he 
warned us about those who gained prominence and power by the 
dissemination of false ideas and deliberately appealing to the 
deepest hate responses within the human mind. Dr. King reminded 
us that while these individuals by no means represent the 
majority of Americans, the false ideas they spread often grow 
louder when those who disagree with them remain silent because 
of fear of political or economic reprisals.
    I said earlier that democracy is a promise. Democracy is 
also a choice. We have a choice when it comes to election 
administration. We can either strengthen democracy and make it 
easier to vote and administer elections, or we can make it 
harder.
    As policymakers, you can make a choice, a choice in favor 
of democracy. During these unprecedented times, I urge this 
Committee and the full Senate, the world's greatest 
deliberative body, to not just speak out loudly against the 
misinformation and lies, but to stop it in its tracks through 
legislation and any means that you can. Thank you.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Hewitt was submitted for the 
record.]
    Chairwoman Klobuchar. Thank you so much, Mr. Hewitt. Next 
up--we are just discussing votes and other things if we look 
kind of distracted here. Next up, Mr. Wilcox. Thank you.

 OPENING STATEMENT OF WESLEY WILCOX, SUPERVISOR OF ELECTIONS, 
                 MARION COUNTY, OCALA, FLORIDA

    Mr. Wilcox. Good morning, Chairwoman Klobuchar, Ranking 
Member Blunt, and Members of the Committee. I am Wesley Wilcox, 
Supervisor of Elections for Marion County, Florida, and 
President of the Florida Supervisors of Elections Association.
    I have more than 30 years' experience in the election 
industry, and I am nationally certified. Most of us, at least 
here on the table and on the Committee, will likely recall the 
2000 general election. Admittedly, it was not our finest hour. 
In the 20 years since, Florida and many other states have made 
great improvements, culminating in an administratively accurate 
and successful 2020 general election.
    Florida offers a no excuse vote by mail option that has 
proven to be quite popular, especially during the pandemic. As 
mentioned earlier by Secretary Chapman, one of the things that 
set Florida apart in 2020 is the fact that vote by mail ballots 
are processed in the weeks prior to the election. This process 
allows us to publish nearly complete vote by mail totals on 
election night.
    In addition, if there is an issue with a mail ballot 
signature, we have time to contact the voter, providing them an 
opportunity to cure their ballot. Several years ago, we also 
added an in-person early voting option to meet the needs of our 
extremely diverse population.
    Elections are best administered at the state and local 
level. A 2-week early voting period offered in Miami Dade 
County with 1.5 million voters is probably not needed for a 
small county such as Lafayette, with only 4,500 voters.
    Decentralized elections are also a positive from a National 
Security perspective, making it more difficult for bad actors 
attempting to compromise the system since there is no central 
point of attack. Florida also has well-developed laws and 
procedures for recounts, post-election audits, providing clear 
guidelines and procedures.
    There have also been significant efforts in raising the 
professionalism of election officials. Since the year 2000, 
over 1,300 election professionals across the country have 
received their National Certified Elections and Registration 
Administrator, CERA, designation, with 119 of those from 
Florida. Our FSE Association developed a nationally awarded 
Florida Certified Election Professional, FCEP, program.
    This program consists of core courses plus renewal courses 
and 120 hours of content instructed by industry experts. Since 
its inception in 2009, we have had over 800 participants with 
245 of those obtaining their master certification.
    In recent years, election security has become a top 
priority. Partnerships with local, state, and Federal agencies 
have been strengthened. As mentioned earlier, in 2017, the 
Department of Homeland Security designated elections as 
critical infrastructure and the Center for Internet Security 
formed the Elections Infrastructure Information Sharing and 
Analysis Center, EI-ISAC, of which I am actually the vice chair 
of that executive board.
    Through the EI-ISAC, election officials have access to 
resources and tools for implementing cybersecurity best 
practices. Florida has used HAVA dollars to fund our election 
security grant programs, which have been extremely beneficial 
across the state. Despite these vast improvements and strong 
partnerships, grave concerns remain for me and my colleagues. 
Florida was touted as the gold standard and model for voting in 
the 2020 election, but lately the accolades have waned and high 
fives for a job well done have ceased.
    Instead, they have been replaced by threats of violence 
against us or our families. Accusations of rampant voter roll 
irregularities. Allegations of voter fraud or voter suppression 
and inundation of public records requests. My colleagues and I 
continue to defend the accuracy of our 2020 election and our 
cherished democracy, which remains under a relentless and 
unprecedented barrage of falsehoods.
    Misinformation has made our jobs more difficult, as we 
battle on the front lines defending our democracy. Several of 
my tenured colleagues have retired or have announced their 
impending retirement due to these unceasing false narratives. 
Even the days of wanting to be an election worker for your own 
civic duty have been replaced with fear and polling place 
disruptions.
    We have spent over two decades professionalizing our 
conduct of elections, and now in a short period of time, our 
institutions are being undermined by falsehoods that 
continually weaken voter confidence in our elections. The 
challenges facing our elections are daunting.
    In normal times, election worker recruitment is difficult, 
but today it is nearly impossible. Elections officials across 
the Nation will need record amounts of paper this fall for our 
ballots and other supplies, and they have all been affected by 
the paper shortages.
    Lest we all forget, the 2022 election is taking place after 
the decennial census, with its resulting redistricting, a 
challenging operation even in the best of times.
    Finally, many of us are also facing new state election 
laws, resulting in demanding court cases and requiring 
substantial voter education. Election law changes are the most 
successful when there are a collaborative effort between the 
election administrators and legislative bodies. We remain 
dedicated to impartial administration of Florida's election 
laws and conducting fair, honest, and accurate elections. Our 
goal is to make it easy to vote and hard to cheat. Thank you 
again for the opportunity to testify today on this important 
topic.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Wilcox was submitted for the 
record.]
    Chairwoman Klobuchar. Thank you very much. Ms. Patrick?

 OPENING STATEMENT OF TAMMY PATRICK, SENIOR ADVISOR, DEMOCRACY 
                      FUND, WASHINGTON, DC

    Ms. Patrick. Chairwoman Klobuchar, Ranking Member Blunt, 
Members of the Committee, and honored guests, it is a privilege 
to provide testimony on the status of election administration 
and the preparedness for this election cycle. My name is Tammy 
Patrick and I currently serve as the Senior Advisor to the 
Elections Team at the Democracy Fund. As an Adjunct Professor 
at the Humphrey School of Public Policy at the University of 
Minnesota, I have worked in the election administration field 
for almost 20 years and spent 11 of those years in Maricopa 
County, Arizona, most of them as the Federal compliance 
officer. I, too, am CERA certified, as Supervisor Wilcox 
mentioned.
    I have the great fortune of knowing many state and local 
election officials, as well as many across the country who are 
working across the aisle and across the myriad of facets of our 
election systems to ensure that officials have the tools and 
resources that they need to serve their voters well.
    As a representative of the Election Center to the United 
States Postal Service's Mailers Technical Advisory Committee, a 
bit of a mouthful, for over a decade, I have forged 
relationships that have aided the improvement of our postal 
system to better deliver democracy to the American voter.
    Today, I would like to share with you what I am hearing and 
seeing unfold for the primaries and the forthcoming November 
midterm elections. My written testimony covers seven different 
topics; for my prepared comments, however, I would like to 
focus on just one topic, paper and supply chain issues, echoing 
what Secretary Ardoin's sentiments are. This is new in both the 
scope and the scale of what we are seeing.
    My comments are derived directly from recent communications 
with election officials and service industry providers. Each 
section provides direct comments from election administrators 
and professionals, an overview of the issue, and then the 
impact it is having now in the field of election 
administration.
    ``Needs: paper! Some folks have stockpiled paper, but 
overall ballot paper for November is a major concern,'' from a 
local election official.
    Another local election official, ``Paper shortage issues 
have mitigated--was mitigated because we contract with a vendor 
who responded by purchasing paper early. We did have to 
increase what we pay, however, to our vendor.''
    Yet from a service industry provider, ``The supply chain 
issues continue with dates getting further and further pushed 
out. Additionally, more allocations are in play. For example, 
recently our supplier just delivered part of an order we placed 
months ago and cannot fulfill the rest. We are searching and 
are having to pay higher prices for paper sizes larger than 
what is needed and then cut them down to size so we have the 
ability to keep moving out the work.''
    Paper supply chain concerns began surfacing in the 2020 
elections. The origin of the paper supply for election 
materials is mostly domestic, coming from North American mills, 
as Secretary Ardoin mentioned, in both the United States and 
Canada.
    When the international supplies became problematic, other 
markets, however, turned to these domestic sources to fill 
their gap. This reduction in supply occurred at the same time 
as the increased demand for corrugated paper to fulfill the 
spike in online shopping during the pandemic.
    We have not had a new paper mill open in the United States 
since the 1980's, and the existing mills could not 
simultaneously continue their traditional paper production and 
take on the corrugated manufacturing. Many of them opted to 
change production to the more lucrative corrugated product.
    Ballot and envelope printers and vendors began seeing these 
issues in late 2021 and started to ask their election official 
customers to get their orders in early. In order to take care 
of their customers, they placed their paper orders well in 
advance of normal schedules. Standard turnaround times have 
gone from a few weeks to many months in order to fulfill, and 
it is now common for orders to be incomplete. Partial 
shipments, back orders, and outright cancellations are becoming 
typical.
    This is creating a disparate impact on jurisdictions. Those 
who use a vendor or service provider may be in better shape, 
but only if that vendor preordered paper stock, the order was 
fully satisfied, and the jurisdiction got their order in early 
enough. Election officials, which have traditionally printed 
and created their own materials in house, are now finding it 
very difficult to obtain items and are turning to these same 
vendors who are already strapped serving their existing 
customer base. Service providers and vendors are now having to 
turn customers away and those customers are leaving empty 
handed.
    An additional impact is felt in those states that have had 
changes to their election policies and laws that negate their 
ability to use existing inventory of materials. New 
registration requirements, ballot application changes may 
necessitate throwing away existing paper products and require 
reprinting in an already strained market.
    Not all states and election offices will be impacted 
equally by the paper shortages. States that offer online and 
automatic or automated voter registration and those that 
utilize electronic poll books to check in voters will not be as 
hard hit as those relying on paper registration and roster 
forms.
    To be very clear, the paper shortage is pervasive. It is 
across all materials required to conduct an election, and 
simply limiting options for voters to an in-person solution is 
not viable.
    States that have all vote by mail regimes as well as those 
that offer mainly in-person, are having issues. It is not just 
ballot paper, but also paper used for postcards, poll worker 
training materials. It is for everything.
    The paper shortage further impacts election administration 
timelines. Unless this shortage is remedied, statutorily 
required election mailings and notices may not go out on time. 
The condensed timeframe and resources leave no room for error, 
and we know that errors can occur in printing. Given the 
shortage, there may not be available stock to reprint if an 
error occurs and states need to contemplate how they will 
handle that situation if it arises.
    Despite the utmost gravity of the paper and supply chain 
shortage, there is one silver lining. I always try and conclude 
something positive. A service provider recently told me----
    Chairwoman Klobuchar. We try as well. Go ahead.
    Ms. Patrick. I know. It is hard in these times. But one 
thing that came out of it as a vendor told me that they were 
working with the state, they could not get the normal paper for 
their voter registration materials, and they were encouraged to 
redesign to fit the paper sizes that they had. It was a decades 
old form that they were able to revise using best practices and 
plain language and make their materials easier to comprehend 
for voters. It is the perfect example of how election 
administrator professionals work. They are continually deprived 
of resources and services but try to find the best solution 
available since the election must go on.
    [The prepared statement of Ms. Patrick was submitted for 
the record.]
    Chairwoman Klobuchar. Okay. Thank you. Thank you so much, 
Ms. Patrick. I was looking at Secretary Ardoin. I think he is 
happy that I have not just the Mississippi River that that 
connects Minnesota and Louisiana from the beginning to the end, 
but also trying to get at this paper issue.
    Thank you very much. I am going to start with you, I think, 
Secretary Chapman. Do you agree that election workers need 
additional Federal protections and resources to ensure safety 
as well as administrate elections?
    Ms. Chapman. Yes. In Pennsylvania, we have 67 counties, and 
one consensus that we have from most county election directors 
and county commissioners is the need for additional robust 
funding to administer elections. Just as an example, before 
2020, it costs around $20 million to run in an election 
statewide in Pennsylvania. Since then, that cost, at least to 
the department, has skyrocketed.
    We spent around $60 million just as a department alone, and 
that does not include county costs in 2020. We, you know, 
implemented mail in voting in 2019. That increased the costs 
for counties. You know, they had to buy scanners and tabulators 
and new equipment to fulfill that need.
    We have had over around 6 million voters in the 
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania who have used mail in voting since 
it was passed in 2019. That need for both the Federal 
Government and also the State Government to partner to support 
our elections is something critical to support county election 
administrators and their needs.
    Chairwoman Klobuchar. I would think cybersecurity, of which 
we have assisted on the Federal level, but we know that that is 
needed. How about the threats against election workers? Are you 
continuing to see that in your state?
    Ms. Chapman. Unfortunately, we are, and it is a concern 
that we are taking seriously. You mentioned partnering with 
Federal partners. We actually had a meeting with DHS CISA and 
other Federal partners a few weeks before the primary election 
with all 67 county election directors to talk about how to 
report threats, how to mitigate threats. You know, we have had 
very good partnerships with our law enforcement partners, but 
it is something that we are concerned about.
    You know, election officials are your neighbors, they are 
your friends, they are your families. They are really just 
trying to do their job to make sure that every vote is counted, 
that every voter has the opportunity to exercise their 
fundamental right to vote so they really should not be 
threatened. It is a shame that that is happening.
    Chairwoman Klobuchar. Thank you for saying that so well, 
because I know you have had issues in your state, and it is one 
of the reasons that Senator Warren and I and a number of people 
on this Committee have put together this package for election 
funding.
    Mr. Hewitt, I have pushed the social media companies to 
improve their policies for election related disinformation, 
make sure these policies are enforced. While we saw some 
improvements in 2020, there is still so much progress to be 
made. What kind of disinformation do you think was particularly 
harmful in 2020?
    Mr. Hewitt. Well, thank you for the question, Senator 
Klobuchar. What we saw being harmful was the kind of 
disinformation that steered people away from trying to vote via 
certain means or sometimes at all. For example, there are a 
couple of individuals whom we have sued civilly, and they have 
also been prosecuted, who set up a series of thousands of 
robocalls to voters.
    They used a narrator who had a voice appearing to sound as 
if she were an African-American woman. That was the intent. She 
may well have been, but the voice on a robocall said, if you 
vote by mail, the information will be used to track you down to 
execute outstanding warrants by the police. It will be used to 
track you down to give the information to creditors for 
outstanding debts, and it will be used by the CDC to require 
mandatory vaccinations.
    You think about fears in the black community, about police 
misconduct, about economic insecurity, about the Tuskegee 
experiment, right. Trying to hit all of those pressure points 
to have a chilling effect on voting by mail, which for some 
people was a safe and effective means of casting a ballot, 
especially then and also now. We saw that through the airwaves.
    We have sued civilly. We have put Facebook Meta, the other 
companies on notice as well. But we need more help. We need 
more help from Congress.
    Chairwoman Klobuchar. Okay, very good. I was not aware of 
that. Thank you for sharing that chilling story. Ms. Patrick, 
as a member of the Postal Service Working Group on Election 
Mail, do you anticipate any significant mail processing and 
delivery issues this year? Just answer in one minute so I can 
get to my colleagues.
    Ms. Patrick. Thank you, very quickly. One of the biggest 
challenges will be the continued utilization of the 
extraordinary measures that were put in place in 2020, and most 
specifically, knowing whether or not ballots will be kept 
locally because ballots kept locally are not postmarked or 
scanned and can create some issues and challenges for the 
voters in having their ballots be accepted.
    Chairwoman Klobuchar. Okay. As you know, we recently passed 
on a bipartisan basis postal reform to try to help with some of 
this. I will end with you, Secretary Ardoin. You have raised 
concerns about supply chain issues that would impact election 
officials' ability to get sufficient paper for election 
materials. Senator Blunt and I have agreed that supplies are 
needed, and I have urged the Election Assistance Commission to 
support.
    We both have state and local officials confronting these 
issues. As President of the National Association of Secretaries 
of State, have you discussed these issues with other 
Secretaries and are you aware of any strategies that can be 
helpful in getting election officials needed supplies?
    Mr. Ardoin. We have discussed these issues on our 
elections--weekly elections calls, Senator. What we--what has 
been urged is through the Sector Coordinating Council, which is 
a private sector of the GCC Governing Coordinating Council 
under CISA, they have urged since the beginning of the year a 
lot, every jurisdiction to order their paper as soon as 
possible and to make certain that they order enough in order to 
be able to deal with the issues that we have seen just recently 
in Pennsylvania.
    I will tell you that in my state, we do a lot of deck 
checks, as we call them, quality checks to make certain that 
the printer is doing the job that they are supposed to do. But 
when you catch a mistake and supplies are at risk, it may 
jeopardize the ability for folks to utilize that.
    I think what we are going to promote in Louisiana 
specifically is that, as you know, we had 2.1 million voters 
vote in person--I am sorry, in the Presidential election, and 
93 percent of those voted in person, and we are going to 
continue to encourage those to vote in person so that there is 
enough supply for those individuals who need to vote by mail or 
absentee to be able to utilize that service.
    Chairwoman Klobuchar. Thank you very much. Senator Blunt.
    Senator Blunt. Mr. Wilcox, quickly, let us go back to the 
whole idea of pre-canvassing, which means you can open the 
absentee or the mail in envelope. What else do you do? I do not 
have much time here so quickly give us a sense of what you do 
before Election Day and when you actually count in the pre-
canvassing environment.
    Mr. Wilcox. Yes, Senator, thank you. We actually, as vote 
by mail is returned to us, we are able to validate signatures. 
Starting about three weeks before the election, we will 
actually open the envelopes and run the ballots themselves 
through the tabulation machines, processing them, but not 
releasing any of the results.
    We know how many we have ran through so that on election 
night, when 7:00 p.m. goes--comes in, the only vote by mail 
that we are dealing with are those that literally were dropped 
at our door the last 15 or 20 minutes. It allows us that huge 
advantage of reporting the results in a timely manner.
    Senator Blunt. Do you have a curative process where if 
there is not a signature or you wonder about the signature, you 
try to do something about that, or do you reject that ballot?
    Mr. Wilcox. Yes, sir. We do have a cure process. As soon as 
we receive a vote by mail ballot back from a voter, and there 
is any question concerning the signature, we at that point in 
time attempt to notify the voter via United States Postal. If 
we have got an email address, we are going to do that. Any 
other means, letting them know that the signature on their vote 
by mail ballot may be in question.
    Senator Blunt. That processing is done in a bipartisan way, 
just like elections are administered in a bipartisan way?
    Mr. Wilcox. Yes, sir, it is. Yes.
    Senator Blunt. Is anybody aware of that count as it occurs, 
except the knowing of the fact that the ballot was counted?
    Mr. Wilcox. We know turnout at that point in time and that 
is all we know. You can ask me two weeks before the election, 
and I can tell you that, you know, I have had 37,000 ballots 
cast and that can either be in a vote by mail or early voting--
--
    Senator Blunt. The counties have, you said three weeks, do 
they have the discretion to start when they think they need to 
start?
    Mr. Wilcox. Yes, sir. You know, the Miami-Dade's of the 
world, they are going to start three weeks. Lafayette County 
that has 4,500 voters, they may start only one week prior to 
the election. Yes, we as administrators and canvassing board 
members have that discretion to fit our personal needs.
    Senator Blunt. Secretary Chapman, did you or your 
predecessor either want to ask the Legislature to give you more 
pre-canvassing ability?
    Ms. Chapman. We have, and all 67 counties are in support of 
it. That is why it is Thursday, our election was Tuesday, and 
there is still 50,000 ballots left to be counted because 
election officials are not able to start the pre-canvass until 
7:00 a.m. on Election Day.
    Senator Blunt. All right. What do you do on pre-canvassing, 
Secretary?
    Mr. Ardoin. Thank you, Senator. As a result of the 
hurricanes in 2020, we initiated an emergency process. We have 
an emergency process in our state that I and the Governor can 
act and then the Legislature--I have to present a plan to the 
Legislature.
    We did provide for that. We have provided for, I believe it 
was four days prior to the election to start the ballot 
processing, but not the counting. Counting starts on Election 
Day.
    Senator Blunt. Is the Legislature always in session, or do 
you have to present that some time before the Election Day?
    Mr. Ardoin. I have to present it before the election and I 
have to present it to the two committees with jurisdiction on 
both sides, and then those committees approve it, and then it 
goes to a mail ballot of the vote----
    Senator Blunt. When you have a hurricane six days before 
the election, do you wind up changing polling places?
    Mr. Ardoin. We do emergency changes. Yes, sir.
    Senator Blunt. Do you think you would have the same ability 
to do those emergency changes if there was a set of Federal 
guidelines?
    Mr. Ardoin. No, sir.
    Senator Blunt. How about you, Mr. Wilcox? What do you think 
you would lose if there was a Federal structure as opposed to a 
state by state structure?
    Mr. Wilcox. As mentioned earlier, I am in strong support of 
local and state control of election because we you know, the 
things that work for the State of Florida work very well in the 
State of Florida.
    But if we add a Federal legislation, I do not know how you 
could get a Florida and a Colorado and possibly a Louisiana and 
fit us all into the same box. We in Florida had decided and 
worked through what works best for our Miami Dades, our 
Lafayettes, and everybody in between so that it fits, and we 
have those optional pieces to make it for our particular 
jurisdiction.
    Senator Blunt. Secretary Chapman, what do you think was the 
problem with these 20,000 ballots that were not able to be 
counted on Election Day? Was this a printing error in printing 
the barcode or--and why wouldn't that have come up in some kind 
of pretest of the system?
    Ms. Chapman. Yes. That was Lancaster County. It was one 
county. It was a vendor issue with, you know, mis-printing the 
barcode. When, at 7:00 a.m., when the county started pre-
canvassing, they discovered this error that the scanner was not 
reading the barcode, so that is why they are hand marking the 
ballot. If we had ample pre-canvass time like Florida, that 
would have definitely been caught earlier.
    Senator Blunt. Right. On the paper issue, you know, we do 
not want this to become the new--our next baby formula issue. 
When you have elections on Election Day, you need to be 
prepared for them. I think we are both and this whole Committee 
is very interested in that. Thank you, Chairwoman.
    Chairwoman Klobuchar. Okay. Next up, Senator Warner online 
and Senator Cruz and Senator Padilla. Okay. Senator Warner.
    Senator Warner. Thank you, Madam Chair. Let me just say at 
the outset, I think we all are a little concerned with some of 
the folks who have been election deniers who are being 
nominated around the country, some as recently as this week.
    I do think, you know, I have been working on a bipartisan 
basis, and I know that Chair has done some great work on at 
least making sure we get the Electoral Count Act reform.
    I really do hope, whether it comes out of the Chairwoman in 
the Rules Committee's efforts or out of this bipartisan effort 
that we get that Electoral Count Act reform legislation to the 
President as quickly as possible.
    I think I am going to start my questions with Ms. Patrick. 
I know you have just recently been at an event, kind of current 
state of play within the postal services. Can you talk a little 
bit about, if you do not have good coordination between the 
state and the postal system, how that can interfere in the 
election? In particular, I believe there are certain states 
that their vote by mail ballots actually cannot even be 
processed by the Post Office's sorting machines. Is that 
accurate as well?
    Ms. Patrick. Thank you so much for the question, Senator. 
Part of the challenge is that many of the materials that are 
being produced by election officials do not follow standards 
and best practices, and they are not automation compatible. 
What that means is that they are not able to flow through the 
normal mail stream and have to be manually processed.
    They are either too big or there is so much content and 
text on the envelopes that they get slowed down in the system 
and they do not follow those best practices, so those are big 
challenges. The other big challenge that really conflicts with, 
quite frankly, common sense is that we have 19 states that 
allow for a voter to request a ballot within the timeframe that 
the Postal Service says the mail should be returned.
    They recommend ballots be mailed back seven days before the 
election. Nineteen states allow for a ballot to be requested 
even up to and including the Monday before Tuesday's election. 
That is just not possible for the Postal Service to deliver it 
in that timeframe.
    Senator Warner. Well, I appreciate that. I mean, I know--I 
think some of the extraordinary measures that took place in 
2020, making sure that you do not change drop boxes, change 
Post Office locations, change mail locations in the weeks 
leading up, that you have appropriate sweeps, and making sure, 
again, that absentee ballots are treated as first class mail.
    You know, I am working with Rob Portman on a number of 
these issues on a, you know, fairly isolated but fairly 
targeted set of reforms to make sure that those Americans who 
choose to vote by mail are not inhibited and prohibited.
    I do think while we cannot mandate, you know, a single type 
of ballot, there ought to be some level of incentives so that 
those ballots that are vote by mail, of some level standard 
size, may even be of a different color again, so that Post 
Office workers can easily sort and make sure that those ballots 
are appropriately processed.
    Mr. Hewitt, I thought your comments about some of these 
misinformation, disinformation stories are pretty chilling. I 
would point out to my colleagues that literally today there is 
a meeting taking place in Washington about misinformation and 
disinformation that includes parliamentarians from some House 
Members are going, but members of the British Parliament, 
Canadian members of parliament, members from Australia, New 
Zealand, and a number of other European countries.
    This misinformation, disinformation plague is happening 
across democracies everywhere, often times supported by foreign 
adversaries. Not necessarily where they have got to create the 
foreign bots that are spreading misinformation, oftentimes it 
is just amplifying misinformation, disinformation that may have 
been originated, for example, here in America.
    But it is ongoing, and it is a problem, even if DHS, with 
their roll out on their recent board, did it pretty ineptly, 
this is a problem that we cannot move away from. Ms. Chapman, I 
guess what I want to ask you is, you talked about in your 
testimony, misinformation, disinformation directed toward 
voters.
    What about misinformation, disinformation that might be 
directed toward election workers, local elected officials, and 
others? How do we guard against that taking place where 
suddenly you have got election workers believing misinformation 
that may candidly affect their ability to do their job as an 
election official? Are you seeing that start to take place?
    Ms. Chapman. You know, in Pennsylvania right now, I think 
the largest bit of misinformation and disinformation we are 
seeing is around the elections process itself. Around, for 
instance, secure ballot drop boxes and whether or not, you 
know, voters can drop off their ballot, which they can. It is 
not really directed at the election workers per se, but more 
about the process of voting in elections. At the Department of 
State, you know, we work very closely with our counties on an 
education campaign so we can be transparent about what the 
process is to register to vote, to cast their ballot, and also 
the options voters have to return that ballot as well.
    Senator Warner. Well, I guess, again, I know my time is up, 
but I thank the Chair and the Ranking Member. I know they 
worked hard together to try to protect election workers from 
threats and abuse.
    I do think the sophistication of some of the 
misinformation, disinformation, I do think we have to look at 
those election workers themselves being victims of some of this 
misinformation, disinformation. How we sort through this is 
going to take us all putting our heads together. Thank you, 
Chair Klobuchar.
    Chairwoman Klobuchar. Thank you very much, Senator Warner. 
Senator Cruz.
    Senator Cruz. You know, much of our discussions about 
elections today would make George Orwell blush. Democrats have 
routinely taken to decrying what they call misinformation and 
disinformation by which they mean any information that is 
politically inconvenient for Democrats.
    That was illustrated most powerfully by President Biden's 
minister of truth, this new appointee to lead a so-called 
disinformation board, a Government board who has been a wild 
eyed partisan her entire life, who has repeatedly amplified 
things that were in fact disinformation.
    Things like the bogus and fraudulent Steele dossier, she 
was happy to amplify. She has also advocated silencing and 
censoring things that were unquestionably true, like Hunter 
Biden's laptop, which was politically inconvenient to Democrats 
at the time of the election.
    You know, just a moment ago, the Senator from Virginia made 
a reference to election deniers, which is yet another 
interesting bit of nomenclature that Democrats have adopted. I 
find it interesting that that apparently now Democrats are 
denouncing Hillary Clinton. They are denouncing Stacey Abrams 
because Hillary Clinton and Stacey Abrams both maintain the 
election was stolen from them.
    Stacey Abrams apparently thinks she is still the Governor 
of Georgia and that no election occurred. The hypocrisy that 
our Democratic friends bring to this issue is truly stunning. 
Now, Mr. Wilcox, a year ago, 21 Democrat Senators sent Attorney 
General Garland a letter about the ``barrage of threats and 
abusive conduct from those seeking to interfere with the 
certification of the 2020 election or overturn the results.''
    Now, of course, no election officials should be subjected 
to threats. But many threats to election officials and public 
officials more generally are not limited to one side of the 
aisle. We see Democrats across the country making false claims 
of voter suppression.
    For example, President Biden has called Georgia's common 
sense election law, ``Jim Crow in the 21st century.'' This 
rhetoric deliberately racially, divisive, incendiary rhetoric 
can have real consequences. Can you speak, Mr. Wilcox, to how 
this type of rhetoric and misinformation from the left affects 
our elections?
    Mr. Wilcox. I think misinformation, regardless of left or 
right, is bad for our election institution. You know, my 
concern and my colleagues' concern as elections professionals 
is the accuracy, the security, and the ability to vote. Once 
again, I go back to our statement earlier. We want to make it 
easy to vote and hard to cheat. However that is accomplished is 
what we want as elections administrators.
    Senator Cruz. The last major bipartisan examination of 
voter fraud was the Carter Baker Commission. This was a 
bipartisan commission. It was chaired by former Democrat 
President Jimmy Carter and former Republican Secretary of State 
James Baker.
    They produced a report. That report concluded that voter 
fraud was real. It was a problem. It was persistent and it 
needed to be combated. It also put forth a series of 
recommendations in terms of how to fight voter fraud, things--
common sense ideas that the vast majority of Americans support, 
like photo ID for voting.
    You need photo ID to get on an airplane, to drive a car. 
You need photo ID to get a beer or if you are a teenager, to 
get into a movie. Yet, our Democrat friends routinely 
filibuster and oppose any efforts to have photo IDs, despite 
the fact that the overwhelming majority of Americans support 
them.
    Carter Baker Commission also talked about one of the most 
frequent sources of voter fraud is mail in ballots. That mail 
in ballots historically have invited fraud. Now, I will say, 
unfortunately, we are seeing Democrats across the country 
pushing for universal mail in balloting. It is almost as if 
Democrats took the Carter Baker Commission, read the 
recommendations on how to stop fraud, and inverted them.
    Let us do the opposite. Whatever would stop fraud, let us 
do the opposite and let us do more of the conduct that produces 
fraud. You know, we are sitting here in Pennsylvania. We still 
do not know who won the Republican nomination for Senator 
because we are still waiting on ballots coming in.
    Many states manage to actually conduct their elections on 
the day of elections, and yet Democrats keep moving in the 
direction of election chaos. Secretary Ardoin, some of the 
witnesses here have criticized laws like Texas's SB1 because it 
slows the expansion of nontraditional voting methods like mail 
in voting. Can you tell this Committee about the security 
concerns and fraud concerns potentially posed by mail in 
voting?
    Mr. Ardoin. Yes, Senator. The concern in Louisiana that we 
have found is that the concern is that we cannot quickly enough 
process the ballots to make certain that the absentee requests 
are from the individuals that are actually asking for the 
ballots.
    We have to compare signatures, which requires additional 
equipment for us to be able to electronically do that. Right 
now, we are doing it eyeball, in person. That slows down the 
process of being able to get individuals their ballots. The 
concern is which we passed a law with regards to ballot 
harvesting.
    Our concern was that political campaigns, political 
parties, and nonprofits, 501(c)(3)'s and 501(c)(4)'s, and 
political action committees could manipulate the process, and 
we did not want to have that happen in the Presidential 
election.
    We passed bipartisanly that piece of legislation in a 
Republican led Legislature, and it was signed into law by a 
Democratic Governor. We did not have the issues that we have 
seen around the country that a lot of harvesting was done in 
terms of turnout for an election.
    Because of that, we feel more confident where we are. We 
make certain that we promote in-person voting. We had 2.1 
million votes cast in 2020, and of that, 93 percent of those 
were in-person. People did not mind standing in lines. It was 
at the height of COVID for early voting.
    We have seven days of ten hours of voting for early voting, 
and we have for Federal elections a 14 hour voting day. We 
believe we have given our citizens ample time to vote in 
person. With this shortage of paper, we believe that we should 
be promoting in-person voting as much as possible. It is also 
the best way for the voter to make certain that their vote was 
accurately count--cast and counted.
    Senator Cruz. Well, thank you.
    Chairwoman Klobuchar. Thank you. Thank you, Senator Cruz. I 
am going to turn this hearing in general over to Senator 
Merkley. Senator Padilla is up next. I know Senator Ossoff is 
here. I did want to thank the witnesses because I am going back 
to vote. You have been incredible. I will note, I hope you saw 
the spirit that Senator Blunt and I bring to this issue.
    We had disagreements on the Freedom to Vote Act that I 
strongly believe we should pass, but we agree that there should 
be some Federal funding for elections. We have worked together 
on that in the past. We believe, as we have stated, that 
election officials, local election officials should be 
protected and should not be the subject of threats and 
violence. We believe in our democracy and a fair administration 
of our elections.
    With that spirit--and we believe in trying to fix the paper 
shortage for the Secretaries of State, Secretary Ardoin. There 
are many other things we agree on as well, but we bring that 
spirit to this hearing as we go forward into another election.
    I just want to thank all of you for raising these very 
important issues. Thank you very much, Senator Padilla, former 
Secretary of State of the great and large State of California. 
You are next. Thanks.
    Senator Padilla. Thank you, Madam Chair. I think in a 
similar spirit, I will resist the temptation to engage or 
escalate partisan rhetoric in this hearing out of respect for 
the topic at hand, out of respect for the professionalism of 
the witnesses that are before us, and out of respect, frankly, 
for the American people, everybody observing this hearing.
    Mr. Wilcox, I have heard you say a couple of times now, not 
many have put the question yet, the catch phrase I have heard 
far too often here were we just want to make it easier to vote 
and harder to cheat. Sounds good. It is a great soundbite, and 
it is not your fault, but I have heard it far too often in this 
Committee as a pretext, frankly, from some of my colleagues 
who--look, I agree we should be making it easier to vote and 
harder to cheat. If you look at the policies, if you look at 
data, we have gotten the hard to cheat part down because voter 
fraud in America is exceedingly rare.
    What I get frustrated by is my colleagues forget about the 
first part, the easier to vote part because there are proven 
practices that are secure but can afford eligible voters more 
opportunities to conveniently register, stay registered, and 
actually cast their ballot, have their ballot counted.
    It is not directed at you, but just sort of a level set for 
anybody observing this conversation because I agree. You have 
all touched on it. Election security and ballot access should 
not be mutually exclusive. They should not be mutually 
exclusive. I do not think they are. As the former Secretary of 
State of California proud of the California model, I think it 
is exhibiting on how we can do it right.
    Every voter in America deserves the same protections, the 
same options for participating in our democracy. Now, there is 
a lot to unpack in the hearing here today. Appreciate the 
concerns that have been raised about poll workers, recruitment, 
retention, training, safety. But I am not going to ask a 
question about that.
    We have talked about that. We will continue to talk about 
that vote by mail, an expansion to vote by mail, including the 
security steps in assuring the integrity of vote by mail like 
signature verification, opportunities to cure.
    I will not get into detail because we have in previous 
hearings, and we will continue to have the conversation. Even 
the values and merit of ballot drop boxes as an additional 
option for voters to return their ballot. The merits of in-
person early voting opportunities that can be done securely and 
offered additional options for voters to participate. I will 
have a second question on election disinformation, but I will 
talk about security for a second.
    Not cybersecurity and not staff training, not voting 
systems and the guidelines and security standards for voting 
systems that we should continue to elevate, and not just the 
merit of paper ballots, but a different angle on the supply 
chain question that has been raised specifically about paper.
    Now, a voter watching at home may say, well, wait a minute, 
can't you just go to the Office Depot or the local printer and 
pick up some reams of paper and print ballots? Not voter 
information guides, not--specifically paper as it pertains to 
printing of ballots.
    Let me direct it to Ms. Patrick, and one of the 
Secretaries, if you want to tell me afterwards, some of the 
technical requirements that people should be aware of in terms 
of printing of ballots that voters should be aware of to 
reinforce their faith in the process, including certification 
of ballot printers.
    Ms. Patrick. Thank you, Senator. It is a joy to testify 
before you again. I would say that one of the things to 
remember is that the sophistication of our tabulation equipment 
is very high. Because of that, we need a high quality of paper.
    Because we need to make sure that it is pristine paper, it 
does not have filaments, it does not have other things that can 
capture the light and in some way misrepresent a voter's mark 
as an errant mark, what have you. You cannot just go down to 
Staples or Office Depot and use any sort of paper.
    You have to have a specific type of paper that is of high 
quality and that has always and traditionally been obtained 
here in North America from the North American mills. That is 
part of the tension, is that it is a very unique paper product. 
It is a high quality paper product. In this time when the mills 
have turned their processing over to corrugations, it is 
becoming more and more difficult to obtain.
    Yesterday at the National Postal Forum, many of the 
providers were telling me that even though they have, you know, 
26 thousand-pound rolls, that will blow through in about an 1.5 
or 2 hours in their processing plants. It is of great need.
    Senator Padilla. Right. As a former Secretary of State, I 
invite people to search their state's websites and see the 
public information on what the criteria is for the quality of 
paper, the certification process, who those certified printers 
are, and to make themselves less vulnerable to misinformation 
like we are looking for bamboo filaments here. I will just 
leave it at that. I think that that is critical.
    Again, for voters to know. It is not just about how clear 
the print job is to circle the bubble--fill in the bubble or 
draw an arrow or something like that. But the technology on the 
backend used to accurately count their ballots. I know my time 
is up. A question, an ongoing conversation on disinformation.
    For all the concerns that have been raised, I think there 
is a unique additional challenge of combating let alone trying 
to prevent disinformation and its impact on voters who prefer a 
language other than English, of which there are many, not just 
in California, but across the country.
    Either of the Secretaries, can you speak for a minute just 
on concerns or recommendations on how to battle disinformation 
for linguistically diverse voters?
    Ms. Chapman. Sure, I can take that. Thank you for that 
question. In Pennsylvania, you know, we, of course, follow 
Section 203 of the Voting Rights Act. Actually, this is the 
first election where Philadelphia will provide voting materials 
in Chinese.
    We have been working at the Department of State to support 
Philadelphia County, also statewide, to make sure that all of 
our voter education information is translated into Chinese, 
that we are reaching voters where they are, that we are 
partnering with stakeholder groups.
    But we also go above and beyond just the languages that we 
are required to provide language assistance in and, you know, 
try to also provide it to the most common spoken languages 
within the Commonwealth.
    There is still more work to be done, but we are definitely 
on the right track to make sure that we are providing education 
information in every language possible.
    Senator Padilla. Thank you. To Secretary Chapman, and 
before turning back over to the Chair, just to acknowledge my 
experience as Secretary of State in California was the best way 
to battle the bad information that is out there is to try to 
get ahead of it with accurate information. We know that 
misinformation, disinformation does not just exist on social 
media, but is predominantly on social media.
    From other hearings and other Committees that we have had 
in Congress, the safety measures in place by social media 
platforms helpful, certainly not enough. That is in English, 
and languages other than English leaves a hell of a lot more to 
be desired. We have our work cut out for us. Thank you, Mr. 
Chair.
    Senator Merkley. Thank you. Thank you very much. We so 
appreciate your experience as Secretary of State and bringing 
that to bear on these election issues. I thought I would turn 
first to you, Mr. Hewitt. One of the challenges I have seen 
over time is that there is a number of ways to manipulate 
Election Day.
    That is, if you want an area to vote, you can create 
smaller precincts. If you do not want them to vote, you create 
larger precincts so there is a bigger crowd at the voting 
place. You do not want people to vote, you can change the 
location of the precinct voting place. You can put it where 
there is no parking.
    We have also seen occasions where people put out 
information that was misinformation about where the Election 
Day precinct place was located, actually even seen occasions 
where people put out information about the Election Day. Sorry 
you missed it, versions, or, oh, hope you vote next week, the 
week after the actual Election Day to mislead people.
    All of these are challenges on Election Day. Are you 
familiar with those types of efforts to manipulate Election Day 
to make it easier for people in some precincts or some counties 
to vote versus other precincts?
    Mr. Hewitt. We certainly have seen those, Senator Merkley, 
throughout the country. Now, I want to distinguish what you may 
call kind of the single precincts, which you may call mega 
precincts, from some other context where it makes sense.
    In my home State of Louisiana, after Hurricane Katrina, we 
saw mega precincts out of necessity because so many polling 
sites were destroyed, right. Schools, other places, what have 
you. That was a necessity. It is much different to constantly 
change. What we know is all it takes sometimes is a few minutes 
or maybe an hour of misdirection when people are voting, 
especially because around the country people tend to vote on 
Tuesdays, unlike Louisiana, where we have Saturday elections 
for state elections.
    It just takes a little bit of an ounce of misdirection to 
frustrate the entire democratic process for voters to go 
elsewhere. I would be remiss if I did not say, Senator Merkley, 
and add that in a regime of pre-clearance and the previously 
covered jurisdictions, those kinds of changes would have been 
caught by and large if they were reported timely, as it should 
be, and submitted for pre-clearance or if they were raised by 
advocates and so forth.
    Senator Merkley. Thank you. Thank you. Ms. Patrick, one of 
the statistics that struck me about Georgia was that in the 
last election, so this is before any election law change, that 
the waiting time in predominantly black precincts, that is 
where there is 80 percent or more of the voters were black 
versus waiting time in predominantly white precincts, in which 
80 percent or more of the voters were white, the waiting time 
was eight to ten times as long, the average waiting time, as in 
the predominantly white precincts. You are familiar with that 
statistic?
    Ms. Patrick. I am, Senator.
    Senator Merkley. Is it--is that correct?
    Ms. Patrick. It is correct. I think it is also important to 
take into consideration the distinction between urban and rural 
jurisdictions and some of the constraints that occur with 
election administration in those situations. But there is 
definitely a disparity across the country that still exists, 
particularly when voters are restricted in the options that 
they have in order to vote.
    Senator Merkley. Ms. Patrick, in Oregon, we have had vote 
for mail for a couple of decades. Our expert from Louisiana, 
Secretary of State from Louisiana said they were having trouble 
verifying the authenticity of the request for the absentee 
ballot by examining the signatures.
    Now, before my state had vote by mail where we sent a 
ballot to everyone, we had--upon request--we had no such 
difficulty. If we could figure it out in Oregon more than two 
decades ago, is not it possible for every jurisdiction to 
figure out how to issue an absentee ballot with integrity?
    Ms. Patrick. Two decades ago, Senator, I was also securing 
and signifying or verifying signatures in Maricopa County. We 
had over 2 million registered voters. The majority of them 
voted by mail. There are absolutely procedures and policies in 
place all across the country that any jurisdiction can adopt 
and they are widely shared among the states and local 
officials.
    Senator Merkley. Well, I would invite any election 
officials who are having difficulty figuring out how to compare 
signatures or verify request for absentee ballot, we are happy 
to give a seminar in my state. We have been a leader on vote by 
mail, or Ms. Patrick, I am sure, can set up that type of 
seminar.
    Furthermore, when the ballot is returned, we have the 
integrity of comparing the signature on the ballot envelope to 
the signature on record. If there is a difference in the 
signatures, the voter is contacted and said, hey, come down and 
verify your ballot. Does that system work pretty well?
    Ms. Patrick. It does, Senator. I would say that it is not 
only good customer service, it is a security measure. Very 
often when we talk about curing, and we talk about it as good 
customer service, but it is a security measure to find out why 
is that signature missing? Why is the signature different?
    In my thousands of voters I called in almost over a decade, 
I never had an instance where I uncovered a fraudulent 
signature. I found that voters were wearing a cast, they had 
had a stroke, they were aging, and their signatures had 
changed. But it was good to know why, in fact, that signature 
was omitted or was different.
    Senator Merkley. I can tell you that after coming to the 
Senate, my signature changed because I only sign things 
occasionally in my previous life and now I do it every day, and 
so I am waiting for that call that my signature no longer 
matches, and I need to come down and verify it. Mister--Senator 
Hagerty is with us and is next in line.
    Senator Hagerty. Thank you, Senator Merkley. Thank you to 
all of our guests today. I would like to start out with you, 
Mr. Hewitt and talk about the Georgia voting laws. Last year, 
you characterized changes to Georgia's election laws as, 
``limiting access to early voting.''
    Yet we are currently in the third week of early voting in 
Georgia, and they are seeing record early voting. In fact, 
early voting is up 217 percent from the last midterm election, 
and it is even up 155 percent from the 2020 Presidential 
primary. I want to ask you, Mr. Hewitt, do you still think that 
the new Georgia law limits access to early voting?
    Mr. Hewitt. Thank you, Senator. Look, we are still 
analyzing the numbers that are coming in, but what we know is 
that anything that requires voters en masse to have to change 
to now find alternative ways to voting, whether restricted from 
being able to do what they once did or what they were 
accustomed to doing is inherently problematic.
    We think there are still some challenges with mail voting 
as well in Georgia and elsewhere, but here is the thing. The 
frame for us, and this is, you know, if you want to talk about 
the lawsuit, we can talk more here and offline as well, we 
claim as we have intentional discrimination. We have to ask 
ourselves, tell the story. Why is this happening? Why are these 
laws changing? Just because people are finding a way beyond you 
know----
    Senator Hagerty. Do you ask the same question about why the 
laws were changed, the rules were changed in 2020, or does this 
only apply to 2021?
    Mr. Hewitt. When the laws are changed to make it harder to 
vote, that is what the key question is, why----
    Senator Hagerty. The evidence does not support that it is 
harder to vote. In fact, the evidence supports that far more 
people are voting early. I am having a hard time with this line 
of logic.
    Mr. Hewitt Your argument proves too much, and I will 
suggest just because more people--you are just--you are telling 
me you are giving me stats about more people being able to 
vote. What we are not looking at is, how was that happening? 
Why is that happening?
    It is not as if the law that was changed was designed to 
make it easier for people to vote, to encourage more people to 
vote. In fact, it was designed to clamp down on a particular 
means of voting. The argument is actually proving my case.
    Senator Hagerty. I do not see the logic at all. I do not 
see how--the logic follows through, the data does not support 
it. In fact, the Georgia Secretary of State's office says that 
it expects this record turnout to continue.
    I am frankly very shocked to hear you continue to maintain 
this position. I would like to go to you, Ms. Patrick. You 
speak in your testimony about misinformation as being 
unintentionally false information, disinformation is 
deliberately misleading information, and malinformation is 
information that is used out of context.
    The 2021 Georgia voting law expanded early voting, 
requiring 17 days of early voting, at least two Saturdays, and 
it gave counties the option to offer Sunday early voting. Ms. 
Patrick, would it constitute misinformation or disinformation 
then to say that the Georgia voting law reduced access to early 
voting?
    Ms. Patrick. The definitions that I included in my 
testimony are from CISA, from the Cybersecurity Infrastructure 
Security Agency's website, and their ``misinformation is false 
but not created or shared with the intention of causing harm.''
    The ``disinformation is deliberately created to mislead, 
harm or manipulate a person, social group, organization or 
country''. Then the ``malinformation is based on fact but used 
out of context in an effort to mislead, harm, or manipulate.''
    I think every particular statement would need to be 
reviewed to see which one of those categories it falls under if 
it does fall under any of those individual categories.
    Senator Hagerty. Well, I would like to ask you again then. 
You just cited the definition of those statements. Does the 
Georgia 2020 voting law, 2021 voting law, which expanded early 
voting, requires 17 days of early voting, at least two 
Saturdays, and gave counties the option to offer Sunday early 
voting, is it misinformation or disinformation to say that that 
law reduced access to early voting?
    Ms. Patrick. My understanding of that law, Senator, is that 
that is only one facet of the law. To state that the law in its 
totality falls into one or only one of these categories based 
on just one small faction of the law, I do not feel that I am 
qualified to make such a statement.
    Senator Hagerty. Let me go to another statement then. 
Again, this is pertaining to the Georgia election law. The 2021 
Georgia election law did not change the law allowing counties 
to have polls open between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. The law did 
not change that. Yet, President Biden claimed, and I am going 
to read the quote, ``it is sick, deciding that you are going to 
end voting at 5 o'clock. Among the outrageous parts of this new 
state law, it ends voting hours early so working people cannot 
cast their vote after their shift is over.'' That is the end of 
the quote from the President. This law does not end voting at 
5:00 p.m.
    Even The Washington Post gave that statement four 
Pinocchios, which is a whopping falsehood. Ms. Patrick, would 
you characterize this statement by President Biden as 
misinformation or disinformation or malinformation?
    Ms. Patrick. I never try to ascribe motivations to 
individual statements by anyone, Senator.
    Senator Hagerty. Is motivation required in all of those 
definitions?
    Ms. Patrick. I would say it is not, but what I would 
continue with my sentence to finish is that I would not ascribe 
motivations. If I took it on its face, it is not exactly 
accurate from what you are telling me. I am not a specialist in 
Georgia's law or the most recent law.
    Senator Hagerty. Well, the difference between 5:00 p.m. and 
7:00 p.m. does not require expertise and special expertise. I 
think it is whether it is true or not.
    Ms. Patrick. What I was trying to finish, my apologies, is 
that if the statement is incorrect, these categories then take 
the next step to say, why is that information being shared, and 
it is ascribing motivation. Is the individual saying something 
that is false because they believe it to be false and they are 
saying it for a purpose to spread that misinformation?
    Are they saying something that is incorrect and false 
because they are unaware that is incorrect and false? That is 
where I do not feel that I am in a position to be able to 
qualify what that category is, because I do not know what the 
motivation was or the understanding of the individual.
    Senator Hagerty. The doublespeak here is shocking, but the 
motivation I think is clear, it is to inflame. I think it is 
shameful. I end my time but I turn back--yield back the floor. 
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
    Senator Merkley. Our Ranking Member.
    Senator Blunt. Thank you, Senator Merkley. Let me just ask 
a couple of questions about cybersecurity. If that was covered 
while I was gone, we will just repeat whatever those answers 
may have been.
    Particularly the two current election authorities, 
Secretary Ardoin and Mr. Wilcox, what have your states done 
between, say, 2018 and now to try to both secure the system and 
create a stronger impression that both the voter system and the 
voter registration system is less subject to any interference 
than people might have been led to believe?
    Mr. Ardoin. Thank you, Senator, for that question. What 
Louisiana has done is, we have a centralized management system 
with no remote access from vendors. We have a third party that 
is monitoring all behavior on our--attacks on our website to 
see if there is any certain behavior and to mitigate those 
attacks immediately. That is a 24/7 process. We own our own 
transmission lines, and we monitor those, even if they are not 
being used, every single day of the year and all hours of the 
day.
    Additionally, we work with our local partners in order to 
provide them the latest information we have. I will tell you, 
Senator, if we could get more substantive information and more 
quickly disseminated information with regards to activity that 
is out there, we would be better served, both as state and 
local level.
    Because many times when we are called into higher security 
level clearance briefings, we are finding out information that 
we have already read in news outlets.
    Senator Blunt. Right. You are saying this is something the 
Federal Government could definitely do and do by just 
designating somebody in your office and maybe other election 
offices around the state to be cleared to get information that 
somebody in the Federal Government thinks could be a problem 
for your state or that jurisdiction.
    Mr. Ardoin. We do have individuals in each of our offices, 
including the chief elections officer, that are designated for 
this information. The issue is----
    Senator Blunt. Getting it?
    Mr. Ardoin [continuing]. getting it because it has to go 
through ODNI, FBI, CIA--it has to go through a process of 
declassification to a level that we can get. By the time it 
goes through that, I guess it is sanitized, I think is the 
terminology. The problem is by the time it gets down to that, 
we have already heard about it.
    Senator Blunt. Got it. Mr. Wilcox.
    Mr. Wilcox. I concur with the Secretary. We have done a lot 
of the same type of security, cybersecurity procedures that he 
mentioned. We have done them at the local level as well, based 
on our needs in the State of Florida.
    The vast majority of us have implemented these different 
types of cybersecurity suites. The Federal Government was 
extremely beneficial with the granting that allowed us to--
through their funding of CISA and EI-ISAC and allowing us to do 
some cybersecurity things that we could not have done all 67 in 
the State of Florida on our own. That has been wonderful. The 
other part of this is education.
    We have been able to--we have to understand that in a 
jurisdiction that has a small number of registered voters, the 
supervisor there is the data base administrator, he or she is 
the vote by mail coordinator. They are the person that does 
early voting there. They do all of these things and having them 
become a cybersecurity expert is a major challenge.
    But we have been able to educate our membership and bring 
the entire level. We are able to use terminology today, 
phishing or whaling or any of these that we all now currently 
understand that three years ago we did not have that.
    Senator Blunt. Do those small counties have somebody to 
turn to at the state election authorities office or----?
    Mr. Wilcox. Yes, sir. In the State of Florida, the 
Secretary of State's Office has put together what is called a 
cyber navigator program, where they have five to seven 
different individuals with different pieces of the state to 
where anyone that lives in that district can contact their 
cyber navigator to help them respond on--or even RFPs, request 
for proposal for security type things and best practices to 
ensure all of our jurisdictions are at least at a minimal 
level.
    Senator Blunt. Yes. Secretary Chapman, do you have the same 
concerns about not getting the information as quickly as you 
need to get it from the Federal Government on cyber and other 
similar issues?
    Ms. Chapman. There are key members of our staff that do 
have their security clearances and we are in constant 
communication with Department of Homeland Security. We, you 
know, receive that information on an expedited basis, so.
    Senator Blunt. Then, are you able to constantly communicate 
it to other people around the state who need to know?
    Ms. Chapman. Yes. With the counties. We actually have 
biweekly meetings with counties. If anything is related to a 
particular county, then we speak with them right away. Our 
Federal partners and our state partners are very strong when it 
comes to cybersecurity.
    Senator Blunt. I think my last question, Ms. Patrick, on 
the urban, rural--you mentioned urban precincts and rural 
precincts, and I was not quite sure how that related to the 
waiting in line, but I am assuming one of the ways that you 
wait--that it relates to that is usually rural precincts have a 
lot fewer people that are going to vote there because they have 
to travel a lot further to get there, and so by definition, 
there would almost always be less waiting in those precincts. 
Was that the point you were trying to make?
    Ms. Patrick. That is certainly part of it, Senator. The 
other, as I am sure you remember from your days as an official, 
when you have an urban population, they are often more 
transient. They move more frequently. Given whatever the 
existing voter registration regime is in that state, you can 
slow down the line by virtue of not having an updated voter 
registration.
    Now you are a provisional voter, provisional ballot. 
Depending on whether or not the state has automatic or 
automated or online voter registration, it can slow down the 
process, particularly in jurisdictions where they either move 
more frequently--and I would say that one caveat and 
distinction between the rural and urban is when you talk about 
voters in Indian Country or in reservation lands, there the 
challenge is the addressing system itself because it is sorely 
lacking in this country.
    Senator Blunt. Right. I think there are also election 
authorities looking for better ways than signature verification 
to determine how to process a ballot unless someone has reason 
to question. Are you doing that at either one of any of your 
three states, Mr. Wilcox?
    Mr. Wilcox. Yes, we are in the State of Florida. We do have 
some automated signature verification, basically the same 
technology that the banking industry uses with validating 
checks. We are using that in some of our jurisdictions in the 
State of Florida.
    Senator Blunt. Mr. Ardoin.
    Mr. Ardoin. We are not using automated at this time, 
Senator, because we are in the process of determining what type 
of new voting system that we will be moving to. We have mostly 
touch screen or touch voting DREs, direct recording electronic 
voting machines.
    Our mail absentee voting program has not expanded itself as 
most states have, just because our voters are used to voting in 
person. We had the highest number ever in Louisiana during the 
Presidential election, but it did not--it was only 7 percent of 
our voters voted by absentee ballot.
    Senator Blunt. Well, one of my personal thoughts on voting 
in person, as opposed to five weeks earlier is you know a whole 
lot more about the campaign and the candidate and the issues, 
and I have always thought moving that decision earlier makes it 
hard for candidates to figure out how they are going to 
communicate with you, what they think the campaign is all 
about.
    But there is not a lot of sympathy for candidates in this 
process. I do get that. I will say on the voting location, you 
know, if you do have a significant populated urban location, as 
I am sure all of you have figured out, one thing you can do if 
you have got room in that--at that location is to divide the 
precinct on big Election Days alphabetically or some other way 
to where you have more opportunities and you do not have more 
locations than you need on all other elections if it is not a 
travel problem.
    Now, my favorite comment anybody ever made to me when I was 
a local election official about my poor judgment in moving a 
voting location was when one of the party committee women came 
to me and said, you could not have possibly put this voting 
location in a worse place. It is too far for me to walk and too 
close for me to drive.
    I totally failed to meet the standard of having it where it 
met either of those standards. Chairman, thank you for letting 
me ask a second round of questions.
    Senator Merkley. Thank you very much, Senator, in bringing 
your experience to bear, because not everyone has had that 
personal experience of being engaged in those issues. I did 
want to ask Secretary Chapman in Pennsylvania, you have just 
gone through a primary election, and did you have vote by mail 
in that election?
    Ms. Chapman. Yes.
    Senator Merkley. Did you have any difficulty in figuring 
out how to send out absentee ballots or ballots for vote by 
mail to citizens of Pennsylvania?
    Ms. Chapman. No.
    Senator Merkley. Do you use signature match verification as 
a way to make sure that the ballot is being mailed in by the 
same person whose name is on the ballot?
    Ms. Chapman. We check for the signature and date, yes.
    Senator Merkley. Have you had a large number of cases where 
individuals essentially voted somebody else's ballot?
    Ms. Chapman. No.
    Senator Merkley. Have you had any? Have you prosecuted any 
people for that?
    Ms. Chapman. We do not prosecute. That is something the 
Attorney General does, but no.
    Senator Merkley. No. Okay. I am just checking because so 
far, I have had the chance to ask many Secretary of States 
around the country. It all comes down to you are more likely to 
be struck by lightning to find a case that somebody 
deliberately voted somebody else's ballot.
    We have come up with cases where people moved and they had 
an early primary in one state and they had a later primary in 
another state, and they thought, citizen of a new state. Maybe 
I can vote in two primaries. Were not sure if that was legal, 
if we have cases like that, but that is not an intentional 
voter fraud situation.
    I remain very concerned about changes that are making it 
much harder to vote. I was noting that in Georgia between 2012 
and 2018, 214 voting precincts were eliminated, and when they 
were eliminated, people had to figure out where to go in order 
to vote because their old precinct location was eliminated.
    Then Georgia changed the law so that if you go to the wrong 
precinct voting place, which is much more likely after the old 
voting place is eliminated, you cannot vote at that location.
    You have to travel to the new location, which means quite a 
lot of difficulty in figuring out where that is and making 
sure--there is just--in that Georgia law, there is provision 
after provision after provision, including doubling or cutting 
in half the time that you have to apply for early voting or for 
an absentee ballot. You can just count them off, more than a 
dozen.
    I think we should all be working together to make it easier 
to vote. Yes, I hear advocates who are defending things that 
make it harder to vote saying this makes it easier to vote. 
Well, let us just have an honest discussion about changes in 
law that are designed to make it more difficult, because that 
is the wrong way to go and not to use fake issues of fraud as a 
justification for trying to trying to disenfranchise people.
    There is no way in any state it should be ten times as long 
to wait in a predominantly black precinct as it is in a 
predominately white precinct. That is institutionalized racist 
discrimination and it needs to end. It is our responsibility to 
make sure that there are fair laws around this country.
    It was the year 1891 that the Act came from the House that 
said we are going to make sure, following the end of 
reconstruction, that we are going to have fair opportunity to 
register, fair opportunity to vote, and integrity in counting 
those votes across the entire country. That bill, 
unfortunately, was filibustered here in the Senate and killed a 
leading to 75 years in which black Americans were 
disenfranchised before the 1965 Voting Rights Act.
    It is our responsibility to continue to address this 
challenge. I thank Ranking Member Blunt and Chair Klobuchar for 
holding this hearing. We need to keep working on this critical 
issue central to a democratic republic. I appreciate the 
election officials bringing their experience to bear here today 
and their strategies, sharing their strategies to improve the 
administration security of elections.
    I commend Mr. Hewitt and Ms. Patrick for being strong 
advocates for election workers and voters and for their ongoing 
work, including testifying today to ensure voters can make 
their voices heard in our democracy.
    The testimony that we have heard today makes clear that we 
must continue to work together to overcome the challenges 
voters and election workers are facing this year, including 
ensuring that state and local Governments have access to 
Federal resources, that election workers are safe and feel 
safe, and that voters across the country can easily cast their 
ballots.
    I look forward to continuing to work with my colleagues on 
this Committee to provide election officials and voters across 
the country with the support needed for a successful year of 
midterm elections.
    The hearing record will remain open for one week. All 
Members who wish to submit questions for the record have one 
week to do so. With that, we are adjourned. Thank you.
    [Whereupon, at 12:48 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]

                      APPENDIX MATERIAL SUBMITTED

                              ----------   
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]