tv House Administration Committee Hearing Election Security CSPAN June 25, 2019 9:04pm-10:39pm EDT
trump campaign and black wives matter and police shootings and the tragic events at baton rouge and doubtless. it was a time people felt like all they were seeing on tv about race was bad news and here was first a white man admitting that he was prejudice, which for people of color was like finally. the house administration committee considered and reported favorably to the house a bill that would create federal standards for election regulations and boost funding for election security efforts throughout the country. the bill was approved by a partyline vote with democrats in support and republicans opposed. this is 90 minutes.
>> [inaudible conversations] the committee will come to order and without objection the chair authorized to declare a recess at any time. pursuant to the committee rule, the chair announces that she may postpone further proceedings today when a recorded vote is ordered on the question of proving a measure or matter on adopting an amendment. this morning we will consider h.r. 2722, the securing america's federal election act targeted bill to modernize the nation's election infrastructure and responded t respond to the g attacks on our democracy. as we all should know and now appreciate ouit nowappreciate od
as special counsel mueller said to interfere in our election in the 2016 presidential election. when outsiders meddle in our election if an attack on the country and we cannot release to the cyber attacks of the state actors on their own. while we have made progress to bolster our defenses it is clear from the analysis of our intelligence community and a host of independent experts from across the political spectrum that more must be done. our state and local governments need the resources, know-how and support to hard in the election infrastructure before americans head to the polls. in a little over 200 days, new hampshire will hold the first primary election of the 2020s cycle. we must act now. this we know is not a partisan perspective. quote, the warning lights were blinking red. to be clear that it's not my
assessment, but the administration's director of national intelligence speaking about four in attacks o foreignr elections a little under a year thago. we recognize that our adversaries are going to keep adopting and upping their game. yet again that is not my analysis but instead the administration's own fbi director who recently said our adversaries treated the 2018 midterms as a dress rehearsal for the01 big show of the 2020 presidential elections. today we will act. this package of legislative reform will begin to respond with the urgency and the stark warnings deserve. the safe act will require voting systems to use individual durable voter verified paper ballots widely agreed-upon reform to protect our elections from manipulation, expand risks limiting audits equipping the states with the systems needed
to ensure the accuracy of the vote tallies in a sufficient manner andns authorize a 600 million-dollar election assistance commission grant program to assist in securing election infrastructure while providing states with 175 million biannual sustainment funding to help maintain the election infrastructure. this initial 600 million is beingg appropriated by the financial services and general government accounting appropriation bills and it will foster accountability for the technology vendors creating a qualified electionn infrastructure designation and much-needed cybersecurity deadlines and implement safeguards to protect our systems from attack including prohibition on wireless communication devices and a prohibition on election systems internet interconnectivity. ultimately, the actual improve the resilience of american elections, the goals that i know we all share a.
of today is an opportunity to work together to counter attacks on the elections and i now recognize ranking member davis for any opening statement he may have. have. >> thank you madam chair and you all for being here today. the infrastructure is aging and death risk. congress should work together in a bipartisan way to put a solution on the table to address the problem. hoection security shouldn't be a partisan issue and i'm disappointed the majority chose not to work with our public and colleagues all three of us on the committee for that bipartisan solution to strengthen the nation's security and instead they decided to put forth legislation that stands no chance. it's disappointing for the american people who deserve a bill that allows them to trust in their system and have the votes preserved and protected. during the debate in the committee on hr one and a
majority insisted the bill contained serious security components and if that is the case why are we here. hr one fell flat in the media with public opinion now we are here discussing another bill federally mandating elections. this is simply more of the same. what we are not going to hear about today is the work done last congresss to provide fundig for election infrastructure and to create unprecedented cooperation among the states and federal stakeholders since the result not a single instance has been reported of interference in the 2018 midterms elections which experienced record midterm turnouts to not create the takeover of the systems that's why i introduced along with my colleagues mr. walker that secured the assistance act that will provide assistance to the states in updating the formidable infrastructure and
empowering the officials and provide additional resources for improving cybersecurity. these are what i was asked to do by my officials who are a bipartisan group of folks that work to secure elections at the local level in the district of illinois every clerk and official in my district who came to the meeting told me these the were their prioritthese arethei. a fundamental right of the nation is the ability to choose theos leaders. the american people deserve to have that right protected. we should secure and protect it without partisan politics. thank you and i yield back the balance of my time. >> thank you. at this point, i would ask that the opening statements of all other members be included in the
record without objection. i now call of hr 2722 the motion to report the title legislation. >> it's used to carry out for other purposes. without objection the first reading of the bill considered red and open for amendment at any point. the nature of the substitute offered by ms. lofgren of california it may be cited -- >> without objection it will be considered as a grad for the
purpose of the amendment and willor be opened for the amendmt at any point. i would like to take a moment here to explain it is in the amendment as you know we worked hard and had disagreements on hr one plus a about the need to secure our infrastructure and the remaining disagreements that disagreement is whether we mandate and whether we work in a different way with ^-caret more than sticks. if they had attacked with military weapons they attacked
suspects cybersecurity instance asand grants would be committed for those qualified vendors it includes specific cybersecurity standards that apply to the paper optical scanning voting systems and there will be another set of standards applied to the marking devices. it's built in a manner where ita is impossible for it to add or change the votes and it consists of hardware certified by the homeland security into the device is not capable tabulating votes i think it is enormously important as a requirement and
also because we know that we have a disability community that has an absolute right to vote even if they are not able to mark with a pencil they have the capability to meet their needs. we require the use of hardware and software for which information is disclosed by the manufacturer to the open source and we also prohibit wireless communication devices. we found and have seen reports on the fbi that the voting systems are connected to wireless communication systems. that is just a nightmare for the systems that they be prohibited from the marking devices and
optimal scanners would prohibit internet connectivity we think that this is a sound measure and it's important to proceed. we have when we returned after the fourth of july recess 17 legislative days before the august recess, and we have appropriation bills that have eaten up on schedule certain members of the house it's taken a blog period of time so if we have the window to move the bill we need to take it. any member seeking recognition for the amendment's. >> i have an amendment at the
desk. the staff will distribute the amendment. >> offered by mr. rodney davis this act may be cited as a security assistance act. section 2 grams the administration improvement authorization of the funds notwithstanding section 104. >> with unanimous consent, the reading of the amendment is waived. the gentleman is recognized for five minutes in support of this amendment. >> this is the bill that was introduced by my colleagues and me that i believe would address many of the security concerns that we should have in a bipartisan way. this is a bill that preserves the system thatip we have whichs a decentralized system that allows for less opportunity for
the various actors and foreign entities to be able to do various things. let's be clear if this markup and if this bill is about foreign interference only we are missing the point about making sure officials have the resources they need and the flexibility that they need to continue to do what they do best at the local level. i can tell you a democratic county clerk in illinois mike and i have known each other since grade school, went to junior high together and you know what, he's in the other party but i know that he is going to run the most fair election as possible. he wants every vote be counted. we have a lot in every district in this country.
but what this original piece of legislationhi does is take away his right to be able to number one afford to upgrade the software equipment and enforces and mandates a certain type of investment that they may have already planned to invest in another type in the future that does nothing to address the concerns that we all have as americans to keep the election safe and secure. that's why our bill is a better bill. it doesn't have a one-size-fits-all approach. it's the approach we were working on in a bipartisan way with the staff of the committee. our staff sitting down talking about how we can come up with a bipartisan solution, something that we haven't seen a lot under the democratic majority in the congress.
i don't know what bipartisan success any colleagues on the other side will be able to recall. if there's anything that should be bipartisan it is election security, but instead, again, the far left of the democratic party decided to leave this committee and also this congress into a piece of legislation that is a lot more about the show then helping people exist in christian county illinois. that is unfortunate. but here we go again. if we want to do something together, the election securities act will provide states to update their equipment. that's what democrats and republican officials in my district told me they needed them most. our bill does that. it keeps the decentralization. if we are worried about the
various actors, the last thing we want is a congress is the federal government and registration and vote counting. we don't have a lot coming in wondering whether or not it's is good to be aer fair account clearly there are some instances in north carolina recently where we have bad actors that will likely go to jail. ironically for using the same process that is illegal in other suates but we have to have an amendment to outlaw that and i hope that my colleagues can join us there. let's stop playing games. to talk about this in a bipartisan way, and again a democratic majority did not live up to the promise they made to the american people that they wanted to work with us. that's unfortunate. i certainly hope it changes and i hope i'm not optimistic, but i
certainly hope my colleagues on the other side of the dais help support this amendment butid i n get you right now i can give you the account of what it's going to be. thank you for the time. i've got 22 seconds and i will reserve that time later but i will yield it back now. >> as a point of order is withdrawn, the amendment is germane. i appreciate the gentleman is offering a proposal that recognizes the important role that the federal government has in the election security although with a different approach. d i do need to impose this amendment. i fully appreciate your telling of the proposal that could be a step forward from the status quo. however, voter verified paper ballot or the solution that would address the risk and threats that our nation faces unlike the gentleman's amendment voter verified paper ballots are
with the safe act provides in section 103 page 396 through 24 into the security experts urged congress to adopt. adopt. voter verified paper ballots are the best way to ensure that it's counted as cast. voters should be able to see the vote clearly and verified devotedly intended to cast is the one recorded in the cases where there becomes necessary. it also requires risk limiting audits which are cost effective and go hand-in-hand with paper. these requirements are section 3038 page 41 line nine. if they really are the gold standard of election security and will address the national emergency the nation faces and that's why i think we ought to maintain our commitment to the
proposal moreover unlike the gentleman's amendment the safe act section 201 b. on page 53 starting at line three expressly prohibits wireless and internet connectivity systems or devices upon which the ballots are marked by the voters or upon which they are cast, tabulated are aggregated. this is an important and basic cybersecurity standard we ought to require. nobody thinks connecting the systems to the internet is a good idea. sometimes low-tech is the best defense to a high-tech threat so i would urge a no vote on the amendment. does any member wish to be recognized for the purpose of offering an amendment? the gentleman is recognized. >> with a representative is offerinthe representative isofft i would yield back sometime. >> thank you. sorry, madam chair. i know our colleagues thought i
was stunned that i' done doing w minutes. my good friend, listen i certainly hope we can come together after this bill is forced to the floor and likely again it will be a bipartisan roll call vote i hope we can come together on the positions we agree with. i would urge each member on my side of the aisle and the other side meet with your local officials and frankly that is why we have the security assistance act. they don't want a heavy hand on washington and we are talking about technology. i'm sure there's a lot of technological experts in the security experts but i'll say every single county in the united states should have this certain type of system. what about those that invested their hard-earned tax dollars and equipment that may be just as secure but all of a sudden
they've got to come in because the federal government says you're going to do this and what are we doing to limit or faults with technology that's why we haveve provisions to account for future technological advances. it wasn't too long ago everybody filed their tax returns on paper. are we requiring that to happen again? technology will change when it comes to elections and election security that can do a lot of things. it may allow the polling to be less. if they allow for more polling places to exist because the technological advances and by the way, i know some may disagree with this and say that it may never happen but it could beer more secure so what are we doing with this piece of legislation limiting the ability to bring new and safer technology into the systems? with not do this. that's whym? we need to pass ths
amendment we have provisions in place and i certainly hope my colleagues will join me in making that happen. we even had a hearing not long ago. they are supposed to be the ones administering many of the things my colleague's want to pass in their bill they are supposed to be doingis this already. we had a hearing with officials that i wish we would have talked more about what they were doing to protect our security in this country but instead it is a person now reading over who likes whom and who doesn't. that's where we are at right now. that's why we need to be serious about this. your own witnesses said with voter verified paper they are safe in the one hearing that we had. why are we now at the federal level mandating people like this
in illinois to do something and have to pay for something that may not be the most secure process so that i would urge a yes vote on my amendment and yield back to my colleague. >> the gentleman yield spec. it does any other member, the gentle lady from ohio is recognized. >> i just want to say a lot of the things i do agree with that he made a comment on the record i really want to clarify. he made the comments that wouldt happened in north carolina is the legal in most places which in fact is not true. not submitting or changing them isn't legal anywhere so let's make the record clear. i yield back. any other member wish to be heard? then we willwi have a vote on te amendment. all those who are in favor of the amendment will do so by
the amendment is not agreed to. are there additional amendments offered to the motion? >> a point of order is reserved in the constitutional role of the states and localities choosing the method of the voting best for their own citizens. mandatory paper ballot system introduces the logistical fiscal concerns and especially vulnerable with misplaced, tampered with or as we saw in the ninth congressional district
during the most recent cycle team bert with paper ballots. that is where the various people, bad actors that are in both parties, that's where they can play a role in actually determining the outcome. that's just as much of a security issue as many other issues that we ought to be able to face in a bipartisan way. mandatory paper ballots. what technology makes this in the future to help us lessen the lines of the polling places with the majority wants us to do is mandate those that have been proven time and time again to increase the wait time. i thought that is what we were trying to stop. it's going to require more training of the workers which we had a debate on wh why there's a shortage in the first place at the same committee a few months ago. this provision requires that they must be counted by hand or another primitive device which
effectively again eliminates the modern technology currently used in almost every jurisdiction in the community. they are called direct recordinn electronic machines addressed by many of the witnesses the majority calls to the hearings into the only one hearing we have on this issue before the bill was scheduled for the markup. this one hearing i when the papr ballots were foolproof having spoken to the local and state administrators i know there's overwhelming supporthere isovere states to have the option to choose the right voting methods for themselves. they ought to have the right to choose. there's simply no basis for the proposal for the ballots in every election and now it would bring us back to the days of the hanging chads in florida during the presidential election and
last butin not least it would be detrimental to the security of the community we need to ensure that every eligible american has the opportunity to vote and you are going to hear a lot about the voting devices, those who are disabled, but they are not the same as the machines many of the disabled committee are using right now but many communities and election jurisdictions are using. it would drop the scan card. if the majority wants to federalize the system, be honest about it. try to run that through but let's not use paper ballots as an unfunded mandates to the officials in all of our states, so with that i will reserve the balance of my time.
po the gentleman yields back. the point of order is withdrawn, but i opposed this amendment striking the mandate for the paper about ballot because it would completely undermine the security that we are trying to achieve. section 102 mandates the states conduct all elections using voter verified paper ballots. this positio provision along wih section 3048 is on page 48 line one we simply cannot be sure that our elections are free from outside interference unless we have an audit paper trail to confirm the results. voter verified paper ballot for the best way to ensure that it's counted as cast and they should be able to see the vote clearly and verify that the vote they
intendedly to cast as the one recorded. they were at least 10-years-old which the officials said must be replaced before 2020 to make sure that it's preserved the paper ballots are the best way to ensure that and i would note also the safe act on page three requires that the state's use of voter verified paper ballots but also on line 16 the states that use direct recording electronic machines that provide paper irceipts doesn't fill the
requirements made continue to do so until 2020. these machines are not as secure as paper, but they are not as dangerous as the paperless electronic voting machines. tor ensure the most vulnerable machines were taken off the market, this bill prioritizes the replacement of the paperless voting machines and provides two extra years to replace them with paper receipts. we also require paper ballots are available in all locations alat use them with receipts in order to ensure we maximize the number of the voters cast their ballot on the voter verified ballot systems in the 2020 election. a reduces the risk of hacking the vote and changes the trail for the potential recounts. the one thing that every american should know they cast their ballot but it's counted as
cast. that's pretty simpl simple and d be a requirement. the idea that we woul would maks somehow optional, i respect the gentleman from illinois as he knows, but when the russian attack occurred in the last election, and our security people, our national security people heard o that was a trial run for the next, let's leave this up to the good people come into their orbit people. we all have our registrar of voters that are friends, but you wouldn't ask them to stand for the country if it were actual missiles coming at the united states. these are cyber missiles. it's a federal attack on our federal system and we need a federal response for these reasons i oppose the amendment. do other members wish to be heard on the amendment? recognized for five minutes.
>> madam chair, thank you very much and forgive me for being late is on the floor on an amendment, but this legislation is a input into the american people, and i rise in opposition to the gentleman from illinois. to speak on behalf of what we are doing here, which is we are rising to the defense of the election is turning our role in the process that the constitution says in the calls the congress has to guarantee to every state a republican form of government. government. that means a representative form of government based on democracy that works and channels for the electoral participation to guarantee the will of the people as expressed, heard, counted and been embodied t they have the
power and authority to guarantee equal protection rights for everybody. that's beeeverybody. that said that basis alone with the 15th amendment of a lo the f the federal action to vindicate the voting rights of people. the people. certainly that was the basis for the voting rights act. in every turn o whenever congres is enacted to amend the constitution or to anybody in the statute electoral democracy, there has been a claim that this is somehow a violation of federalism or states rights. on the contrary, our action defends democracy at the local level to make sure that everybody's vote is actually counted. so the requirement of the individual paper ballots is absolutely essential in the cyber age. especially in the wake of the special counsel described as a sweeping and systematic attack
on american electoral democracy in 2016 by russia. that is not any kind of partisan invention and its something that should alarm every political persuasion. to directly attack the machinery in more than 30 states to hack into the computer systems in more than 30 different states, so that is a matter for the extraordinary alarm in the
nations or rather the world's first modern political democracy. we've got to make sure that we hang onn to our territorial political integrity and sovereignty and self-government. we know that russia doesn't have the power to attack us militarily. they don't have the power to attack us economically or intellectually because our constitutional democracy is far superior to what they've got there but they've been able to attack us online through the internet and through the systematic cyber campaign that they lead in 2016. c our intelligence agencies have us coming back again. they never stopped, and this is part of a global campaign it is a major check against a computer
manipulation of the results. i oppose the amendment and strongly support the legislation and yield back. >> does any other members wish to be heard on mr. davis's amendment? all of those in favor, say aye. all of those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the no prevails and the amendment is not agreed to. are there additional amendments members wish to offer? we will get right back to you. [roll call] speed above
[roll call] on this boat and there are six nose and three guesses. the gentleman is recognized for the purpose of offering an amendment. >> the clerk will report the amendment. in the nature of the substitute en 2722 offered by georgia. >> the point of order is preserved and the gentleman from georgia is recognized for five minutes in support of the amendment. >> thank you, madam chair. while my amendment addressed the recycled paper aspect of this, i'm going to focus on the integrity of the paper ballot issue that we are talking about here. last year wasn't the first time they ever tried to attack us and i'm speaking from experience of this.
cybersecurity and in the intelligence committee they've been trying to interfere with our elections for years and years and let me tell you if we were as it was said trying to rise to the defense, this is opposite of what we should be doing. yes, the russians did attempt to get into our system and they got into some election databases, but they didn't get into is the actual voting machines. and what are we addressing here, the voting machine. the suspects of this that i think we do need to address, but one thing that has been missing in all of this is why were they able to get as far as they did and i've spoken about this before because in any type of military operations and in cybersecurity, when you see a threat, you have to respond to that threat. mr. michael daniel the coordinator for president obama was told to stand down.
when he told them that they were actively trying to get into our security system because the 5-for senate come is that the only reason, no, but the fact that you were not responding to that soundtrack makes us more vulnerable. the vulnerability was voting databases, which is bad. here's the problem with the paper ballot. i've spent a lot of my career helping people automate on a secure basis. the risk that we face as the ranking member has brought up this paper ballots are the most susceptible for voter fraud. they are the most susceptible when that is their primary method of actually voting. that will perpetuate at the ballot harvesting and especially when the minority is brought up they don't even like sifting through the verification. it's harder to verify. so, when we had the experts here before, the most secure way and
i'm all for having the verification i've been fighting for this for us and the state legislature i've been speaking about it here is to use the automation when you verify the person who is there punching the buttons, the automation allows us to move more people through quicker if we can get more polling places open you use your technology that's been produced as a paper backup report of how that person voted so they are using the automation that can basically prints the audit that they can verify that this is the way they voted and it is in a secure box. now come if there is the need for a recount, then you have that paper backup. the problem we have with this legislation is it is a manual
ballot and they got away from that because we pointed automation that was more secure there is a lot we can be giving it should be doing on election security but let me tell you we are the wrong people to be doing it. the boots on the ground of the state level managing those elections who have a greater interest in making sure that they are safe and secure than we do and here's another thing, what theyy are after is not to disrupt our election system i can promise you they didn't want those in the white house any more than anybody else. what they are trying to dohe iso distressed of our system and right now the federal government has the lowest approval rating by the american people fan and history. and with that if we then take over the system, that is just
going to further deteriorate and play into the hands of what they want. that's why i'm an submitting this amendment and also in support of the other amendments as i think we need to step back and look at this from what is the actual thing we should be doing and not putting in something that perpetuates something to be are trying to get away from and about harvesting and with that i would encourage all of my colleagues on both sides to support this amendment. >> the time is expired. the amendmentk is turning to the gentleman from california to withdraw her amendment. i would like to note that the amendment actually strikes recycled paper provision in the bill was approved unanimously in the housese by the deliberationf hr one and so it is included in this bill.
the gentleman's discussion however as we know was about the overall issue of the paper ballot. i addressed that in prior amendment was defeated and i think certainly i do not challenge the intentions of the gentle man in any way but i think to say the security of the entire nation is more properly lodged in the hands of the county officials rather than the federal government when it comes to attacks by foreign nation i don't agree with that and i think that the paper ballots mandate we've heard from experts repeatedly is where we need to go into the amendment should i e opposed.
thank you, madam chair. i would like to remind those in the audience and my colleagues yes this language was put into the underlining though and we did not pass that unanimously. we had so many other roll call vote we decided not to ask for a roll call on this. >> would the gentleman yield ordinarily if it is considered unanimous but i take the gentleman's point and field back. cynical me because this is a provision that was found to the approach that i believe the majority is taking, think about this, we all want to recycle more and do what we can to help the environment. think about the federal government save jurisdictions in puerto rico you have to have recycled paper and all of a sudden they run out of ballots and try to figure out where to
get them printed it's going to be more convenient for them to use a printing office in another caribbean nation versus here. we all want toto make sure. are they going to have to apply to the federal government to see if they can make that purchase? these are the provisions that just don't make sense. i can't say enough about what we should do to move the priority is forward. it can have been in a bipartisan way and that is why we introduced our version of the bill that would take positions like this out and make sure the local election official officiae what is less costlbutis less coe convenient to them without a federal mandate based upon a political philosophy rather than cost effectiveness and rather
than reality. i would like to yield time to my cohort. >> i want to clarify to understand we are going after the wrong thing if you want to secure the nation against russian or any foreign influence. it was the voter databases that were actually hacked. this doesn't address that. it's going after the physical machines that were not hacked. i support the federal standards continuing through the department of homeland security through the department of defense working with states tork set standards that even in the state is multiplicity of databases and they use different platforms. you can't come in and dictate to them a specific type of security because it may not be tailored exactly to the systems.
if we want to address standards for the databases as it relates to the federal election federalk that is onlyha appropriate, buto target, the one thing that wasn't manipulated is ignoring the larger problem and i won't yield back. >> the gentleman from north anrolina is recognized.d. >> madam chair, let me begin by saying i suppose the gentleman's amendment and support your amendment in the nature of a substitute i think that it's possible. it's a federal response to a huge problem requiring paper ballots will protect democracy in my opinion. it is long past time for congress to act boldly with legislation that response to foreign interference and took place in the election to strengthen the election security
so we can protect our democracy from future attacks so we are here today taking the very first step and thank you to the chair for including several provisions in your legislation that respond to incidents that occurred in my congressional district during the 2016 elections. the mueller report found that russian military intelligence targeted, quote, for administering the related software and hardware such as voter registration just to name a rejected voting technology company that develops software used by numerous u.s. counties to manage the voter rolls and install malware on the companies that were. a rejected voting technology company is the very same one used in my district whose book
called p in the county and it causes them to transition to paper records which is what we are talking about in the poll books in the middle of the election day which led to long lines and delays. it led to some of the voters to leave. they left the polling place without casting a ballot. section 297 of the legislation contains provisions that require vendors to notify suspected cyber securitcybersecurity inten three days. it would ensure that we would know about suspicious activity within days instead of three years later so i thank you for your legislation and intend to oppose the amendment. >> of the gentle man would yield to me for a comment.
bthe bill before us does actuay address the issue of the voter roll by providing 297 a the funds can g go towards enhancing this labor protection of the voter systems and directing the eac to create the guidelines that would apply to the voter registration databases. we understand that the documented incursions were to the voter rolls and there is a multiplicity of to how they are maintained and we do not intend to mandate, but we do address the issue through a grant program and through a voluntary cyber guidelines. i would just say this. use case where the puck is going to be and not where it was last time. the biggest vulnerability that we have is if you can imagine in
2020 we had the votes actually changed because of insecure voting systems, that would be a catastrophe for the country so with that i was asked to those who favor the amendment and those opposed will say no. those in favor say aye and those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the noes have it. the clerk will call the roll. [roll call] [roll call]
on this boat there are six noes and two guesses. >> are there additional amendments being offered? i have an amendment of the desk. >> of the amendment to the amendment 2722 georgia strike subtitle b. subtitle risk lending audit section 121 funding to implement the risk spending audit system section a and title the of the help america vote act of 2002 and continue -- >> without objection. the point of order is reserved at the gentleman from georgia is recognized for five minutes. >> thank you madam chair and i hope not to take that much time on thehe amendment. i do want to respond to a couple other issues and my time here. one, we understand the russians
attacked. they dota cyber attacks, other defense contractors. they are continually attempting to be hacked by the russians. that's whatss they do. they are bad people. they have nefarious intentions. we protect ourselves against those. i appreciate the comments regarding the manufacture, and absolutely right they are going to be going after these manufacturers. the best way to know if they are successful is to be able to immediately identify if the machine is not reporting accurately while the person is voting which is ackley what i proposed that it's after the dre. ..
the aspect, i appreciate we are trying to address some of where the russians were able to hearken. if we're gonna force our state to spend the resources that they have changing theirir voting machines, they will not have a lot money left over for securing the databases which is the most vulnerable aspect that we know of at this point. i am not against making changes i just think were going in the wrong direction. i think were going in the wrong direction with audits as well simply a lame saying instead of dictating to the states, the specific type of audit to use, there are four types of audits out there, let's provide the states with optional grant money that they can used to choose the type of audit that best fits in the election system and the best
that would work well for them. i'm not trying to get rid of it altogether but instead of mandy need from the federal level let's provide grants to the state and give them the flexibility to enter and implement these. >> the general lady redraws her points awarded. i would ask that we oppose this amendment. this limiting audits are the gold standard of postelection audits. they involve a handd counting insert number of balance using statistical methods to determine with a high degree of confidence that the reporting election outcome is accurate. the audits accomplished to a portable 17 is a great entry and integrity off our election and increasing confidence of the public in theec election results to which each individual vocalist counted as cast. the safe act requires implement audits in section 303 ab which is on page 41ud and because thee
audits go hand-in-hand with moving the paper ballot. we need audits to ensure the market devices or optical scanners were not hacked. we appreciate the vital role states and counties play enemas during elections but it's the duty of the federal government to help states respond to the national security and for the timely to implement of these types of issues are too important to delay. we cannot risk the undermining of our democracy by having an election where there is doubt about the reported results. so are there additional members wishing to be? if not -- are they to say am pleased that this amendment also highlights the importance of vendors notifying federal estate authorities in the event of cyber incident.
the clerk will report the amendment. [roll r call] >> i ask unanimous consent that a big way. mr. davis is recognized for five minutes in support of his 11. >> my colleagues across the aisle and i agree on one substantive thing in election security there is still a need for funding for state and officials. i held a roundtable on this issue as i discussed earlier and it was in my district and her directly from those that run my house elections. i agreed the federal government has responsible the other states to assist with state election administration i want to make it clear this is not the sole responsibility of the federal government. as a representative of our constituents we need to be responsible to our taxpayers. we need to be diligent to spend federal funds only when
necessary. additionally, it is ultimately the role ofe the states to administer their own elections. each state election ministration structure and procedure grew organically based on their unique needs and challenges. this is why i propose to include a 25% funding match from states that receive funding under the spell. this creates a system that provides funding on any base criteria and forces states and o localities to actually have skin in the game. this is similar to last year's appropriation bill which required states to match 5% with state funds to be eligible. i do want to think my colleagues for the debate on this issue. i want to point out that the debate over the last amendment that passed what major the only recycle paper would not have been a requirement from the federal government to be used at every single election of 40 so we give into ann a issue of papr ballot backup and voter verification versus theories.
i want to say, i think it is a terrible thing that the federal government is mandating where localities can and cannot produce ballots. in the certain types of ballots. that is an unfunded mandate that i would've hoped to have more bipartisan support. i have a lot of concerns about election security because my home state of illinois, was part of an initial attempt by the various actors to get information. we gotta do what we can to stop that. the build that the majority's proposed does not do that. let's work together to get the local election officials funding that the requesting. but do that together. i think the requirement is typical of the federal government, why would we asked them to devote resources. frankly many have devoted their own resources to machines that this bill passed to makee obsolete. that is something we have to be thinking about too.
i really appreciated my colleague mr. raskin almost saying that we needed states and localities to be republican governments but i understood what she said. [laughter] i agree. we are a constitutional republic. there is a role for federal government. that's why i have my bill, the bill that we introduce together and we believe is good to be a less of a top-down approach, cost effective and also represent solving the problems of our local election and state election need. i cannot say enough, we all went to work together to stop countries like russia from coming into the election system. but requiring paper ballots will inevitably leave under lead to longer life is the purposes of what my good friend chairwoman subcommittee on this committee had hearings throughout this country to talk about. we were told that long lines
cause problems with people being able to cash balance. i would argue many oflo the provisions in the bill would cause longer lines. that is not what we should be doing. that is what we were told at the hearings that were held throughout this country. we need to do better. i hope, not just because i wrote it in my college early. i know our villas better in addressing these concerns. but i know it did not pass the first amendment. but let's at least come together and showhe bipartisanship on making sure states and localities help plan for the future and then we can make our federal dollars go further in helping the counties he needed the most in every election jurisdiction. that i asked that this amendment be supported in a very bipartisan way and if it is not i asked the church a rural in the voice the better the last vw few times.
>> the general lady would also put aborted. i put the amendment data requirement that states provide this additional match to accompany the funding allocated in the back. as we discussed, the security of a national election is a national concern in a national emergency given the fact that has beent outlined to us by the director of national intelligence of the fbi and others. it should not be reliant on state budget processes as a ranking member has indicated. this bill institute requirements to protect our election. in making those safety requirements contingent on state budget process. we have to shoulder the responsibility we should not require a 25% match. article one section four, of the constitution.co it allows the congress to
provide for the conduct of federal elections. we are using the authority to protect our country and we should not make it contingent on state budget processes. i would oppose the gentleman's amendment and other other members? >> the general manager connect for five minutes. >> manager i don't know if i have mentioned of mandating the paper ballot. i do want to make one point. here in a little while hopefully in 20 minutes or so they will finish the debate on the floor, the speaker is going to call us all to the floor and the last thing that the speaker is going to say before we go to the floor as members will record their votes by electronic device why are we doing that?
because it's more efficient. we could move more votes, having his been on for the lastot few days, we've moved a lot of votes for short amount of time, we're buddy the electronic device, but we have a physical verification, youth or your butt on the machine, you can look and see how it is floating there and if you really want you can go back to the back and pull a paper for now and verify that that is a way they voted. -- >> is whatt you're saying if we were able to use electronic devices in the house we would have to go back to what the senate uses? >> yes. the gentleman is correct. >> wire using electronic devices with verification "after words" because it's more efficient. if we want to make sure more people are voting let's go the route that led them to vote to
put more voters and develop offices with verification "after words". i yield back. >> the general and yield back. the generalities point of order has beenn withdrawn. if i mayhd just make a the analy between the 435 members of the house casting ballots in the house chamber and the votes are displayed in the chamber in real time while the members look at them, i think it's quite different the millions of americans casting their votes for a later count. dre can be hacked to produce different electronic and printed results in actually a recent sty by the georgia institute of technology show last year that unlike in the house chamber half of the people did not check the actual printed receipts from the dre's to see whether they matched the rope. in the other half looked at it for about three seconds and
whether they actually made the connection or speculation. i would be surprised if members of the house of representatives didn't look at the big four. if there is a vote that seems weird our staff is running around saying did you mean to vote that way, it's a completely different analogy, the general from maryland interconnect for five minutes. >> does the echo and elaborate on the chairs reputation of the argument. in the first place, the house of representatives has not been hacked. at least not yet directly by the deer you and the agent of vladimir putin. we are not aware that we got that particular security problem on the floor of the house yet although we should obviously remain vigilant. the chairs point, i think it's positive if there were computerized voting taking place in a state without a paper trail
but everybody's vote immediately. online where they could check it then you would have a proper analogy but we were afraid of is the use of computer voting technology in the states where there is no paper trail and no one can verify that in any way. so you are just entering your vote online and it disappears and it could be subject to manipulation. >> i agree in part with you. but were mandating in the wrong direction. i think it wouldld be superior o have a voting system that printed about the could check her there. my question, the chair study that she brought up from georgia tech, i'm not sure what voting
systems that they were looking at but the state of georgia doesn't have the ability to print a paper ballot after using the dre, iw don't know if they were looking other states when ithey measured, whether someone looked at it or not,, the state of georgia system physically cannot do that. i've been fighting a and georgia for many years. my point, were going in the wrong direction yes in part we can look up immediately but you can pull up printed printout of how you voted, the analogy is consistent. the reason we went to electronic voting is for efficiency. with the waiver frame. the point i was making is america people would like to see us abide by the same rules that we vote for them and i think we've adopted something for efficiency for verification. that's my point area back. >> area back. >> unless others wish to be heard we will have a vote on the amendment. all those in favor of the amendment say aye and those opposed say no in the opinion of
the chair the no's have it. and mr. davis has asked for roll call and the clerk will call the roll. [roll call] [roll call] [roll call] >> the clerk report. >> their six nose and three asses. >> the memo is not agreed to other additional amendments? >> the gentleman from north carolina is recognized for his moment. >> thank you. the clerk will report -- the point of order is reserved.
the gentleman is organized for five minutes. >> this a amendment would have acceptable prohibiting harvesting. it is them practice in which to organize campaign workers are volunteers collect absentee ballots from certain voters and drop them off at a point placed for election office. this process seems innocuous at first, it is been used to take advantage of voters and severely abused by political operatives across theti country. most recently we saw election ordered in north carolina the ninth-grade directional distant interdistrict because of allegations. in california this practice is actually legal and it affect multiple races. validate was up six points and .ost three weeksn later. jeff denham lost because of the
57000 vote by ballot cast encounter. after election day. i know have members from california that are very diverse in this and not saying this is the entire factorr but obviously it was at some point a factor in these races. we can no longer ignore the most notable threat to election security. we talked about it today. in fact i wrote out a couple of things that some of our members have said, it's an attack on tho federal system and with the russians and chinese have done. i believe they said this calls for extra ordinary alarm. the chinese and russia tax are projection systems. when i first heard that, it was written and was in congress, january 2015. the question is, why wasn't there an extra ordinary alarm during the previous elections?
why is extraordinary alarm happened during 2016. we had the information. we have the data, the previous administration had the data that are election system and we were getting cyber attack, tens of thousands of times per day just by these two countries alone. it is an extraordinary alarm and that's one of the ways we can prevent that in any kind of potential wrongdoing is to be due under prohibit. we must pay attention to the actual evidence of election interference were both so changed and even sold. securing the ballot means protecting voters from all means of ballots to interference including bella harvesting. this amendment prohibits the practice about harvesting while allowing common sense of disabled and elderly and other specific inclusions. i support the passage of this amendment in ao back. >> this amendment is not your
main but i would ask the gentle lady from california nodded on her part of order so we can have this discussion and about. i would ask that we vote against this moment. some votes not ingh the spell, some states do have laws that make voting accessible for homebound voters and others who may have trouble getting to the both in california's election code 1317 provides a devote by mail voter who is unable to return the ballot may designate any person to return the ballot to the election official who issued the ballot to the board about center within the state or vote by mail drop off location within the state. in absentee voter to designate n person of their choosing. love allows for greater participation.
some voters are homebound. some have no family to delegate this role said they should not be disenfranchised. valid drop-off laws are in and of themselves inappropriate election administration laws. that is quite different than altering the vote and taking the vote and failing to turn it in to skim s and election or to engage in fraudulent practices. states like california see no credible reports of fraud relative to the drop-off. since three of the members of o the committee are fromtt california and pretty familiar with the elections in the last year. we have monitors, both republicans and the democrats, everyone of the seats and there were no complaints filed by either party because there were no fraudulent practices. voter fraud is voter pride. it's illegal inl existing law in
this act does not change in the safety act institutes majors like audits to make sure that americans can countan confidence in their votes are counted. experts like the senate repeatedly raised it's more likely that an american will be struck by lightning and he will impersonate another voter at the full ends of the strawman arguments of voter fraud really distract from the real issue that many americans have trouble accessing the ballot and we do not want to prevent american citizens from being able to cast their ballots, this amendment arguably not remains but ill-advised should be defeated. >> the ranking member is reckless for five minutes. >> lightning struck inre north carolina congressional district. they had somebody is a process
that was illegal in north carolina, they committed tax voter fraud in special election and is being held right now. the same process of collecting the balance for the lightning strike that happened -- the only place in the united states of america where political operatives took advantage ofes a process because it's illegal in that staple the exacting process that the legal in another state, that the only place that lightning struck according to the brennan center. >> the gentleman you. >> i'm so pathetic to remember. i've been listening to this debate very closely. i know exactly what happened in north carolina and it was illegal and discussing i'm going to askco that you would consider fromur the amendment that would allow the voter to designate a person of their choosing to deliver the ballot.
if you do that would vote this limit. that the california standard that they can designate a person of their choosing. >> let me talk to my team about that. >> i respect you and i respect your opinion on this issue and i want to make sure that we offer something, what i would like you to do is ask you to vote for this and we can work on any friendly additions at. >> is putting the cart before the horse. if you would give me your word that you would consent to adding that, if the voter can designat- >> we will hopefully have on this before voter called on the house floor potential in the next ten minutes otherwise we will come back after vote. >> i will reclaim my time and we will talk. we know this moment is going to fail six to three vote.
we have to do something. but the idiot in north carolina nine that committed fraud and likely will go to jail is not the only political operatives te take advantage of processes like ballot harvesting. we know it sometime, the lightning strike did not happen because many do not get caught. i look forward to working with you. and i yelled as much time as i can. >> i would like to think the gentleman from north carolina and respect the time in service mr. murphy had on behalf of his constituents and we would be willing to do something along those lines as being about from your cabana we saw the approach took place it was very disgusting as far as parked in the confidence that people had for the votes been counted and also how the whole process went out. we will certainly be flexible on this if it's something we can work together. >> the gentleman yields back an. certainly all of his kingdom the crimes that were committed in
north carolina. they did not relate to the california experience because there has been no fraud there. i would ask that we post this amendment. >> the gentle lady from california is recognized. >> if the chair would yell for l second period i tell from the body language of my colleagues that you don't believe that. as a chairwoman said, there is a group of attorneys there, i assure you from both sides theth best in the country, that are observing this process. if you have evidence of, that there was fraud in the process i'm sure -- the reality is, it is highly highly monitored and i don't believe even the colleagues the losses elections came back to ask for an appeal.
>> i give the majority a lot of credit. you have a lot more lawyers on the ground and a lot better folks on the ground after the election and why ballots were being collectedg from those in obviously california has a much higher population that needs another state because they substantial amount coming in after the election is what first-rate american people. america people want elections to be decided not weeks later. but to begin with those lawyers were not on the ground -- >> consumer. the reality is the law states as long as the postmark is by the day of the election that the bout can be counted. it is discounted. that is clearly the law -- >> the bipartisanship is the biggest that your elections. >> if the general lady will yield. >> the vast majority of the late votes, they were both postmarked by election day delivered by the
post office under california law. those votes are counted. there were huge numbers on both sides. >> also military ballots. the general lady has additional flmes, but it's been called on the four, two additional members wish to be heard under thisdi amendment? if not we'll have to come back after the votes to continuous those in favor of this limit will say aye and those opposed will say no. in the opinion, i think we have noes but mr. davis has asked for ar. roll call. in the opinion of the chair the no's have it. and let's have a rollcall. clerk will call the roll. [roll call]
[roll call] [roll call] >> the clerk will report. >> manager on this vote there are six nose and three asses. >> in the amendment does not agree to. are there additional amendments to be considered? if not then, the amendment will be dispensed with a reported -- the question is, on a green to hr 2722 house amended. all those in favor will say aye
and all those opposed will say no in the opinion of the chair the ayes havthe eyeses aye habi. rollcall rollcal. [roll call] [roll call] >> the bill passes. yes, sir. >> a closing, is, i do question some electronic scoring over the last couple years of the congressional facebook a. i am very concerned about what the electronic corporate pension in next tuesday night i reserve
the right for a paper backup of whatever this course. [laughter] a paper backup on the facebook game is required or requested. i will but i if any member getsa notice of intention to file supplemental minority dissenting views we willws have two days fr clause to enroll 11, the committee rules and the committee members have it additional two days. i moved hr 2722 is amended to reported a roll of the house. all in favor say aye opposed no. aye habit. do we want to record a book on the same. aye habit and it is reported there are two days it is noted.
and for additional minority decency committed to the smitty report. without objection the staff is authorized to make any technical and conforming pages. i want to think the members fork participating. there is no further business in the meeting stands adjourned and we will go to the floor for votes. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]
[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] >> c-span "washington journal" live every day with news and policy issues that impact you. wednesday morning we discussed immigration and border security with republican congressman ben klein. in north carolina democratic congressman mr. butterfield talks about the trump administration plan to change how poverty is determined. and be sure to watch "washington journal" thursday and friday following the first democratic presidential come into debate of the 2020 race. during the conversation both mornings with your phone calls, facebook comments and tweets.
>> here is a look at the live coverage on wednesday. c-span the house is back at 10:00 a.m. eastern for general speeches with legislative business at 12:00 p.m. members will continue work on a 2020 spending package that covers the treasury department and judiciary and executive branches. on c-span2, the senate returns at 10:00 a.m. eastern to resume debate on the bill that sets 2020 policy and programs. at 6:45 p.m. eastern the coverage of the annual congressional baseball game begins with the first page set at 75. and on c-span3, the house oversight hearing regarding the office of special counsel recommendation that president trump fire white house counsel kellyanne conway for alleged hatchback cut under violations. that is at 10:00 a.m. eastern. at 2:30 p.m. the senate budget committee holds a hearing on federal government spending with
testimony from the u.s. comptroller general. book tv this weekend, saturday at 7:00 p.m. eastern the book the u.s. senate and the commonwealth, mitch mcconnell provides a history of kentucky lawmakers. in the leadership in the u.s. senate. and sunday morning at 1030 eastern washington post beijing bureau trees talks about kim jong-un in her book the great successor. >> twenty-seven years old when he took over and he is been able to hold onto the leadership and defy all these expectations and i wanted to figure out why. as a reporter i did what i do in a trench reported operating so i try to re-create the childhood and bring together as much information as i could about how
you grew up and became a leader he is today. and how he justified the brutal things he does to remain a leader. >> at 9:00 p.m. on "after words", he discusses his time as an executive in the trump organization. he is interviewed by cnn anchor and senior political analyst. >> in my view, we have issue with china, we can see these are big emerging fortunes that we have to deal with. don't i want my president, isn't it pretty smart for him to have good relationships with those leaders? isn't that a smart thing. i take comfort in the fact that these people are all talking to each other. >> this week and booktv on c-span2. >> wednesday is annual congressional baseball game in