U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

81–809 2013

MARKUP OF H.R. 94, TO AMEND THE INTERNAL REVENUE 

CODE OF 1986 TO PROHIBIT THE USE OF PUBLIC 

FUNDS FOR POLITICAL PARTY CONVENTIONS; H.R. 95, 

TO REDUCE FEDERAL SPENDING AND THE DEFICIT BY 

TERMINATING TAXPAYER FINANCING OF PRESIDENTIAL 

ELECTION CAMPAIGNS AND PARTY CONVENTIONS; H.R. 

1994, ELECTION ASSISTANCE COMMISSION TERMINATION 

ACT; COMMITTEE RESOLUTION DISMISSING THE ELECTION 

CONTEST IN CA–43; AND COMMITTEE RESOLUTION DISMISSING THE ELECTION CONTEST IN TN–9 

MEETING 

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON HOUSE 

ADMINISTRATION 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED THIRTEENTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

Held in Washington, DC, June 4, 2013 

Printed for the use of the Committee on House Administration 

( 

Available on the Internet 

www.fdsys.gov 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARING
(II) 

COMMITTEE ON HOUSE ADMINISTRATION 

CANDICE S. MILLER, Michigan, Chairman 

GREGG HARPER, Mississippi 

PHIL GINGREY, M.D., Georgia 

AARON SCHOCK, Illinois 

TODD ROKITA, Indiana 

RICHARD B. NUGENT, Florida 

ROBERT A. BRADY, Pennsylvania 

Ranking Minority Member 

ZOE LOFGREN, California 

JUAN VARGAS, California 

PROFESSIONAL STAFF

KELLY CRAVEN, Staff Director 

JAMIE FLEET, Minority Staff Director 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARING
(1) 

MARKUP OF H.R. 94, TO AMEND THE INTERNAL REVENUE CODE OF 1986 TO PROHIBIT 

THE USE OF PUBLIC FUNDS FOR POLITICAL PARTY CONVENTIONS; H.R. 95, TO REDUCE FEDERAL SPENDING AND THE DEFICIT BY TERMINATING TAXPAYER FINANCING OF PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION CAMPAIGNS AND PARTY CONVENTIONS; H.R. 

1994, ELECTION ASSISTANCE COMMISSION 

TERMINATION ACT; COMMITTEE RESOLUTION DISMISSING THE ELECTION CONTEST 

IN CA–43; AND COMMITTEE RESOLUTION 

DISMISSING THE ELECTION CONTEST IN 

TN–9 

TUESDAY, JUNE 4, 2013 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 

COMMITTEE ON HOUSE ADMINISTRATION, 

Washington, D.C. 

The committee met, pursuant to call, at 11:05 a.m., in Room 

1310, Longworth House Office Building, Hon. Candice S. Miller 

[chairman of the committee] presiding. 

Present: Representatives Miller, Harper, Gingrey, Rokita, 

Nugent, Brady, Lofgren and Vargas. 

Staff Present: Kelly Craven, Staff Director; Peter Schalestock, 

Deputy General Counsel; Joe Wallace, Legislative Clerk; Yael 

Barash, Assistant Legislative Clerk; Salley Wood, Communications 

Director; Linda Ulrich, Director of Oversight; Bob Sensenbrenner, 

Elections Counsel; Jamie Fleet, Minority Staff Director; Matt 

Pinkus, Senior Policy Analyst; Khalil Abboud, Minority Elections 

Staff; Thomas Hicks, Minority Elections Counsel; Greg Abbott, Minority Professional Staff Member; and Eddie Flaherty, Minority 

Professional Staff Member. 

The CHAIRMAN. I would like to call to order the Committee on 

House Administration for today’s committee markup. A quorum is 

present so we can proceed. First of all, the meeting record will remain open for 5 legislative days so that members might submit any 

materials that they wish to have included for the record. 

Today we will consider five items in our markup: A committee 

resolution dismissing the election contest in the 43rd Congressional 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARING
2 

District of California; a committee resolution dismissing the election contest in the 9th Congressional District of Tennessee; the 

committee is also going to be considering H.R. 94, which prohibits 

the use of public funds for political party conventions; H.R. 95, 

which terminates taxpayer financing of presidential election campaigns and party conventions; and then finally as well in the mark 

will be H.R. 1994 under consideration which is the Election Assistance Commission Termination Act. 

Our two election contests dismissals, first of all, I would like to 

comment that both of these contests fail every test of validity. This 

committee has made a practice in the past of considering all contests under the Federal Contested Elections Act in public meetings 

to assure that they are treated fairly, and I hope that commitment 

to full and fair considerations would not be jeopardized by 

meritless filings as both of these two clearly are. 

Our next two items on the agenda, again, cover the Presidential 

Election Campaign Fund, the PECF. This committee held hearings 

in the 111th Congress that included testimony on the PECF and 

the House voted on similar bills in the 112th Congress, and I think 

in light of what is happening with this fund and changing times 

as well, it is certainly appropriate for us to be revisiting this legislation today. 

The money in the PECF comes from taxpayers who are given the 

option to have $3 out of their taxes that they are already paying 

placed in the fund. Taxpayers, I think, are already voting to end 

the PECF regardless of what Congress does here because at its 

peak of its popularity in 1980, about 29 percent of filers actually 

participated in this fund. By 2012, however, that dropped to approximately 5 percent. So even though it doesn’t cost them more in 

taxes, the American people are telling us that this is a program 

that they don’t want. 

Since we started using taxpayer funds for presidential campaigns 

and party conventions, supposedly to restore confidence in government, 20 percent of the American people actually think less of their 

elected officials than when we started. So it is no surprise that 

they don’t want to pay for this failed program anymore. 

The PECF’s popularity has certainly decreased among politicians 

as well. In fact, despite his stated support for this program, President Obama was actually the first major party candidate to entirely opt out of the program since it started. He did not participate 

in either the primary or general elections. Major candidates started 

refusing primary election money as far back as 2000. And in 2012, 

only three candidates applied for money from this fund. They were 

Gary Johnson, Buddy Roemer and Jill Stein. So taxpayers don’t 

support the fund, the candidates are not using it, and I think citizens don’t have any more confidence in the government because of 

the program, so I would say it is a textbook example of a failed program, one that we need to end. 

One part of the PECF pays part of the cost for nominating conventions for the major political parties, which are now 4-day extravagances that the major television networks don’t broadcast in 

their entirety anymore. Last year the RNC and DNC received 

about $18 million each to conduct their party nominating convenVerDate Mar 15 2010 05:10 Jul 20, 2013 Jkt 081809 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A809.XXX A809

pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARING
3 

tions. That is $36 million in tax dollars spent for use by political 

parties. 

The parties themselves raised another $80 million or so in private money for their conventions. I would say that clearly the parties are up to the job of paying for their own conventions. They 

don’t need taxpayer subsidies to help do that. 

I think if they knew the details of what they were actually paying for, taxpayers would even be less happy about it. It was interesting looking at a review by Senator Coburn at 2008 funds that 

were provided for conventions. The funds were used for things like 

floral arrangements, gift bags and live music and even makeup 

consultants, this at a time certainly when people all over our Nation are learning to get by with less. So I do not think that as stewards of the taxpayer dollars in good conscience, we should be 

spending taxpayer money on political conventions. H.R. 94 then 

would prohibit taxpayer funds from being used for party conventions, and I think it is at least a start. 

H.R. 95 would eliminate the PECF altogether and use the remaining funds to pay down the deficit. Money that would have 

gone into the fund in the future will be available for other programs and the $260 million sitting in that fund today will go 

straight toward cutting the amount of money that we would have 

to borrow and actually reducing the deficit. 

Speaking of failed programs, I also think it is time for H.R. 1994, 

the Election Assistance Commission Termination Act to end. It has 

far outlived its purpose, no longer benefits voters or election officials, and yet despite an original sunset date of 2005, it continues 

to exist without any commissioners. 

My colleague from Mississippi, Mr. Harper, has led this mission 

to finally shut down this agency that has become a prime example 

of waste shielded by bureaucracy. The EAC has no more money to 

give out to States, its research programs are completed, the Voting 

System Certification Program that it runs is built around a model 

and a marketplace that has failed, and needs to be really reimagined. 

The EAC hasn’t even had commissioners or an executive director 

since 2011 and the country does not seem to be suffering as a result. In fact, the academic research that we have seen so far says 

that the operation of the 2012 election was really no worse than 

the 2008 election. Most of the problems that we saw certainly in 

the last election were from negligence at the local level. So there 

is just no need for this agency to exist. We need to shut it down. 

At this time, I would like to recognize my colleague and the committee’s ranking member, Mr. Brady, for his opening statement. 

Mr. BRADY. Thank you, Madam Chair. I don’t have an opening 

statement. I do have a statement for each bill when we call up the 

bills and we will be offering amendments and we will do it at that 

time. 

The CHAIRMAN. Very well. I also ask unanimous consent to enter 

into the record the statement from a sponsor of H.R. 94 and 95, 

Mr. Tom Cole, concerning the Presidential Election Campaign 

Fund, and, without objection, that will be so ordered. 

[The statement of Mr. Cole follows:] 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARING
4 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 11 here 81809A.001

STATEMENT FOR THE RECORD 

By Rep. Tom Cole 

regarding 

H.R. 94 and H.R. 95 

Chairman Miller, Ranking Member Brady, I appreciate the opportunity to provide testimony 

today regarding two pieces oflegislation I authored, H.R. 94 and H.R. 95. H.R. 94 eliminates the 

taxpayer subsidization of presidential nominating conventions and H.R. 95 eliminated the entire 

antiquated, outdated system of the public financing of elections and presidential nominating 

conventions. 

When the Presidential Election Campaign Fund (PECF) was created, in 1973, it was during a 

time when Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, and even the widespread use of the internet did not 

exist. That is no longer the case. Today, it's as easy as calling up the candidate's web page and 

entering a credit card number. In fact, the largest single category of donations in the 2012 

election cycle made to presidential candidates are of $200 or less, over $675 million. 

Even at the height of the program's popularity more than a quarter-century ago, less than onethird of taxpayers chose to support presidential public financing. Check off participation reached 

a high point in 1980, when 28.7% of filers designated funds for the PECF. Fewer than 15% of 

taxpayers have made public financing designations every calendar year since 1993. In 2012. 

taxpayer participation reached a low of 6.0% 

The 2008 election sounded the death knell for the PECF and the 2012 election confirmed it. 

When both President Obama and Governor Romney opted out and raised hundreds of millions of 

dollars, all without a dime of public assistance, they sent a message that public financing is a 

thing of the past. 

Beyond that, this legislation would terminate funding for the political parties' conventions. Given 

the debt our federal government has accrued, and the over $600 billion deficit expected for FY 

2013, these expenditures are an unneeded lUXUry and amount to nothing more than a politician's 

welfare check. Recent expenditures or "convention costs" paid for by federal dollars include: a 

make-up artist consultant, political consulting fees, gift bags, banners, among others. In 1980, 

federal grants paid for nearly 95 percent of convention costs; however, in 2008, these federal 

grants covered approximately 23 percent of convention costs. Frankly, as former RNC Chief of 

Staff who helped stage the GOP's 2000 National Convention, 1 can assure the Committee that the 

major parties are more than capable of funding their own national conventions. 

Last Congress, the House approved my legislation to repeal the PECF, H.R. 359, which would 

have saved the taxpayers $462 million. Sadly, the Senate failed to take up this legislation or 

companion legislation authored by Senator Coburn. I understand that may not seem like a lot of 

money, given the current fiscal challenges we face; however, we must start somewhere. Ifwe 

can't cut something like this, what can we cut? These programs are clearly unnecessary. They 
5 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 12 here 81809A.002

don't feed anyone. They don't keep anyone warm. It is times like these where we need to reevaluate all of our governmental priorities and remove pieces that are useless. 

Chairman Miller, Ranking Member Brady, thank you for allowing me to testify and I look 

forward to working with you on this. 
6 

The CHAIRMAN. I would ask if any other members have an opening statement at this time? The chair recognizes the gentleman 

from Mississippi, Mr. Harper. 

Mr. HARPER. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

It has been more than 4 years since my first oversight hearing 

with the Election Assistance Commission as a member of this committee, and more than 2 years since I first introduced legislation 

to terminate the EAC. Since that time, the agency’s actions, or lack 

thereof, has proven why the original bill did not go far enough in 

cutting this bloated agency spending. The EAC has proven, yet 

again, that it is not necessary to the conduct of Federal elections. 

It is an unnecessary expenditure of taxpayer funds. 

The EAC initially had a 3-year mandate, but as with most government programs, it found a way to maintain its existence. Unfortunately, it has become a bloated bureaucracy that mismanaged 

taxpayer dollars and has been the subject of two discriminatory 

hiring lawsuits, both of which cost the taxpayers money to resolve. 

The remaining EAC functions, to the extent they are useful, can be 

performed more efficiently by other government or private entities. 

The best course that we can take as the EAC’s committee of jurisdiction is to simply dissolve the agency and end its wasteful spending. 

The EAC has outlived its useful life. The Commission was originally designed to distribute money and oversee upgrade of States’ 

voting machines. The EAC has distributed over $3.1 billion of 

money for States for machine upgrades and election improvements, 

and that stream of funding has ended. The EAC’s testing and certification program for voting machines has been almost entirely left 

unused in recent years. The program only has 11 voting machines 

with current certification and one in the testing phase. The machines are still being tested to standards created in 2005. This onerous costly program is outdated and stifles innovation in the elections community. 

Even more important, the EAC has not had enough commissioners to act and conduct business since December of 2010 and 

has not had any commissioners since December of 2011. The Commission has also lacked an executive director since December 2011 

and a general counsel since May of 2012, prohibiting them from 

conducting official business for the last 2 years. And the overwhelming majority of the country does not seem to have noticed. 

Yet despite its absence of any mission or leadership, the agency is 

still receiving an appropriation of $11.5 million. 

Wasting money on ineffective useless agencies like the EAC is 

yet another example of irresponsible government spending. We 

need to finally put an end to this. This agency has outlived its usefulness and to continue to fund it is the definition of irresponsibility. This is not a conclusion that we have come to lightly. We 

put in the time and effort through hearings and meetings with experts and election officials, and come to the conclusion that this 

agency needs to go. 

NASS, the National Association of Secretaries of State, a bipartisan organization, adopted resolutions calling for the dissolution of 

the EAC in 2005, and renewed that again in 2010. It is simply the 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARING
7 

time to end the EAC and save the American taxpayers almost $12 

million a year at a time when our Nation is hurting financially. 

It doesn’t get any easier to find an example of wasteful spending. 

If we can’t do this, we might as well pack up and go home, because 

this is as obvious as it gets. 

Chairman Miller, thank you for your time and I yield back. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, gentleman. Are there any other committee members that wish to have an opening statement? 

The chair recognizes the gentleman from Georgia, Dr. Gingrey. 

Mr. GINGREY. Madam Chairman, I want to thank you for calling 

this important markup on elections legislation. I am in strong support of the combined efforts by my good friends Mr. Cole and Mr. 

Harper to reduce Federal spending by ending the public financing 

of campaigns and conventions, and to terminate the Election Assistance Commission. As presidential campaigns in this day and 

age are becoming increasingly expensive and costing billions of dollars, the idea of having taxpayers contribute matching funds to 

them is ludicrous. Passage of Mr. Cole’s bills to eliminate The Presidential Election Campaign Fund would immediately return approximately $260 million to the Treasury. 

Regarding H.R. 1994, I believe that the Election Assistance Commission has indeed outlived its usefulness. The Election Assistance 

Commission was designed to distribute money to States to make 

improvements to their election processes. However, the Commission has not had a quorum since 2010. President Obama himself 

appears to believe the Commission now has little value as evidenced by his creation of a new entity to advise on elections. Eliminating the Election Assistance Commission is estimated to save 

taxpayers at least $11.5 million a year. 

Madam Chairman, in the midst of record levels of debt, we must 

scrutinize where every dollar of taxpayer money is being spent to 

ensure we are allocating these funds responsibly and delivering the 

best possible value to our citizens. I believe the bills we are marking up here today help to accomplish those goals. 

I yield back. 

The CHAIRMAN. I thank the gentleman. Do any other members 

have an opening statement? 

If not, at this time I will call up and lay before the committee 

an original resolution dismissing the election contest for the 43rd 

District of California. Without objection, the first reading of the 

resolution is dispensed with. The resolution is considered read and 

open for amendment at any point. 

[The resolution follows:] 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARING
8 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 18 here 81809A.003

F:\NLw\HOREP\DISM13_002.xML 

(Original Si~\,,)lahm.' of Memher) 

113m CO:\'GRESS H RES 1,,'1' SgSSlOX 

• • 

Dismissing the election cOlltest I'elating to tlw office of Represcntatiw from 

tIl(' l''(niy Third Con~'1'esSi01lal Distri('t of Califol11ia. 

IN THE HOUSE O};' REPRESENTATIVES 

Mrs. :\IILLER of Michigan, from the COlllmittee 011 Honse Administration, 

re]lorted the folltmillg resolution 

RESOLUTION 

Dismissing the election contest relating to the office of Representative from the Portr Third Congressional District 

of California. 

Resolved, That the election contest relating to the of2 fice of Representative from the I;'ort.v Third Congressional 

3 District of Califomia is dismissed. 

f:IVHLCI0520131052013.253.xml 

May 20, 2013 (4:54 p.m.) 

(55015011) 
9 

The CHAIRMAN. Let me just, first of all, say in regards to both 

of these election contests, these contests are about as frivolous as 

election contests can be. Apparently they are both sent by the same 

individual who is incarcerated, I think, in Tennessee. But we had 

the legal staff look back and for about a century, we have really 

taken up even the most frivolous contests to the full House for dismissal in an effort to be fair and transparent, so again, we bring 

up these resolutions for the sake of the institution, not because either of them have any merit whatsoever. 

Is there any debate on this resolution? 

Do any members want to offer an amendment to the resolution? 

If not, I move the committee favorably report the original resolution to the House. The question is on the motion. All those in favor, 

signify by saying aye; those opposed, say nay. 

The motion is carried. In the opinion of the chair, it has carried. 

Mr. BRADY. Madam Chair, I do agree with dismissing the frivolous and ridiculous election contest, but I would like to announce 

that minority members will use two additional calendar days provided by clause 2(l) of rule XI of the Rules of the House in order 

to file views. 

The CHAIRMAN. Very well. I thank the gentleman. Without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid upon the table and pursuant 

to clause 2 of rule XI, the member is entitled to two additional calendar days to file such views in writing signed by that member to 

the clerk of the committee. 

I will now call up and lay before the committee an original resolution dismissing the election contest for the 9th District of Tennessee. Without objection, first reading of the resolution is dispensed with, the resolution is considered read and open for amendment at any point. 

[The resolution follows:] 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARING
10 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 21 here 81809A.004

F:INLW\HOREPIDISMI 3_003.xML 

(Original HigllHhH'l' of :\Iemht'l') 

113m COXGHESS H RES hiT Sr,88IOX • • 

Dismissing the electioll pontest relating to the officp of Rl'Jll'esentatiYe from 

the 1\illth COllgn'ssiollHI Distriet of TellllPssep. 

l:-r THE HOnSE OF REPRESE:-rTATIVES 

:\[rs. i\IILl,ER of Miehigan, from the Committee Oil HOl1SP Administration, 

reported the foll(ming l'l'solution 

RESOLUTION 

Dismissing the election contest relating to the office of RepreselltatiY(~ from the :-rinth Congressional Dish'iet of Tennessee. 

Resolved, That the election contest relating to the of2 fice of RepresentatiW' from the :-rinth Congressional Dis3 tl'iet of Tennessee is dismissed. 

f:IVHLCI0520131052013.251.xml 

May 20, 2013 (4:53 p.m.) 

(55015111) 
11 

The CHAIRMAN. Is there any debate or amendments to this resolution? 

If not, I move the committee favorably report the original resolution to the House. The question is on the motion. All those in favor 

signify by saying aye; those opposed, say nay. 

In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it, the ayes have it, 

the motion is agreed to. Without objection, the motion to reconsider 

is laid on the table. 

Mr. BRADY. Madam Chair, again I would like to announce that 

the minority members will use the 2 additional calendar days provided by clause 2(l) of rule XI of the Rules of the House in order 

to file views. 

The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 2 of rule XI, the member is 

entitled to two additional calendar days to file such views in writing and signed by that member with the clerk of the committee. 

I will now call up and lay before the committee H.R. 94, a bill 

to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to prohibit the use of 

public funds for political party conventions. Without objection, the 

first reading of that bill is dispensed with and the bill is considered 

read and open for amendment at any point. 

[The bill follows:] 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARING
12 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 24 here 81809A.005

• 

113T!! CO:'\GRESS 

hl1' SESSIO:-\ H.R.94 

To alllend the Internal Re\'emw Code of 1 flR(i to prohihit the URe of Jll1blie 

funds for political party (,OJIYelltiOllH. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPltESENTA'rIVES 

JAt,L\RY 3, 2013 

:\[1'. COLE introduced the following hill; whieh was referred to the Committee 

on House Administration 

A BILL 

To amend the Internal Reyenue Code of 1986 to prohibit 

the nsc of public funds for political part.'! cOllYentions. 

1 Be 'it enacted by the Senate and Honse of Representa2 lives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. PROHmITING USE OF PRESIDENTIAL ELEC4 TION CAMPAIGN FUNDS FOR PARTY CONVEN· 

5 TIONS. 

6 (a) I" Gl'''BRAL.-Cllaptel' 95 of the Internal Hey7 cnuc Code of 1986 is amended b,1' striking section 9008. 

8 (b) CLBRICAL .A.i\IE?\DMB?\T.-The table of seetiolls 

9 of chapter 95 of snell Code is amended by striking' 1hc~ 

10 item relating to sectioll 9008. 
13 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 25 here 81809A.006

2 

SEC. 2. CONFORMING AMENDMENTS. 

2 (a) A'i'AILABITjITY OF PAY:\fEXTS TO CAXDIDATES.-

3 The third sentence of section 9006(c) of the Internal Rey4 enue Code of 1986 is amended by striking ", section 

5 9008(b)(8),". 

6 (b) REPORTS BY FEDERAL ELECTIOX CmIl\IIS7 sIOx.-Section 9009(a) of such Code is amende<1-

8 (1) by adding "and" at the end of paragraph 

9 (2); 

10 (2) by striking "i and" at the end of paragraph 

11 (8) and inserting a period; a11(l 

12 on by striking paragraphs (4), (5), and (6). 

13 (c) PEXAIjTIES.-Sectioll 9012 of such Code IS 

14 amendecl15 (1) in subsection (a)(l), by striking the second 

16 sentence; and 

17 (2) in subsection (c), by striking paragraph (2) 

18 and redesignating paragraph (8) as paragraph (2). 

19 (el) AYAILABILITY 01" PADIEX1'S Ii'Rmr PRESI20 DEXTIAL PRnIAlW J\i;\.TCHIX(} PABIEXT Accm;xT.-rrhe 

21 second scntcnce of seetion 9087(a) of such Code is amend22 cd by striking "and for payments under section 

23 9008(b)(8)" . 

• HR 94 IH 
14 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 26 here 81809A.007

3 

1 SEC. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE. 

2 The amendments made by this Act shall apply \vith 

3 respect to elections occurring after December 31, 2012. 

o 

.HR 94 IH 
15 

The CHAIRMAN. Do any members of the committee wish to comment on this bill? 

Mr. Brady. 

Mr. BRADY. Madam Chair, I urge the defeat of this bill. Both 

major parties have used public funds to pay for their nominating 

conventions since 1976. While I believe that paying for party conventions is not the best use of our tax dollars, I also do not believe 

that this legislation—I do not believe this legislation is the best solution. We should reject it because we need a comprehensive fix to 

the way we finance presidential campaigns. Hopefully this committee can have a hearing on the excellent proposal by Representative David Price to do just that, and I urge my colleagues to defeat 

this proposal. Thank you. 

The CHAIRMAN. I appreciate the gentleman’s comments. As I 

mentioned in my opening statement, I think when we think about 

$16 trillion and no end in sight worth of debt, the American taxpayers should not be really having welfare for politicians or political parties running infomercials for presidential campaigns. I 

think that this bill is long overdue. 

Do any other members wish to comment on this bill? 

Do any members want to offer an amendment to the bill? 

Mr. BRADY. Madam Chairman, I have an amendment which has 

been distributed to the members. 

The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes to 

talk to his amendment. 

[The amendment by Mr. Brady follows:] 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARING
16 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 29 here 81809A.008

F:\NL W\HODEM\H94AMD _003.XML 

AMENDMENT TO H.R. 94 

OFFEREDByM 

Insert after section 2 the following new seetions 

(and redesignate the succeeding section accordingly): 

1 SEC. 3. CONTRffiUTIONS FOR POLITICAL CONVENTIONS. 

2 (a) SEPARATB COXTlUBUTIOX IJDIITATIOX.-

3 (1) IXDIvlDCALS.-

4 (A) Ix GBXERAIj.-Section 315(a)(1) of 

5 the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 

6 U.S.C. 441a(a)(1)) is amended7 (i) by striking "or" at the end of sub8 paragraph (C); 

9 (ii) by striking the period at the end 

10 of subparagraph (D) and inserting "; or"; 

11 and 

12 (iii) by adding at the end the foJ13 lowing new subparagraph: 

14 "(E) to the national nominating' convention 

15 account of political committees established and 

16 maintained b;y a national political party, in any 

17 4-year period ending on the last day of the cal18 endar year beginning on the day after a g'eneral 

19 election for the office of President 'whieh, in the 

f:IVHLCI0603131060313.264.xml (55140511) 

June 3. 2013 (3:32 p.m.) 
17 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 30 here 81809A.009

F:\NL w\HODEM\H94AMD _OO3XML 

2 

2 

3 

4 

aggregate, exceed the dollar amount 111 effect 

under subparagraph (Bl;". 

(B) CO:\'I"OR\lI:\'G A)m:\'InIE:\'T.-Section 

315(a)(1)(B) of such Act (2 U.S.C. 

5 441a(a)(l)(B)) is amended b~T inserting "(other 

6 than to the national nominating cOl1Yention ac7 counts of such political committees which are 

8 described in subparagTaph (E))" after "national 

9 political party". 

10 (2) AGGREGATE CO:\"l'RIBUTIO:\' LnUTATlOX.-

11 Section 315(a)(3) of such Act (2 U.S.C. 441a(a)(8)) 

12 is amended by adding at the end the following new 

13 flush sentence: 

14 "The donal' amount 111 subparagTaph (B) shan be in15 creased by the amount of contributions (not in excess of 

16 the dollar amount ill dfed untIl'r subparagTaph (E)) made 

17 to the national nominating cOIlYentioIl account of a polit18 ical committee established and maintained by a national 

19 political party cinring the peJ'iocl described in the preceding 

20 sentence.". 

21 (h) NA1'IO:\,AIl NO:\lIXATI:\,G CO:\,VE:\,TIO:\' Ac22 COlT:\'T.-Section 815(a) of sHell Act (2 U.S.C. 441a(a)) 

23 is amended by adding' at the end the follO\\illg new para24 graph: 

f:IVHLCI0603131060313.264.xml 

June 3. 2013 (3:32 p.m.) 

(55140511) 
18 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 31 here 81809A.010

F:\NL w\HODEM\H94AMD _003XML 

3 

"(9) For purposes of this subsection, the national 

2 nomination convention account of any political committees 

3 established and maintained by a national politieal party 

4 is a separate account the funds of which may only be used 

5 to defray the costs of the national llominating convention 

6 of such party.". 

7 SEC. 4. PROHffiITION ON USE OF SOFT MONEY. 

8 Section 32:3 of tIlt' J,lederal Election Campail-,rrl Act 

9 of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 441i) is amended by adding at the end 

10 the following new subsection: 

11 "(g) NATIOXAL CO~"VEXTlo:\s.-Any person de12 scribed in subsection (a) or (e) shall not solicit, receive, 

13 direct, transfer, or spend any funds in connection with a 

14 presidential nominating convention of any political party, 

15 including funds from or for a host committee, eiyic com16 mittee, municipality, or any other person or entity spend17 ing funds in connection with such a cOIlYention, unless 

18 such f\1n<1s19 "(1) are not in excess of the amounts permitted 

20 with respect to contributions to the political com21 mittee established and maintained b~· a national po22 litical party committee under section 815; and 

23 "(2) are not from sources prohibited by this Act 

24 from making eontributiOllS ill connection with an 

25 election for Pederal office.". 

f:WHLCI0603131060313.264.xmi 

June 3, 2013 (3:32 p.m.) 

(55140511) 
19 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 32 here 81809A.011

F;\NL w\HODEM\H94AMD _Om.XML 

4 

Amend the title so as to read: "A bill to amend the 

Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to eliminate the usc of 

public funds for political party cOllYentions and to amend 

the Federal Election Campaigll Act of 1971 to establish 

limitations OIl thc amount of contributions made to politieal parties for such conventions and to prohibit the solicitation or usc of soft money by politieal parties for such 

conventions." . 

f:IVHLC\0603131060313.264.xml 

June 3, 2013 (3:32 p.m.) 

(55140511) 
20 

Mr. BRADY. Thank you, Madam Chair. My amendment ends the 

use of public funding as well as the use of soft money contributions 

for nominating conventions. We should not eliminate public money 

for party conventions only to replace it with undisclosed contributions from special interests. 

My amendment institutes a hard money system subject to contribution limits. My amendment is based on a proposal by Representative David Price from North Carolina who has been a leader 

in this area for a long time. My amendment is also a commonsense 

replacement for the current system which is in desperate need of 

reform. This is an important first step that provides more accountability and disclosure in how we finance our conventions. I ask for 

your support of this amendment. 

The CHAIRMAN. I would say to the gentleman, since we just received the amendment just a little bit ago, we haven’t really had 

a chance to completely digest his amendment. I am very interested 

in our overall goal of stopping taxpayer financing for these kinds 

of things. But if the gentleman is interested in working with us, 

I think we would be willing to do so. If you are interested in withdrawing that amendment, I certainly would commit to the gentleman that I would be willing to look at this in depth and perhaps 

we can come to some agreement before we go to the floor with it. 

I would certainly be open to that with the gentleman. 

Mr. BRADY. Madam Chairman, I am always interested in working with you, and with that, I will withdraw my amendment. 

The CHAIRMAN. I thank the gentleman. Are there any other comments or any other members that want to offer an amendment to 

this bill? 

If not, I would move that the committee favorably report H.R. 94 

and the question is on the motion. All those in favor signify by saying aye; those opposed say nay. 

In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it and the motion is 

agreed to. 

Mr. BRADY. Madam Chair, I would like to announce that the minority members will use the 2 additional calendar days provided by 

clause 2(l) of rule XI of the Rules of the House in order to file 

views, and I thank you. 

The CHAIRMAN. Again, to the gentleman, pursuant to clause 2 of 

rule XI, the member is entitled to 2 additional calendar days to file 

such views in writing signed by that member with the clerk of the 

committee. 

I would now call up and lay before the committee H.R. 95, a bill 

to reduce Federal spending and the deficit by terminating taxpayer 

financing of presidential election campaigns and party conventions. 

Without objection, the first reading of the bill is dispensed with 

and the bill is considered read and open for amendment at any 

point. 

[The bill follows:] 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARING
21 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 36 here 81809A.012

113TH COXGRESS 

IHT SEHHIOX H.R.95 

'ro rC(\llce 1,'('de1'al spendillg Hnd tht:' (lcfieit ho' terminating' tmqmyel' fillRllcing 

of presidential eleetion campaig'lIs a!HI pRrty ('onwntions, 

IN THE HOUSE OI" REPRESENTATIVES 

JAXFAHY ;i, 2018 

Mr. COLE introduced the following bill; which was rt'ferrc(l to the Committee 

on ,\'ay~ and :\lcans, and in addition to the COlllluitt(>c Oil House Administratioll, for a period to be subsequcntl;' determined h~' the Speaker, in 

each easc for eOllsideration of snch provi~ions as fall \)'ithill the jllrisdietion of the COllullittl'c eoncerned 

A BILL 

To reduce Pc(leral spending' and the defieit by terminating' 

taxpayer f'inaneing of presidential eleetion campaigns and 

party conventions, 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States (~f lbnericain Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. TERMINATION OF TAXPAYER FINANCING OF 

4 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION CAMPAIGNS. 

5 (a) rrElnnXATIOX OF DESIGXATIOX OF IxcmIE TAX 

6 PAYl\IEXTS.-Seetion 6096 of the Internal Rcyenue Code 

7 of 1!l86 is amended by adding' at the end the follmving' 

8 new subsection: 
22 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 37 here 81809A.013

2 

"(d) TER.\IL'\ATIOX.-'rhis section shall not apply to 

2 t~L'.;;:able years beginning after December 31,2011.". 

3 (b) TElnIIXATIOX OF I<'rxD AXD ACCOt:XT.-

4 (1) TER~IIXATIOX OF PRESIDEXTIAL ELECTIOX 

5 e,UIPAIGX 1<'l;XD.-

6 (A) Ix GEXERAL.-Chapter 95 of subtitle 

7 H of such Code is amended by adding at the 

8 end the follmving new section: 

9 "SEC. 9014. TERMINATION. 

10 "The provisions of this chapter shall not apply ,yjth 

11 respect to any presidential election (or any presidential 

12 nominating conyention) after the date of the enactment 

13 of this section, or to any candidate in snch an election.". 

14 (B) TRAXSFER OF EXCESS FrXDS TO GEX15 ERAT, PCi"D.-Section 9006 of snch Code is 

16 amended by adding at the end the follmving 

17 new subsection: 

18 "(cl) TRAxsn~R OF FUKDS HE:.\IAIXIXO AFTEH 'rER19 MlxA'rrox.-'rhe Secretary shall transfer all amounts iu 

20 the fund after the date of the enactment of this section 

21 to the general fund of the Treasury, to be used only for 

22 reducing the deficit.". 

23 (2) TER:\IIXATIOX OP ACCOrxT.-Chapter 96 

24 of subtitle H of such Code is amemled by adding at 

25 the end the following new section: 

.HR 95 IH 
23 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 38 here 81809A.014

3 

"SEC. 9043. TERMINATION. 

2 '''£he provisions of this chapter shall not apply to any 

3 candidate with respect to any presidential election after 

4 the date of the enactment of this section.". 

5 (c) CLERICAL A~IEXmIEXTs.-

6 (1) The table of sections for chapter 95 of sub7 title II of snch Codc is amended by adding at the 

8 end the follovving new item: 

"Set', 9014. Termination.". 

9 (2) The table of sections for chapter 96 of snb10 title H of sueh Code is amended by adding at the 

11 end the following new item: 

·'See. 0048. rrermiuatioll,". 

o 

.HR 95 IH 
24 

The CHAIRMAN. Is there any debate or members that wish to 

offer an amendment? The gentleman from Pennsylvania. 

Mr. BRADY. Madam Chair, I urge also the defeat of this bill. Created in the wake of the Watergate scandal, The Presidential Election Campaign Fund was designed to restore integrity to our presidential elections. Since 1976, presidential candidates from both 

sides of the aisle have opted to fund their campaigns using PECF 

instead of private contributions. 

Like convention funding, all money used for the campaign funding functions of the PECF is contributed voluntarily by taxpayers. 

We should honor the wishes of those taxpayers. Beginning with the 

Citizens United decision, we have seen a disturbing pattern of increasing influence of large and undisclosed monies in our politics. 

Terminating the only public finance system at the Federal level 

runs the risk of handing over our election to special interests entirely. 

The system needs reform, not repeal. By modernizing the system, 

we can ensure that Americans continue to have a voice in the process, no matter how small their contribution, and I urge my colleagues to defeat this bill. 

The CHAIRMAN. I thank the gentleman. Are there any other debate does any member have an amendment to the bill? 

Mr. BRADY. Madam Chair, I have an amendment in the nature 

of a substitute which has been distributed to the members. 

[The amendment of Mr. Brady follows:] 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARING
25 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 41 here 81809A.015

F:\NL w\HODEM\H95AMD _004.XML 

AMENDMENT TO H.R. 95 

OFFERED BY M_. 

Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the 

following: 

SECTION 1. RESERVATION OF PORTION OF PRESIDENTIAL 

2 

3 

ELECTION CAMPAIGN FUND TO IMPROVE 

ELECTION ADMINISTRATION IN PRESI· 

4 DENTIAL ELECTION YEARS ON BEHALF OF 

5 MILITARY MEMBERS, ELDERLY INDIVIDUALS, 

6 AND DISABLED INDIVIDUALS. 

7 (a) RESERVATIO:,\ OF l<'U:,\DI:'\G.-Chapter 9f> of sub8 title H of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended 

9 by a<lding at the end the following new section: 

10 "SEC. 9014. RESERVATION OF FUNDING TO IMPROVE ELEC11 TION ADMINISTRATION IN PRESIDENTIAL 

12 ELECTION YEARS. 

13 "(a) TRA:'\Sl~ER OF FU:,\DS I<'OR ELECTIO:'\ AD:\lIl\IS14 TRATIO:'\ hIPROVE~IE:,\TS 0:'\ BEIL\H<' 01<' l\IILITARY 

15 l\IE;\IBEHS, EumlUN I l\DIVIDUALS , &,\D DISABI,ED I:,\DI16 VIDUALS.-

17 "(1) TRAl\SI"ER.-On the first day of each fis18 cal year (beginning- ",-ith fiscal year 2014), the Sec19 retary shall transfer $10,000,000 from the fund to 

fWHLCI0603131060313.248.xml 

June 3, 2013 (3:14 p.m.) 

(55133611) 
26 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 42 here 81809A.016

F:INLw\HODEM\H95AMD_004.xML 

2 

the Election Assistance Commission. Such transfer 

2 shall be made before any transfer is made to any ac3 count for any eligible candidate under section 

4 9006(a) and before any deposit is made into any ac5 eount of a politieal party under section 9008(a). 

6 "(2) IXDl~XrXG OF A.'IIOUXT.-The amount re7 ferred to in paragraph (1) shall be adjusted in the 

8 same manner as the amount of expenditure limita9 tions established by section 315(b) and section 

10 315(d) of the Federal Election Campaign Aet of 

11 1971 are adjusted pursuant to section 315(c) of 

12 such Ad. 

13 "(b) USg (w FUXDS.-

14 "(1) Ix Gf~XgRAL.-The amount transferred 

15 under subsection (a) with respect to a fiscal year 

16 shall be nsed by the Election Assistam~e Commission 

17 to make payments to eligible States to carry out im18 provements in the administration of presidential 

19 elections in the State which \vill impruve the ability 

20 of members of the unifm'med services, elderly i11(li21 viduals, and individuals with disabilities to east bal22 lots in such elections. 

23 "(2) ELlGIBIIATY OJ;' S'l'A'rBs.-A State is an 

24 eligible State for purposes of this subsection with re25 sped to a fiscal year if the State is eligible to receive 

1:\ VHLC\060313\060313.248.xml 

June 3, 2013 (3: 14 p.m.) 

(55133611) 
27 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 43 here 81809A.017

F:\NL w\HODEM\H95AMD_004.XML 

1 a requirements payments under part 1 of subtitle D 

2 of title II of the Help America Vote Act of 2002 for 

3 sueh fiscal year. 

4 "(:3) i\IETIIOD A."\'D :\IAXXER OF' PADIEXTS.-

5 The Election Assistance Commission shall make pay6 ments under this subsection in the same manner, 

7 and in accordance with the same terms and eoncli8 tions, under which the Commission makes require9 ments payments to States under part 1 of suhtitle 

10 D of title II of the Help America Vote Act of 

] ] 2002.". 

12 (b) CLERICAl, A:mJXmIE?\T.-The table of sections 

13 for chapter 95 of subtitle H of snch Code is amended by 

14 adding at the end the follo\',ing new item: 

"SPC', 9014. HeSPITHtioll of fnndillg' to impl'oye election ndministratioll in prpsi~ 

dentin1 pledioE ~?eari:i.". 

Amend the title so as to read: "A hill to reser..,e a 

portion of the Presidential Election Campaign Fund to 

improve the ability of members of' the uniformed serviees, 

elderly individuals, and individuals \lith disabilities to 

cast ballots in presidential elections.". 

f:\vHLC\060313\060313.24B.xml 

June 3, 2013 (3:14 p.m.) 

(55133611) 
28 

Mr. BRADY. Presidential elections see dramatic increases in turnout compared to midterm elections, overburdening election officials 

and creating unique problems, particularly for our most vulnerable 

voters. The amendment reserves a small portion of the Presidential 

Election Campaign Fund balance for the Elections Assistance Commission to improve election administration in presidential election 

years. By checking the right box on their tax return, millions of 

taxpayers voted to have their money used in support of Federal 

elections. 

This amendment adds another goal to the Presidential Campaign 

Fund by working with the Elections Assistance Commission to 

make sure soldiers, students and disabled voters have access to the 

ballot. While the presidential election funding system needs reform, 

we cannot be distracted from our duty to make sure every eligible 

voter gets to the poll and this proposal makes this happen. I urge 

the support for my amendment. 

The CHAIRMAN. I thank the gentleman for offering the amendment. In this case, I would say I will be opposed to the gentleman’s 

amendment. I appreciate the spirit in which it has been offered. I 

think as has been pointed out, if we pass this we actually return 

approximately $260 million back to the Treasury at this time. 

As I mentioned in my opening statement, when you look at the 

history of the participation for this particular fund, you had almost 

29 percent back in 1980 of the folks that were participating in it, 

and by 2012, you had about 5 percent. Again, in the 2012 election 

cycle, no viable major candidate, party candidate, accepted either 

matching funds for either their primary or their general. 

So I do think that this is a good bill and again, I think it is appropriate for us to consider it. I will be opposing the gentleman’s 

amendment. 

Are there any other comments about the gentleman’s amendment? 

The gentleman from Mississippi. 

Mr. HARPER. I would just like to speak in opposition to the 

amendment. I have certainly great respect for Mr. Brady, but I just 

believe that this would be an attempt where we would be rewarding bad behavior. It is clear, whether it is NASS, the National Association of Secretaries of State and the fact that that bipartisan 

group, not once but twice, has said that we need to end it, this is, 

in effect, perpetually funding the EAC and we don’t need to go that 

route. 

Of course, we are all very sensitive to make sure that everyone 

has the opportunity to vote and I believe Mr. Brady’s intentions are 

well meant, but I believe that the EAC should not continue. These 

are matters that can be handled by the localities and the States. 

I yield back. 

The CHAIRMAN. I thank the gentleman. I associate myself with 

his remarks, particularly when we think about voting for our military members. Again, I appreciate the spirit in which the amendment has been offered. As we all know, the DOD is currently and 

have been undertaking and we are hoping for a report here shortly, 

about military voting, at which time, I think that was due at the 

end of May or the beginning of June here, but it should be happening shortly, we will have an opportunity, all of us as a comVerDate Mar 15 2010 05:10 Jul 20, 2013 Jkt 081809 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A809.XXX A809

pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARING
29 

mittee, to discuss, and most probably have a hearing on that particular report as well in regard to how we make sure that all of 

our military members are able to exercise their franchise to vote 

in a timely way and one in which they are counted. 

Any other comment about the amendment? The gentleman from 

Georgia. 

Mr. GINGREY. Madam Chairman, thanks for the recognition, and 

I too am opposed to the gentleman’s amendment, not the spirit of 

his amendment, of course. But here are some of the reasons why, 

from a policy perspective, I would oppose it. 

I think it has already been mentioned that you could call this the 

Election Assistance Commission perpetual life amendment, because 

the amendment converts $10 million per year from the Presidential 

Elections Commission Fund to the EAC, and then this amount is 

actually indexed for inflation. This makes mandatory appropriations for the EAC not subject to the regular appropriations process. 

So the amount is reserved for improvements in ability to vote for 

members of the uniformed services, elderly individuals and individuals with disabilities to cast ballots in such elections. 

Mandatory appropriations will reduce oversight of the EAC. The 

EAC has been the subject of harsh bipartisan oversight from both 

Democrat and Republican chairmen of this committee. The EAC 

has fulfilled its purpose. This amendment seems to be repurposing 

the Commission just so that they have something to do. 

I do appreciate and share Mr. Brady’s desire to help military and 

elderly voters, but this Commission isn’t the group to do it. Why 

would we task the EAC with military voting when we have the 

Federal Voting Assistance Program? And given the EAC’s recent 

mismanagement of resources, what assurances would we have that 

they would even be able to provide assistance to these groups? So 

for that reason, and others that I have mentioned, Madam Chair, 

I, too, oppose the amendment. 

The CHAIRMAN. I thank the gentleman. Any other comments or 

questions by members? If not the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman to H.R. 95. All those in favor of the amendment will signify by saying aye; opposed will signify by saying no. 

In the opinion of the chair the noes have it, the noes have it, the 

amendment is not agreed to. 

Are there any other amendments? 

If not, I move that the committee favorably report H.R. 95 to the 

full House, and the question is on that motion. Those in favor signify by saying aye; opposed, say no. 

In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it, the ayes have it, 

and the motion is agreed to. 

Mr. BRADY. Madam Chair, I announce that the minority members will use the 2 additional calendar days provided by clause 2(l) 

of rule XI of the Rules of the House in order to file views. 

The CHAIRMAN. I appreciate the gentleman. Pursuant to clause 

2(l) of rule XI, a member is entitled to 2 additional calendar days 

to file such views in writing signed by that member with the clerk 

of the committee. 

I now call up and lay of before the committee H.R. 1994, a bill 

to terminate the Election Assistance Commission. Without objecVerDate Mar 15 2010 05:10 Jul 20, 2013 Jkt 081809 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A809.XXX A809

pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARING
30 

tion, the first reading of the bill is dispensed with, the bill is considered read and open for amendment at any point. 

[The bill follows:] 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARING
31 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 50 here 81809A.018

l1::lTH COXGRESS H R 1994 1ST SESSIOX • • 

To terminatt' tll(' Elertion ,\ssistane(' Commission. 

IX THE HOUSE OF HEPRESENTATIVES 

;Vby 15, 2013 

:\[1'. HARPEH introdueed the follm\~Ilg' hill; which was referred to the 

Committe'e on Ilouse Administration 

A BILL 

To terminate the Iijleetion Assistance Commission. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 [cives of the United States of America in Oongress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; FINDINGS. 

4 (a) SnORT TITIJE.-This Act ma.\' be cited as the 

5 "Election Assistance Commissioll 'l'erminatioll Act". 

6 (b) FTXDIXGS.-Collgress finds the follmying: 

7 (1) The Help America Vote Act of 2002 

8 (IIA VA) authorized Hmmal appropriations of not 

9 more than $10,000,000 for the Election Assistanee 

10 Commissioll (EAC) for fiscal years 2003, 2004, and 

11 2005. Funding for additional years has not been au-
32 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 51 here 81809A.019

2 

thorized, and in fiscal year 2011 the EAC's budget 

2 grew to nearly $18,000,000. 

3 (2) Between 2007 and 2011, the number of 

4 staff at the EAC gre-w from 26 to 48 without an in5 crease in statutory responsibility. 

6 (3) 55 percent of the EAC's fiscal year 2014 

7 budget request is devoted to management costs, the 

8 third consecutive year for which management costs 

9 have exceeded one-half of the EAC's budget. 

10 (4) The EAC has distributed more than $3.2 

11 billion in electioll reform grants to the States. The 

12 most recent year for which appropriations for these 

13 grants were enacted or were requested in the Presi14 dent's annual budget was fiscal year 2010. 

15 (5) '1'11e EAC last issued voluntary voting sys16 tem guidelines in 2005. A total of 11 voting systems 

17 currently hold a certificatioll from the EAC. 

18 (6) The research division of the EAC has sub19 stantially complde(l the reports required by HA VA. 

20 (7) The National Association of Secretaries of 

21 State adopte<l resolutions calling for the dissolution 

22 of the EAC in 2005 and 2010. 

23 (8) The EAC has not had a quorum of commis24 sioners sillce December 2010, and has not had any 

25 commissioners since December 2011. '1'he EAC has 

.HR 1994 IH 
33 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 52 here 81809A.020

3 

not had an ExccutiYC Director since December 2011, 

2 and has not had a General Counsel since l\Iay 2012. 

3 (9) The existence of the EAC is not necessary 

4 to the conduct of F'ec1eral elections and is an uunec5 essary expenditure of taxpayer fiIll<ls. Any functions 

6 of the EAC worth contiuuing can be performed by 

7 other government entities, consortia of government 

8 entities, or private associations. 

9 SEC. 2. TERMINATION OF ELECTION ASSISTANCE COMMIS· 

10 SION. 

11 (a) rrER\IIXATIOK.-'l'he Help America Vote Act of 

12 2002 (42 U.S.C. 15301 et seq.) is amended by adding at 

13 the end the follmving new title: 

14 "TITLE X-TERMINATION OF 

15 COMMISSION 

16 "SEC. 1001. TERMINATION. 

17 "Effective on the Commission termination elate, the 

18 Commission (including the Election .Assistance Commis19 sion Standards Board and the Election Assistanee Com20 mission Board of Advisors under part 2 of subtitle A of 

21 title II) is terminatecl and may not carry out any programs 

22 or activities . 

• HR 1994 IH 
34 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 53 here 81809A.021

4 

"SEC. 1002. OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET TO 

2 PERFORM TRANSITION FUNCTIONS. 

3 "Except as provided in section 1004, the Director of 

4 the Office of Management and Budget shall, effective 

5 upon the Commission termination date6 "(1) perform the functions of the Commission 

7 with respect to contracts amI agt'eements described 

8 in subsection 1003(a) until the e:l'q)iration of such 

9 contracts and agreements, but shall not renew any 

10 such contract or agreement; and 

11 "(2) take the necessary steps to 'ivincl up the af12 fairs of tIle Commission. 

13 "SEC. 1003. SAVINGS PROVISIONS. 

14 "(a) PmC)R COKTRAcTs.-The termination of the 

15 Commission under this title shall not affeet any contract 

16 that has been entered into by the Commission before the 

17 Commission termination date. ~All such contracts shall 

18 continue in effect until modified, superseded, terminated, 

19 set aside, or reyoked in accordance with law by an author20 ized Federal offieial, a court of eompetent jurisdietion, or 

21 operation of law. 

22 "(b) OBLIGATIOKS OF HECIPIEXTS OF PAYl\IEXTS.-

23 "(1) Ix GEXERAL.-'rhe termination of the 

24 Commission uncleI' this title shall not affeet the au25 thority of any recipient of a payment made by the 

26 Commission under this Act prior to the Commission 

.HR 1994 IH 
35 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 54 here 81809A.022

5 

termination date to use any portion of the payment 

2 that remains unobligated as of the Commission ter3 mination date, and the terms and conditions that 

4 applied to the nse of the payment at the time the 

5 payment was made shall continue to apply. 

6 "(2) SPECIAI~ RULE FOR STATES RECEI'iiXG 

7 HEQeIRE~mXT::3 PAnmxTS.-In the case of a re8 quirements payment made to a State under part 1 

9 of subtitle D of title II, the terms and conditions ap10 plicable to the use of the payment for purposes of 

11 the State's obligations nncler this subsection (as well 

12 as any obligations in effect prior to the termination 

13 of the Commission nnder this subtitle), and for pur14 poses of any applicable requirements imposed by 

15 reg'ulations promulgated by the Director of the Of16 fice of Management and Budget, shall be the general 

17 terms and conditions applicable under Federal law, 

18 rules, and regulations to payments made by the I'~ed19 eral G(Wernmcllt to a State, except that to the ex20 tent that snch general terms and conditions are in21 consistent \1'ith the terms and conditions that are 

22 specified under part 1 of subtitle D of title II or sec23 tion 902, the terms anel conditions specified uncleI' 

24 such part and such section shall apply. 

25 "(c) PE;\DlXG PIWCEEDl;\GS.-

.HR 1994 IH 
36 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 55 here 81809A.023

6 

1 "(1) :.Jo EFFEC'l' OX PEXDIXG PIWCEEDIXGR.-

2 The termination of the Commission nnder this title 

3 shall not affect any proceeding to which the Com4 mission is a part;\T that is pending on the Commis5 sion termination date, inelnclillg any snit to which 

6 the Commission is a pmty that is commenced prior 

7 to such date, and the Director of the Office of Man8 agement and Budg'et shall be substituted or added 

9 as a party to the proceeding. 

10 "(2) TREATMEKT OF ORDERS.-In the case of 

11 a proceeding described in paragraph (1), an order 

12 may be issued, an appeal may be taken, judgments 

13 may be rendered, and payments may be made as if 

14 the Commission had not been terminated. Any such 

15 order shall continue in effed until modified, termi16 nated, superseded, or revoked by an authorized Fed17 eral official, a eourt of competent jurisdiction, or op18 eration of law. 

19 "(3) COXRTIn:CTIOX REljATIXO TO DIS20 COXTIXrAXCI~ OR :\IODIFICATIOX.-:.Jothing in this 

21 subsectioll shall be deemed to prohibit the elis22 continuance or modification of any proceeding de23 scribed ill paragraph (1) under the Rame terms and 

24 conditions and to the same extent that snch pro-

.HR 1994 1H 
37 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 56 here 81809A.024

7 

1 ceeding could haye been discontinued or modified if 

2 the Commissioll had not been terminated. 

3 "(4) HEGFLATIOXS FOR TRAXSFEH OF PRO4 CEEDIXGs.-The Dil'eetol' of the Office of ManageS ment and Budget ma~T issue regulations pl'oyiding 

6 for the orderly transfer of proceedings described in 

7 paragraph (1). 

8 "(d) JFDICL~L HE\lEw.-Orders and actions of the 

9 Director of the Office of Management and Budget in the 

10 exercise of functions of the Commission under section 

11 1002 shall be subject to judicial reyiew to the same extent 

12 and in the same manner as if such orders anel actions had 

13 been issued or taken by the Commission. Any require14 mellts relating to notice, hearings, action upon the record, 

15 or administratiye review that apply to any function of the 

16 Commissioll shall apply to the exercise of such function 

17 by the Director. 

18 "SEC. 1004. RETURN TO FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION 

19 OF AUTHORITY TO CARRY OUT CERTAIN 

20 FUNCTIONS UNDER NATIONAL VOTER REG21 ISTRATION ACT OF 1993. 

22 "Effective on the Commission termination elate, there 

23 are transferred to the I<'ec1eral Eleetion Commission any 

24 functions transferred to the Election Assistance Commis25 sion under s(~ctioll 802 (relating to fuuctions described in 

.HR 1994 IH 
38 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 57 here 81809A.025

8 

1 section 9(a) of the National Voter Registration Act of 

2 1993). 

3 "SEC. 1005. COMMISSION TERMINATION DATE. 

4 "'rhe 'Commission termination date' is the first date 

5 following the expiration of the 60-clay period that begins 

6 on the date of the enactment of this title.". 

7 (b) TERMIKATIOX OF TECH?\ICAL GT;IDET,Ti'\ES DE8 \'ELOP:\IEXT CmnITTTEE.-Section 221 of such Act (42 

9 U.S.C. 15361) is amended by adding at the end the fol10 lowing new subsection: 

11 "(g) TERi\II:\,A'I'TOx.-J;Jffective on the Commission 

12 termination elate described in section 1005, the DCYelop13 ment Committee is terminated.". 

14 (c) CLEIUCAL lDIEXD:\IEKT.-The table of contents 

15 of such Act is amended b~· adding at the end the following: 

'''lTI'LE X-TER:\IIXATIOK OF Co:\DlIRRIOX 

"See. 1001. Terminatioll. 

"Se('. 1002. Offie<' of :\Ianagellll'nt and Budget to p<'){orm t.rallRitioll fUll('tiollR. 

"Set'. 100:3. Sayings p,·oylsiolls. 

"HI..'(,. lOO·!' Retuf'1l to Federal Eledioll Commission of ftuthority to ('HITY out 

t'el'tain fUlwtiollS l1lld<.'r Kational Yoter Rpgistration --:\('t of 

1993. 

"Set·, 100.). Commission b~rmilwtioll datf'.". 

16 SEC. 3. CONFORMING AMENDMENTS RELATING TO RETURN 

17 OF CERTAIN AUTHORITY TO FEDERAL ELEC· 

18 TION COMMISSION. 

19 (a) PEDERAT" ELECTIOX CA:\IPAIGK ACT OF 1971.-

20 Seetioll 311(a) of the Ii'ederal Eleetion Campaign Aet of 

21 1971 (2 U.S.C. 438(a)) is amemled-

.HR 1994 m 
39 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 58 here 81809A.026

9 

(1) by striking "and" at the end of paragraph 

2 (8); 

3 (2) by striking the period at the end of para4 graph (9) and inserting a semicolon; and 

5 (3) b~- adding at the end the follmving new 

6 paragraph: 

7 "(10) carry out the duties deseribed in seetion 

8 9(a) of the )Jational Voter Registration Act of 

9 1993.". 

10 (b) NATIO:-\AL VOTER l{EGISTRATIO:-\ ACT OF 

11 1993.-Seetion 9(a) of the ;..'atio11al Voter Registration 

12 Act of 1993 (42 U.S.C. 1973gg-7(a)) is amended by strik13 ing "Election Assistance Commission" and inserting 

14 "Federal Eleetion Commission". 

15 (c) EI<'I<'ECTIYE DATE.-'l'he amendments made by 

16 this seetioll shall take effect on the Commission termi17 natioll date desel'ibed in section 1005 of the Help lunerica 

18 Vote Act of 2002 (as added by seetion 2(a)). 

o 

.HR 1994 IH 
40 

The CHAIRMAN. Are there any comments or debate in regard to 

the bill? Mr. Brady. 

Mr. BRADY. Madam Chair, thank you. This is the third attempt 

to terminate the EAC since the outset of the 112th Congress. On 

this matter, I don’t believe the third time is a charm. I have opposed this proposal before, and I oppose this bill today. Thank you. 

The CHAIRMAN. I thank the gentleman. Any other comments or 

debate on the bill? Do any members want to offer an amendment 

to the bill? 

Mr. BRADY. Madam Chair. 

The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Pennsylvania. 

Mr. BRADY. Thank you. Madam Chair, the arguments in support 

of EAC are well-known. It is the only Federal agency tasked with 

assisting State and local elections offices to ensure their Federal 

elections run smoothly and cost-effective. This is an important and 

valuable role of the Federal Government to play. 

My office has received numerous letters, phone calls and emails 

from elected officials of both parties from all across the country in 

support of the EAC and its work. It is a Commission worth reauthorizing and in a few minutes I will offer amendment to do that. 

My colleagues should once again reject—excuse me. This argument in support is well-known and it is only Federal agency. It is 

a Commission worth reauthorizing and in a few minutes, I will 

offer an amendment to do that. My colleagues should once again 

once reject this proposal. 

The CHAIRMAN. I appreciate the gentleman’s comments about the 

bill. I think both myself and certainly Mr. Harper have articulated 

a number of reasons why we believe that elimination of the EAC 

is necessary. 

I will just note that the National Secretaries of State, which I 

was a member of at one time back in the day as well as Mr. Rokita, 

adopted resolutions calling for the dissolution of the EAC both in 

2005 as well as 2010. Again, in calendar year 2013, over $11 million has been appropriated for EAC, money which I think can be 

used in a much better fashion. 

So at this time I would ask if there are any amendments to this 

bill. 

Mr. BRADY. Madam Chair. 

The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Pennsylvania. 

Mr. BRADY. I have an amendment in the nature of a substitute 

which has been distributed to the members. 

The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the amendment will be considered read, and the gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes to speak 

on his amendment. 

[The amendment of Mr. Brady follows:] 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARING
41 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 62 here 81809A.027

F:\NLw\HODEM\H1994SUBXML 

AMENDMENT TO H.R. 1994 

OFFERED BY M • --------~ 

Strike all after the enacting' clause and insert the 

following: 

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; FINDINGS. 

2 (a) SHORT TITu,J.-rrhis Act may he cited as the 

3 "EAC Improvements Act of 2013". 

4 (b) :B'rxDIXOs.-Congrcss finds the following: 

5 (1) The elections for Federal office which were 

6 held in November 2012 'were plagued with a number 

7 of serious problems, inelucling'--

8 (A) long lines at polling places; 

9 (B) poll workers who were trained inad10 equatel;'; 

11 (C) the reduction of hours for early voting; 

12 and 

13 (D) the imposition of practices which re14 stricted eligible individuals from voting, such as 

15 requirements to produce photo identification. 

16 (2) At the time these problems were developing, 

17 the Election Assistance Commission, all agency of 

18 the federal government which was establish to assist 

19 the States in the administration of elections, lacked 

f:WHLCI0530131053013.139.xml 

May 30, 2013 (2:30 p.m.) 

(55089211) 
42 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 63 here 81809A.028

F:\NL w\HODEM\H1994SUB.XML 

1 a quorum in its membership and therefore could not 

2 meet, appoint an exeeutiye director or general coun3 sel, or otherwise take any actions to prevent these 

4 problems from occurring. 

5 (3) The inability of the Commission to carry 

6 out its duties meant that it could not convene its 

7 Standards Board, a collection of State and local 

8 election officials ,vith the authority to review guide9 lines for the voluntary standards applicable to the 

10 voting systems used to administer these elections 

11 and to make recommendations for best practices for 

12 election administration. 

13 (4) The inability of the Commission to carry 

14 out its duties meant that no new laboratories could 

15 be certified to develop and test the equipment used 

16 in these elections. 

17 ([)) rfhe Election Assistance Commission should 

18 be allowed to investigate full~' the problems which 

19 plaglJed the elections held in November 2012 and to 

20 (kw,]op solutiolls. 

21 (()) The Election Assistance Commission should 

22 be given the tools it needs to carry out its mission 

23 in a manner immune from illogic and partisan bick24 ering, so that it can pruvide States and others in25 yolved in the administration of elections with the 

f:IVHLCI0530131053013.139.xml 

May 30,2013 (2:30 p.m.) 

(55089211) 
43 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 64 here 81809A.029

F:\NL w\HODEM\H 1 994SUBXML 

i,,)'uidance that will enahle them to provide each cit2 izen who wishes to pmiicipate in the electoral proc3 ess the ability to do so. 

4 (7) The Election Assistance Commission should 

5 be permitted to provide to taxpayers and election of6 ficials accurate information on the votillg equipment 

7 used to administer elections and to hold the wmdors 

8 of such equipment accountable for an~' problems that 

9 may arise with its use. 

10 SEC. 2. REAUTHORIZATION OF COMMISSION. 

11 (a) REAlT1'IIORIZA'l'lo::\.-Section 210 of the Help 

12 America Vote Aet of 2002 (42 U.S.C. 15:ii10) is ameuded 

13 by striking "for eaeh of the fiscal years 2003 through 

14 2005" and inserting "for each of the fiscal years 2014 

15 through 2018". 

16 (b) TREA'l':\lE::\T 01<' CmnnsslO::\ 1::\ SA:\IE l\:IA::\::\ER 

18 PAPERWORK REDUCTIO::\ ACT.-Section 3502(1) of title 

19 44, United States Code, is amended20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

(1) by redesig11ating subparagyaphs (B), (C), 

and (D) as subparagyaphs (C), (D), and (E); and 

(2) by inserting' after subparagTaph (A) the followillg new subparagnlph: 

"(B) the Election Assistance Commis-

. " SlOn; . 

f:WHlC\053013\053013.139.xml 

May 30,2013 (2:30 p.m.) 

(55089211) 
44 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 65 here 81809A.030

F:\NLw\HODEM\HI 994SUB.XML 

4 

SEC. 3. REQUIRING STATES TO PARTICIPATE IN POST·GEN· 

2 ERAL ELECTION SURVEYS. 

3 (a) REQUIRlmE~'l'.-'l'itie III of the Help America 

4 Vote Act of 2002 (42 U.S.C. 15481 et Req.) is amended 

5 by iURertillg after Rection 303 the follmving new section: 

6 "SEC. 303A. REQUIRING PARTICIPATION IN POST·GENERAL 

7 ELECTION SURVEYS. 

8 "(a) RE(.lUIRK\IE~'l'.-l~ach State shall furniRh to the 

9 Commission such information as the Commission may re10 quest for purposes of conducting any pORt-election survey 

11 of the States with reRpect to the administration of a regu12 larly scheduled general election for l<'ederal office. 

13 "(b) EFI~EC'l'IYE DA'l'E.-This sectioll shall apply 

14 with respeet to the regularly scheduled general election for 

15 Federal office held in November 2014 and any succeeding 

16 election.". 

17 (b) CO"F()R:m~G lli\IE~mIE~T REhYrI~G TO E~-

18 I·'ORCE:\IE~'l'.-Section 401 of Ruch Act (42 U.S.C. 15511) 

19 iR amended by striking "and 303" ant] inserting "303, and 

20 :j08A". 

21 (e) CIJI~RICAI, A;\{gNDl\IEN'l'.-The tahle of contentR 

22 of RllCh Act is amended by inserting after the item relating 

23 to section 303 the following new item: 

f:IVHLCI0530131053013.139.xml 

May 30,2013 (2:30 p.m.) 

(55089211) 
45 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 66 here 81809A.031

F:\NL w\HODEM\H I 994SUB.xML 

5 

SEC. 4. DETERMINING EXTENT TO WHICH DISABLED INDI2 VIDUALS HAVE ACCESS TO POLLING PLACES. 

3 (a) 0:-':001:-\0 SFRYEYR m' CO:\IPI,I~"CE WITH 

4 ADA.-In accordance with section 241 of the Help Amer5 ica Vote Act of 2002 (42 U.S.C. 15381), not later than 

6 180 da;n; after the date of the regularly scheduled general 

7 election for Federal office held in November 2014 and 

8 each succeeding regularly scheduled general election for 

9 }<'ederal office, the Election Assistance Commission, shall, 

10 with the assistance of the Comptroller General, conduct 

11 and publish a survey of each polling place used for the 

12 election to determine the percentage of such polling places 

13 that were in compliance with the standards applicable to 

14 such locations under the .Americans With Disabilities Act 

15 of 1990. 

17 YEys.-At the time the Election Assistance Commission 

18 publishes the results of the survey conducted under sub19 section (a) with respect to the regl1larly scheduled general 

20 election for Pederal office held in Noyember 2022, the 

21 Commission shall evaluate and make a recommendation 

22 to CongTess regarding whether the percentage of polling' 

23 plaees in compliance with the standards applicable to such 

24 locations under the Americans With Disabilities Act of 

25 1990 has increased to such an extent that there is no 

f:WHLCI0530131053013.139.xml 

MA\I qn ?01 q (,)·qn n m \ 

(55089211) 
46 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 67 here 81809A.032

F:\NL w\HODEM\H I 994SUB.XML 

longer a need to conduct SUl'\'e~'s under subsection (a) with 

2 respect to subsequent electiolls. 

3 SEC. 5. ESTABLISHMENT OF PROCEDURES AND FEE 

4 SCHEDULES FOR CONDUCTING TESTING OF 

5 VOTING EQUIPMENT HARDWARE AND SOFT6 WARE; PAYMENT OF USER FEES FOR COM7 PENSATION OF ACCREDITED LABORATORIES. 

8 (a) L'\ GI£Xl£RAL.-Section 2iH(b) of the Help Amer9 ica Vote Act of 2002 (42 U.S.C. 15371(b)) is amended 

1 0 by adding at the end the following new paragraphs: 

11 "(3) PROCEDURES FOR COXDUCTIXG TESTE\"O; 

12 PADIEXT (W uSlm Fl<JI£S FOR CmIPBXSATIOX 01<' 

13 ACCRBDITED LABORATORIES.-

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

f:IVHLCI0530131053013.139.xm1 

May 30, 2013 (2:30 p.m.) 

"(A) ESTABLISlumXT 01<' ESCROW ACcm·xT.-The Commission shall establish an escrow aecount (to be known as the 'Testing Escrow Account') that will serve as the exclusiye 

SOUI'(~e for making payrnents to accredited laboratories for the costs of the testing carried out 

in cOllnection with the eertification, decertification, and recertification of yoting system hard-

,yare and softwarL'. 

"(B) SCIIEDUI,E (W FEgs.-In cOllsultation Kith the accredited laboratories, the Commission shall establish and regularly update a 

(55089211) 
47 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 68 here 81809A.033

F:\NL W\HODEM\H 1994SUBXML 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

f:WHLCI0530131053013.139.xml 

May 30,2013 (2:30 p.m.) 

7 

schedule of fees for the testing carried out in 

eonneetioll with the eertifieation, deeertifieation, 

and reeertificatioll of voting system hardware 

and software, based on the reasonable costs expeeted to be incurrer] b~' the acereditecl laboratories in carrying out the testing' for various 

types of har(hvare and software. 

"(C) REQUESTS AKD PAY:iIEKTS BY MAKUFACTUmms.-A mallufacturer of voting system 

hardware and software may not 11(1\'e the hard-

,vare or software tested by an accredited laboratory under this section UllleSS-

"(i) the manufacturer submits a detailed request for the testing to the Commission; 

"(ill the request provides suffieient information for the (;ommission to determine 

the applicable fee for the testing under the 

schedule established and in effect under 

suhparagT/tpb (B); 

"(iii) the Commission approves the request; and 

"(iv) the manufacturer pays to the 

Commission, for deposit into the Testing 

Escww .Account establishe(] under suh-

(55089211) 
48 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 69 here 81809A.034

F:\NL w\HODEM\H I 994SUB.xML 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

8 

paragraph (A), the applicable fee for the 

testing. 

"(D) SELECTIOX OF LABORATORY.-UpOn 

apprming' a request for testing and receiving 

the payment from a manufacturer required 

under snbparagntph (C), the Commission shall 

select at random (to the gTeatest extent practicable), from all laboratories ,yhich are accredited under this section to carry out the specific 

testing requested by the manufacturer, an aecredited laboratory to carry out the testing. 

"(E) PAY:\IEXT8 TO T,ABORATORmS.-

13 Upon determining that a laboratory selected to 

14 carry ont testing pnrsnant to subparaf,'Taph (D) 

15 has completed the testing in accordance with 

16 the approved request, the Commission shall 

17 make II pa~'lnent to the laboratory from the 

18 Testing Escrow Account established under suh19 paragraph (A) in an amount eqnal to the appli20 cable fee paid by the manufacturer under sub21 paragraph (C)(iv). 

22 "( 4) DrSSK\lIXATIOX OF ADDI'l'IOXAI, IX}i'OR:\IA23 'I'IOX ox ACCREDITED J."ABOHATOHIES.-

24 

25 

f:IVHLCI0530131053013.139.xml 

May 30.2013 (2:30 p.m.) 

"(Al 11IS'I' OF ACCHEDITIm LLABORA-

'l'OHIEs.-The Commission shall maintain and 

(55089211) 
49 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 70 here 81809A.035

F:\NL w\HODEM\H 1994SUB.XML 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

f:IVHLCI0530131053013.139.xml 

May 30, 2013 (2:30 p.m.) 

9 

publish an updated list of all accredited laborat01'ies under this section. 

"(B) I:-':FOlDL-\'l'IO:-': 0:-': STATUS OF LABORATORIER-In additioll to updating the list 

maintained and published under subparagraph 

(A), the Commission shall promptly notifY Congress, the chief State election official of each 

State, and the public 'whenever-

"(i) the Commission revokes, terminates, or suspends the accreditation of a 

labomtory uncleI' this section; 

"(ii) the Commission restores the accreditation of a lahomtory nnder this section which has been revoked, terminated, 

or suspended; or 

"(iii) the Commission has credible evidence of a significant securit~7 failure at an 

aecredited laboratory. 

"(C) I:-.:r"OlDIATIO:-': 0:-': TESTI:-':G.-Upon 

completion of the testing of a voting' system 

under this sectioll, the Commission shall 

promptly disseminate to the public the identifieation of the laboratory which carried out the 

testing.". 

(55089211) 
50 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 71 here 81809A.036

F:\NL W\HODEM\H I 994SUB.xML 

10 

(b) CO;\;B'OK\lI;\;(; _A.}m;\;mIE~Ts.-Scctioll 281 of 

2 such Act (42 U.S.C. 15:371) is further amcnded3 (1) in subscction (a)(l), by striking "testing, 

4 certification," and all that follows and inserting the 

5 follmving: "testing of yoting s,\'stem hardware and 

6 software by accredited laboratories in eonnection 

7 with thc eertifieatioll, (leeertifieation, and reeertifi8 eation of the hardware and software for purposes of 

9 this Aet."; 

10 (2) in subseetion (a)(2), by striking "testing, 

11 certifieation," and all that folluws and inserting the 

12 follmying: "testing of its yoting s,\"stem hardware and 

13 software by the laboratories accredite<l by the Com14 mission under this section in connection with cer-ti15 fying, decerti(ving, and reeerti~ving the hardware 

16 and software."; 

17 (:3) in subsection (b)( 1), by striking "testing, 

18 certification, dPcertification, and recertification" and 

19 inserting "testing"; and 

20 (4) in subsection (<1), by striking "tcsting, cer21 tification, decertification, and recertification" each 

22 place it appears and inserting "testing". 

23 (c) DI~ADU;\;g I<'OR ESTABUSIE\IE;\;T OF ESCRo\Y Ac24 COU;\;T A;\;D SCmmULE OF PEBJS.-The r~lection Assist25 ance Commission shall establish the Testing Escrow Acf:WHLCI053013\053013.139.xml 

May 30, 2013 (2:30 p_m.) 

(55089211) 
51 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 72 here 81809A.037

F:\NL w\HODEM\H 1994SUB.XML 

11 

1 count and schedule of fees described in section 231(b)(3) 

2 of the Help America Vote A('t of 2002 (as added by sub3 section (a)) not later than ,January I, 2014. 

4 SEC. 6. STUDY OF METHODS TO REDUCE COSTS OF ADMIN5 ISTERING ELECTIONS. 

6 (a) Ai\ALYSIS OP };'ACTOHS AFl<'ECTli\(} COSTS (W 

7 Amni\IST~~HI:"G ELECTIO:"S.-The };Jlection Assistance 

8 Commission shall conduct it study analyzing' various fac9 tors that affect the costs to States and units of local gov10 ernment. of administering elections for Federal office, in11 eluding the following specific factors: 

12 (1) The durability of the equipment used in \'ot13 illg systems, 

14 (2) The extent to ,yhich States and units of 

15 local government must replace existing systems be16 eause such systems are not capable of using e11-

17 hanced software or are not capable of being up18 graded in a cost-effective manner. 

19 (3) The laek of competition among vendors and 

20 manufacturers of the equipment used in voting sys21 tems because of consolidation in the voting systrm 

22 industry. 

23 (b) RECQ;\DIl<~:\,DATIO:"S ],'01{ STEPS TO REDUCE 

24 COSTS.-'1'he Commissioll shall include in the study eOll25 eluded under this section snch reeommcmlations as the 

f:IVHlC\053013\053013.139.xml 

May 30, 2013 (2:30 p.m.) 

(55089211) 
52 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 73 here 81809A.038

F:\NL w\HODEM\H 1994SUB.XML 

12 

Commission shall consider appropriate to reduce the costs 

2 incurred by States and units of local governmcnt in ad3 ministering eleetions for J<1 ederal office, including rec4 ommendations for legislative action by Congress or the 

5 States. 

6 (c) DEADH\'!<J.-Not later than 180 days after the 

7 date of the enactment of this Act, the Commission shall 

8 submit the stndy conduded under this section t.o Con9 gress. 

10 SEC. 7. STUDY OF METHODS FOR INCREASING EFFICIENCY 

11 AND COST·EFFECTIVENESS OF ELECTION AS· 

12 SISTANCE COMMISSION. 

13 (a) STUDY.-Thc Comptrollcr General shall conduct 

14 a study of the administratiyc operations of thc Election 

15 .Assistance Commission, and shall includc in the study an 

16 anal,\'sis of yarious methods for increasing the cfficiency 

17 and cost-effectiwmess of such operations. 

18 (b) DrJAnIJI:\E; RI~POl{T.-Not latcr than 90 (1<1,\'S 

19 after the date of the enactment of this Ad, tIll' Comp20 troller General shall submit to Congrcss a report Oil the 

21 study cOllducted uncleI' subsection (a), an(1 shall inelllde 

22 in the report sueh reeommendatiolls as the Comptroller 

23 Gcneral considers appropriate. 

24 (e) PARTICIPATIO:\ OF EIJ}<~CTIO); ASSISTA?\CE CO:\I25 :\IISSIO:\.-Thc Election Assistance Commission shall prof:IVHLCI0530131053013.139.xml 

May 30, 2013 (2:30 p.m.) 

(55089211) 
53 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 74 here 81809A.039

F:\NL w\HODEM\H 1994SUB.XML 

1 vide the Comptroller General with such assistance as the 

2 Comptroller General may require to carry out this section. 

Amend the title so as to read: "A hill to amend the 

Help .America Vote Act of 2002 to improve the operations of the Election Assistance Commission, and for 

other purposes.". 

f:IVHLC\053013\053013.139.xml 

May 30.2013 (2:30 p.m.) 

(55089211) 
54 

Mr. BRADY. Thank you. This amendment would reauthorize the 

Election Assistance Commission to allow the agency to continue its 

important mission. Additionally, it calls for the EAC to determine 

the extent of which polling places are accessible for disabled voters 

and ensure all voters can cast their ballot. The amendment also 

tasks the EAC with determining the most cost-effective method to 

administer elections as well as methods for increasing the cost-effectiveness and value of the agency itself. 

Finally, this amendment will result in more transparency in the 

testing and certification of voting machines by establishing an escrow account that prevents machine manufacturers from paying directly to the laboratories ordering their machines and making information about the testing and certification results available to 

the public. 

This amendment continues the important mission of the EAC, 

which is to help America vote and making sure every vote is counted. I would ask my colleagues to support this amendment. 

The CHAIRMAN. I thank the gentleman for offering that amendment, and certainly again in the spirit in which the amendment 

was offered. I would just again comment, having just received the 

amendment, I am a huge 10th Amendment person, I think most of 

us are, and it appears at first blush looking at this amendment 

that you are actually giving the EAC more power over the States, 

shifting the burden from the States to the EAC, so it is sort of 

making the EAC more powerful. I am not sure that it makes it 

more efficient. Again, I don’t think we need the EAC at all and we 

certainly don’t need to give it anything else to do at this time, so 

I will be opposing the gentleman’s amendment. 

Are there any other comments to the gentleman’s amendment? 

The gentleman from Mississippi. 

Mr. HARPER. Thank you, Madam Chair. You know, it is interesting that it was stated that it is designed, the EAC is supposed 

to help the States and localities be cost-effective, and that is rather 

ironic because the Election Assistance Commission would be the 

poster child for wasting money and not being cost-effective. They 

have done such things as double their employees’ size in the last 

4 or 5 years without any new responsibilities, not to mention the 

Inspector General reports that contain such information about 

spending $7,000 worth of taxpayer money to buy employees shirts 

for morale. I mean, come on. 

Then you look at other issues on spending and things that they 

have done, and the two discrimination cases against them that had 

to be resolved and settled and paid out in taxpayer funds to resolve 

those. It is just the mismanagement is such, we don’t need to be 

expanding their work or keeping them. And I think we do need to 

go back, despite that history, and look at the fact that the bipartisan group, National Association of Secretaries of State, have 

looked at this agency that was supposed to last for 3 years after 

HAVA, and it now has gone on for, I guess more than 10 years now 

with no real end in sight. So this is a chance to do that. 

I ask to vote in opposition to this amendment, and I yield back. 

The CHAIRMAN. I thank the gentleman. You know, I would also 

comment about the EAC. Really, they did have their purpose originally. When the country, the Congress was appropriating all this 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARING
55 

money are for HAVA, over $3 billion that was shuffled out the door 

to all these various States for equipment, you had to have sort of 

a distribution point, somebody for accountability for that. So I do 

think the EAC had its time and its place. But I think, again, it has 

long outlived its usefulness. 

I would even just make a personal observation, listening to the 

President’s State of the Union when he constituted this National 

Elections Committee to study what has happened and some of the 

best practices and worst practices in how elections are being administered in some of the States, he never mentioned the EAC. He 

never gave them any responsibilities in that. Here you have a staff, 

they already have housing, they have got an office here in D.C. So 

they are staffed up and they have an office space, and yet the 

President, in his comments, never mentioned them or thought to 

utilize them in any way. 

So, again, I just think that they have outlived their usefulness 

and I will be opposing the gentleman’s amendment. 

Are there any other members that wish to speak to the amendment? The gentleman from California. 

Mr. VARGAS. Thank you, Madam Chairman. I would like to support the amendment made by the ranking member. I think all of 

us remember the huge lines in this last presidential election. In 

fact, it was rather striking, on television there was a gentleman 

who was an elderly veteran who had been standing in line for 

hours attempting to vote, and he said that he had gone and put 

his life on the line and had fought for the opportunity to vote, and 

yet it was so difficult, it seemed that they made it purposely difficult for him to cast his vote. That shouldn’t happen in America. 

You should have the right to vote. A person, especially a veteran 

who is disabled, went and fought for our country, should expeditiously be able to go and vote his conscience for whomever he is 

going to vote for, for whomever she is going to vote for. 

I had the opportunity in 2000 to be an international observer to 

the Mexican election when Vincente Fox became the first person to 

defeat the established party there, the PRI, and the shocking thing 

for me was the size of the lines to vote. I think in Mexico they purposefully made it difficult to vote so one party would stay in power, 

at least that is what it seemed to me as an observer, and the lines 

were incredibly long. Yet that is exactly what we saw. 

In a developing country you see those lines, you think, well, they 

don’t have the technology, they don’t have the money, they don’t 

have the assistance. But to see those times of lines in America is 

outrageous. I mean, we have to do something about it, and I think 

that is what the amendment attempts to address and I appreciate 

the amendment. Thank you. 

The CHAIRMAN. I thank the gentleman. I also think we all 

watched those lines on TV, and my personal reaction to it was 

amazement that that was still happening. It is sort of amongst the 

usual suspects, I will say. This is my personal opinion. Florida, 

some places here in the District, in Virginia. In my State of Michigan, we didn’t have any stories like that. In your State, they didn’t 

have any stories like that. 

There were a couple of places that had those stories, and I believe as a former election official, as soon as I saw that, I thought, 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARING
56 

well, first of all, there ought to be accountability of the election supervisors locally that were running those elections. I was pretty 

sure that it was because they hadn’t adequately trained their election inspectors, their precinct workers, they didn’t have adequate 

amount of election equipment out there numerically for the demographics that they were servicing within those precincts, they just 

didn’t have enough election equipment. 

Also, I am listening to some of these news reports where they are 

saying, I think it was in Florida, I am trying to remember exactly 

where they were talking about, they had 11 pages on the ballot or 

something because of all of these, and we have a member of from 

Florida here, because of the ballot questions that were on there. I 

can’t even imagine going through page after page after page reading these ballot questions, and I will yield to the gentleman in just 

a moment, but I know in most States, you have your election commissioner or whatever go through and summarize very quickly, but 

yet getting the intent of what the ballot question is, not the entire 

language of that. 

So again, I am not sure that when I saw the President appoint 

this Presidential Commission, in my opinion, I think you ought to 

hold the election officials who are running those elections accountable, and in the State of Florida, that is actually what happened 

because the Governor went to the Secretary of State and said, look 

at this, this is not right. And we ought have somebody look at it, 

make recommendations, which the Secretary of State in Florida did 

do, I know it is up online, I was reading it. Essentially many of the 

things that I brought forth and others that they found were exactly 

what happened there. 

Again, I am a 10th Amendment person. I think it is up to the 

State, and I am happy to yield to my friend, the colleague from 

Florida for any comment about that as well. 

Mr. NUGENT. I thank the chairman for that. Florida, unfortunately, has had been in the national news on a couple issues over 

the years on elections. But when you look specifically at the areas, 

one was that ballot initiative, the constitutional amendments to the 

Constitution, 11 pages, which absolutely slowed the process down 

measurably. I mean, it was overwhelming. 

But if you look, I think you mentioned the usual suspects, but 

if you look in particular at the one county that it occurred in the 

worst, that supervisor of elections, it wasn’t a Republican supervisor of elections. The supervisors of elections within the counties 

have great latitude and control of their elections in regards to staffing and the number of locations they want to open up. 

Just in my home county, you know, the new supervisor of election who is now a Republican who actually was one of my employees down in the district got elected, she has already increased the 

number of locations and hours to actually handle those types of 

issues. So you don’t have people disenfranchised to have to stand 

and wait. Because I remember just early voting, driving by and 

seeing the lines so long that you would wait until the lines went 

down, and they never did. 

So it really is a local issue, it is a State issue in regards to how 

they set those up. And you are right, the Federal Government 

doesn’t do a good job anyhow as it relates to those State issues. So 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARING
57 

the Election Commission never did that to start with, and wasn’t 

challenged by the President to do that. So I absolutely support this. 

The CHAIRMAN. Just one other comment, watching Florida in 

particular, but in Michigan we don’t have either no reason absentee voting or early vote. I have often been told if we had both of 

those things in Michigan we would really expedite the process. But 

I notice in your State, you have both of those things. I just point 

that out. So again, I think it points to the local election supervisor. 

Mr. NUGENT. They have gone out of their way in regards to absentee voting. At one point in time, you had to have a reason. Now 

you don’t. Anybody can absentee vote. They encourage people to absentee vote or early vote. So I think they have made a lot of accommodations trying to get more people the access to vote, but a lot 

of folks still want to go in there and put their mark on it. 

The CHAIRMAN. Absolutely. Well, I think we are certainly all in 

agreement of free, open, fair elections, and having long lines like 

that, there is no reason for it in today’s time, no reason at all. 

I recognize the gentleman from Indiana, the former Secretary of 

State, Mr. Rokita. 

Mr. ROKITA. I thank the Chairman. I am struck by Mr. Vargas’ 

statements. First of all, I would like to say that in my years as an 

election official, I never knew one election official that didn’t want 

the best for their voters, that didn’t want an equal—excuse me, an 

accurate outcome, not equal. We wanted someone to win one way 

or another. We didn’t necessarily like recounts, but we wanted a 

process that not only we could be proud of, given our profession, 

but that people would have confidence in. 

The reason I am concerned about the comments is because for 

some reason this amendment is about the EAC, and this is an 

amendment about making the EAC more powerful, actually not 

necessarily more efficient, but bigger and more powerful than it already is. And like the gentleman from Florida says, it exists here 

and now. It didn’t solve the lines in Florida, nor would it nor will 

it ever no matter how big or how powerful it becomes. So that is 

one thing. 

I also would like to echo the comments that were alluded to a 

little bit earlier by the chairman and the gentleman from Florida, 

in that I don’t know how it is in Mexico, but in all States, you can 

vote by absentee ballot. Some have, I wouldn’t call them restrictions, I think that is too strong a word, but qualifications. 

In the gentleman’s example, even if that gentleman wasn’t from 

Florida where he didn’t have to have an excuse at all to vote absentee by mail, let’s say, he would have fit the qualification in Indiana 

because of his age and because of his disability. So the idea that 

he might have been in a line, albeit unfortunate, was his choice. 

And at some point we have to have parameters and rules to our 

election process or else we have chaos. 

So I think Florida has gone beyond what it really has to do in 

allowing people without any excuse whatsoever to vote absentee, 

but that is their choice and that is the good thing. I don’t know 

anything about the ballot initiative being 11 pages, but I think that 

is unreasonable and that probably contributed to the lines. But 

that doesn’t mean there is a systemic failure, and it certainly 

doesn’t mean that we need to make this government agency that 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARING
58 

hasn’t performed well at all, whose reason for existence in the first 

place has been met, that we need to re-purpose it or make it bigger. 

By the way, I am not here to trash or beat up on EAC as an 

agency or any of the people in it, because I think the attitude and 

the problems demonstrated by this little baby agency, Madam 

Chairman, is really just a microcosm of the attitude and pervasiveness of some of the problems we have across all agencies, and we 

only have to look to a hearing going on in another part of the 

House side of this Congress to see the effect of that attitude, of that 

sloppiness, of that bias. 

I will say on the record I was a victim of EAC bias during one 

of their reports that caused an Inspector General investigation that 

called into account and clearly exposed that attitude. So it exists, 

it is out there, and the last thing we need to do with respect to the 

author of the amendment is make this agency or any agency any 

bigger or more powerful. 

What do I mean by more powerful? This amendment, as I understand it, removes the EAC, one example, removes the EAC from 

OMB oversight under the Paperwork Reduction Act so there is no 

control over what information they demand from the States, and I 

think that is absolutely the wrong way to go. 

I will close by just saying that the gentleman from Mississippi 

used the word ironic when talking about the purpose of this 

amendment and how it would make the States more efficient. I 

think the word better suited to my experience, at least as Indiana’s 

chief election officer for 8 years, is offensive. The States may not 

be perfect. By definition of the word ‘‘human,’’ Madam Chairman, 

no one is perfect. But everywhere I saw at the State level and local 

level, all of us wanted to get it right and we wanted to get it right 

for this free republic above all else. And to say that some overseers 

here in this town are going to make sure we do it better is, I think, 

going to be intolerable for nearly all if not all of our State brothers 

and sisters. 

I yield back. 

The CHAIRMAN. I thank the gentleman for his comments. The 

gentleman from Pennsylvania. 

Mr. BRADY. May I just make a quick comment. I don’t know just 

how much just authority—and I looked into it when I was chair of 

this committee—we have to agree with my friends from Indiana 

and Florida by saying we make elections fairer, but not only in the 

States but throughout the entire country. 

In the State of Pennsylvania, we do have restrictions on absentee 

ballots to get an absentee ballot. We have no early voting. You 

have to be 65 years old or older. You have to have a doctor’s certificate which is a little inconvenient from time to time, and you have 

to either show proof that you are out-of-state to be able to vote absentee ballot, which is not unlike, and I wish we had the same 

rules as Florida and Indiana had with the early voting, which we 

don’t have either. And it would be maybe—I would love to try to 

look into making all things equal throughout the whole United 

States, I mean, to make every State fair and have every State have 

the exact way how they can vote. 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARING
59 

To throw out one agency that tries to make it a little better, 

maybe supposed to, if they don’t, maybe we can reform it instead 

of throwing it out, that has a little bit of teeth into putting some 

type of penalty on people that do violate it. We had lines in Pennsylvania, not only in Mexico, you know. I could not imagine, and 

I do chair the party in the City of Philadelphia, and I do have to 

run elections there to the best that I can and as much as I can. 

I could not imagine having 11 constitutional ballot questions on 

a ballot. I mean, that is somebody’s mistake somewhere. I know I 

would have—I wouldn’t have fired the person. With no disrespect, 

I would have shot him for putting that on the ballot. 

But I would like to maybe, again, say this in the spirit of maybe 

in cooperation where we can have every State have the same exact 

qualifications of early voting, absentee voting, and this way makes 

it fair for people from Pennsylvania, people from New Jersey, people from Florida, Indiana, wherever you are from. And maybe that 

is something I kept trying to look into and will continue to look 

into and my staff, maybe we can figure out a way to make that 

happen. The fairness in all elections is most important to all of us. 

So thank you. 

The CHAIRMAN. I thank the gentleman. Any other questions or 

comments? The gentleman from Georgia. 

Mr. GINGREY. Madam Chair, thank you. I am in opposition to the 

amendment. To a large extent, we are here to represent the voices 

of our constituents, each of us, approximately 700,000, and the 

voices of our State, our State government, being firm believers in 

the 10th Amendment and that which rules best rules closest to the 

people. 

Our Secretary of State has made it abundantly clear to me that 

this amendment is not necessary, and that the EAC indeed has 

outlived its usefulness. Some of the comments made by my colleague on the other side of the aisle whom I have great respect for 

in regard to, let’s say, making everything equal, well, think about 

the Voting Rights Act, a piece of legislation that was abundantly 

necessary when it was passed because of egregious behavior regarding voting in certain States across the country, and indeed a 

lot of those States were in the Southeast. But, you know, here we 

are 50 years later, these States, and one of them is mine, the great 

State of Georgia, is far, far beyond that, and yet we are under section 5 of the Voting Rights Act for another 25 years. So, so much 

for making everything equal. Why not make that applicable to all 

50 States, rather than just 13 and in parts of a few more? 

This Election Assistance Commission, I was just told by my colleague a few minutes ago, while there are no commissioners, they 

are still leasing office space at a tune of $1 million a year. Now, 

if you were having to pay rent on an empty office space to the tune 

of $1 million a year and you were a small businessman or woman, 

you would be a little bit concerned about that. 

So this amendment does not reform the EAC. It expands it. It 

includes no reforms or efficiency. What it actually does is it reauthorizes it through 2018. It forces States to submit information the 

EAC asks for in post-election surveys. It removes the EAC from 

OMB oversight under the Paperwork Reduction Act, so there is no 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARING
60 

control over what information they demand. It gives the EAC more 

power over States. It shifts the burden from EAC to the States. 

Why it is bad is it does not address any of the real problems at 

the EAC. It makes the EAC more powerful, not more efficient, and 

we don’t need the EAC at all and we certainly don’t need to give 

it more to do. It has nothing to do now except pay $1 million a year 

rent for empty office space. 

I am opposed to the amendment, and I yield back. 

The CHAIRMAN. I thank the gentleman. Any other members wish 

to be recognized to speak on the amendment? 

If no more comments, we will vote on the gentleman’s amendment. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman 

from Pennsylvania to H.R. 1994. Those in favor of the amendment 

signify by sayings aye; those opposed will signify by saying nay. 

In the opinion of the chair, the nays have it. The nays have it, 

the amendment is not agreed to. 

Are there any other amendments? If not, I move that the committee favorably report H.R. 1994 to the House and the question 

is on that motion. 

All those in favor signify by saying aye. 

Opposed, say nay. 

In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. The ayes have it, 

the motion is agreed to. 

Gentleman from Pennsylvania. 

Mr. BRADY. I announce that the minority members will use the 

two additional calendar days provided by our clause 2(l) of rule XI 

of the Rules of the House in order to file abuse. 

The CHAIRMAN. I thank the gentleman. Without objection the 

motion to reconsider is laid upon the table. And pursuant to clause 

2 of rule XI the member is entitled to two additional calendar days 

to file such views in writing and signed by that member with the 

clerk of the committee. 

For all of the matters that the committee has considered today 

I would ask unanimous consent that the staff be authorized to 

make technical and conforming changes if necessary. Without objection, so ordered. 

And this concludes today’s markup. The meeting for the markup 

is adjourned. I appreciate the interesting debate and for all of the 

members. As you know, we are now prepared to begin our hearing 

for H.R. 2115. 

[Whereupon, at 12:01 p.m., the markup was concluded.] 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARING