Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1

The Commission . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2

The Commissioners . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2

Executive Director . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2

Inspector General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3

EAC Federal Advisory Committees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4

Board of Advisors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4

Standards Board . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4

Technical Guidelines Development Committee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4

EAC Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5

Keeping the Public Informed and Involved . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10 

Guidance and Assistance to States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12

Interpreting HAVA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12

Complying With Section 301(a) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12

Statewide Voter Registration Lists . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13

Provisional Voting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13

HAVA Funds Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15

The Proper Use of HAVA Funds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16

Recordkeeping, Reporting, and Auditing HAVA Funds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17

Audit Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17

Improving Voting Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .19

Voting System Certification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .21

Clearinghouse Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .22

Sharing Information and Offering Assistance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .22

2004 Election Day Survey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .22

The Impact of the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 . . . . . . . . . . . .23

Research Projects Under Way in 2005 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24

Election Management Guidelines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24

Public Access Portal Design Conference . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24

Legal Resources Clearinghouse . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .25

Best Practices for Recruiting, Training, and Retaining Poll Workers . .25

Best Practices for Recruiting, Training, and Retaining College

Poll Workers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .25

Vote Counts and Recounts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .26

Voting Fraud and Voter Intimidation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .27

Fiscal Year 2005 Annual Report i

Contents
ii U.S. Election Assistance Commission

Voter Identification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .27

Provisional Voting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .28

Effective Designs for the Administration of Federal Elections . . . . . .29

Hispanic Working Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .29

Goals for 2006 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .30

Certifying Voting Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .30

Improving Voting Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .30

Assistance to States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .31

Managing HAVA Funds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .31

Appendix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .32

Commissioners’ Bios . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .32

Executive Director’s Bio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .37

EAC Board of Advisors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .39

EAC Standards Board . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .41

EAC Technical Guidelines Development Committee . . . . . . . . . . . . .45
As election officials throughout the

country worked to meet the 2006

deadlines of the Help America Vote

Act (HAVA) of 2002, the U.S. Election

Assistance Commission’s (EAC’s) top

priority in fiscal year (FY) 2005 was to

assist in their efforts by providing

funding, guidance, and data to help

them make informed decisions in

preparation for the next election cycle. 

EAC received inquiries from election

officials and the public about how to

implement statewide voter registration

lists, as well as numerous questions

about which voting systems would

meet the requirements of Section

301(a) of HAVA. In response, EAC

issued voluntary guidance about the

implementation of the statewide lists

and worked diligently to complete the

HAVA-mandated Voluntary Voting

System Guidelines (VVSG).

The VVSG is the third iteration of

national voting system standards. EAC

received the initial recommended

guidelines from its Technical

Guidelines Development Committee

(TGDC) on May 9, which was within

the 9-month deadline established by

HAVA. After receiving the TGDC

version, EAC sought widespread input

in formulating these guidelines and

subsequently held three public

hearings dedicated solely to this

important HAVA mandate in New

York, NY, Pasadena, CA, and Denver,

CO. During the public hearings, EAC

received testimony from election

officials, advocacy groups, academics,

and the disability community. The

widespread input was extremely

valuable as EAC sought to make sure

the guidelines would be technically

sound but to also provide assurance to

voters that voting equipment would

accurately record their votes. 

Another important responsibility that

HAVA assigned to EAC is to serve as a

national clearinghouse by conducting

research about election administration

issues and making the information

available to election officials and the

general public. In FY 2005, EAC met

that responsibility by issuing the 2004

Election Day Survey, the largest and

most comprehensive survey on election

administration ever conducted by the

Federal Government. The survey

produced critical statistics about the

voting process, which provided

valuable insights into election

administration procedures that are

working and those that need

improvement. 

EAC assisted States with the

interpretation of HAVA by issuing

advisories and guidance. The

commission also met its obligation to

assist election officials by identifying

resources and providing information

for election officials whose

jurisdictions were impacted by

Hurricane Katrina. 

During FY 2005, EAC distributed

$927,241,903 in HAVA funds to the

States and initiated its first special

audit of a State’s expenditure of

HAVA funds. Furthermore, through

an agreement with the U.S.

Fiscal Year 2005 Annual Report 1

Introduction
2 U.S. Election Assistance Commission

Department of the Interior, EAC

secured the services of an acting

inspector general to assist in audit

activities to ensure the proper use of

HAVA funds. 

The material that follows in the 2005

Annual Report provides a detailed

description of the commission’s

activities in FY 2005 and outlines

EAC’s goals for FY 2006. Throughout

the past year, EAC substantially

increased its efforts to assist States and

inform the public thanks to the

resources provided by the U.S.

Congress. EAC is determined to

continue its efforts to inform the

public and assist election officials as

we work together to make sure every

vote is counted accurately.

The Commission

The EAC is an independent,

bipartisan agency created by HAVA. It

assists and guides State and local

election administrators in improving

the administration of elections for

Federal office. 

EAC provides assistance by dispersing

Federal funds to States to implement

HAVA requirements, adopting the

VVSG, and serving as a national

clearinghouse and resource of

information regarding election

administration.

EAC is also responsible for the

accreditation of testing laboratories

and the certification, decertification,

and recertification of voting systems. 

The Commissioners

The four EAC commissioners are Paul

DeGregorio, chairman; Ray Martinez

III, vice chairman; Donetta Davidson;

and Gracia Hillman. Commissioners,

who are nominated by the President

and confirmed by the U.S. Senate,

may serve only two consecutive terms.

Commissioners serve staggered terms.

No more than two commissioners may

belong to the same political party. 

Commissioner Davidson joined the

EAC in August 2005, filling the

remaining term of former

Commissioner DeForest Soaries, who

resigned in April. The 2005 EAC

officers were Gracia Hillman, chair,

and Paul DeGregorio, vice chairman.

Executive Director

Thomas Wilkey was named executive

director of EAC in May 2005 by a

unanimous vote of the EAC

commissioners. Mr. Wilkey has

worked in election administration for

34 years and, immediately prior to

joining EAC, chaired the Voting

Systems Board of The National

Association of State Election Directors

(NASED). He is also the former

president of NASED and one of its

founding members. From 1992 to

2003, he was the executive director of

the New York State Board of

Elections. 

EAC’s executive director serves a 4-

year term. The executive director’s

duties include managing EAC’s daily

operations, preparing program goals

and long-term plans, managing the
development of the VVSG, reviewing

all reports and studies, and overseeing

the appointment of EAC staff

members and consultants. 

Inspector General

In FY 2005, EAC obtained the

services of an acting inspector general,

Roger LaRouche, through an

agreement with the U.S. Department

of the Interior. Acting Inspector

General LaRouche is the former

assistant inspector general for audits at

the U.S. Department of the Interior,

where he managed 150 staffers located

in six field offices. He has more than

36 years of experience auditing Federal

grants. 

The inspector general is responsible

for establishing an office of inspector

general, conducting audits and

investigations of the programs and

operations of EAC, and examining the

expenditure of HAVA funds by State

and territorial governments. The

inspector general keeps EAC and

Congress fully informed about the

findings and activities of the office. 

Fiscal Year 2005 Annual Report 3

U.S. Election Assistance Commission

Organizational Chart

Commissioners

Inspector

General

General

Counsel

• Compliance

• FOIA

• Ethics

• Public Meetings & Hearings

• Legislative Liaison

• NVRA

• Fiscal/Budget 

Management

• Purchasing

• Info. Tech.

• Human 

Resources

• Travel

• Office Mgt.

• Media Coord.

• Web Site Mgt.

• Annual Report 

• Clearinghouse

• Publications & 

Other Public 

Documents

• Foreign Briefings

• Guidance

• Guidelines

• Studies

• Surveys

• NIST Contract

• Voting Systems 

& Equipment 

Standards & 

Certification

• Lab 

Accreditation

• Requirements 

Payments

• Grant Programs

• Program Audits

• Poll Worker 

Initiative

• College

• Other

• Best Practices

Executive

Director

Administration Communications Research Standards and

Certification

Programs and

Services

Special

Assistants

Board of Advisors

Standards Board

Technical Guidelines 

Development Committee

FOIA = Freedom of

Information Act. 

NVRA = National Voter

Registration Act. 

NIST = National Institute of

Standards and Technology.
4 U.S. Election Assistance Commission

EAC Federal Advisory

Committees

HAVA requires the formation of a 37-

member Board of Advisors and a 110-

member Standards Board to assist

EAC in carrying out its mandates

under the law. HAVA Section 221 calls

for establishing a Technical Guidelines

Development Committee to assist

EAC in developing Voluntary Voting

System Guidelines. All of these

governing boards provide valuable

input and expertise in the formation

of guidance and policy. 

Board of Advisors

Membership on the Board of Advisors

includes the following groups, as

specified in HAVA (two members

appointed by each): National

Governors Association; National

Conference of State Legislatures;

National Association of Secretaries of

State; The National Association of

State Election Directors; National

Association of Counties; The National

Association of County Recorders,

Election Officials and Clerks; The

U.S. Conference of Mayors; Election

Center; International Association of

Clerks, Recorders, Election Officials,

and Treasurers; U.S. Commission on

Civil Rights; and Architectural and

Transportation Barriers Compliance

Board.

Other members include

representatives from the U.S.

Department of Justice, Office of

Public Integrity, and the Civil Rights

Division; the director of the U.S.

Department of Defense Federal Voting

Assistance Program; four professionals

from the field of science and

technology, one each appointed by the

Speaker and the Minority Leader of

the U.S. House of Representatives,

and the Majority and Minority leaders

of the U.S. Senate; and eight members

representing voter interests, with the

chairs and the ranking minority

members of the U.S. House of

Representatives Committee on House

Administration and the U.S. Senate

Committee on Rules and

Administration each appointing two

members. 

Standards Board

The Standards Board consists of 110

members, 55 of whom are State

election officials selected by their

respective chief State election official.

The other 55 members are local

election officials selected through a

process supervised by the chief State

election official. HAVA prohibits any

two members representing the same

State to be members of the same

political party.

The board selects nine members to

serve as an executive board, of which

not more than five are State election

officials, not more than five are local

election officials, and not more than

five are members of the same political

party. 

Technical Guidelines Development

Committee

HAVA mandates that the Technical

Guidelines Development Committee

assist EAC in developing the Voluntary

Voting System Guidelines, a task that

was completed in May 2005. These
guidelines are voluntary and each

State retains the prerogative to adopt

these guidelines. 

The chairperson of the TGDC is the

director of the National Institute of

Standards and Technology (NIST).

The TGDC is composed of 14 other

members appointed jointly by EAC

and the director of NIST. Members

include representatives from the EAC

Standards Board, EAC Board of

Advisors, Architectural and

Transportation Barriers Compliance

Board, American National Standards

Institute, The Institute of Electrical

and Electronics Engineers, The

National Association of State Election

Directors (two representatives), and

other individuals with technical and

scientific expertise related to voting

systems and voting equipment. 

EAC Operations

In FY 2005, the EAC received

significant and much needed funding

to begin, in earnest, its work to assist

the States with HAVA-mandated

election reform efforts, including

provisional voting and voter

identification requirements, updated

voting equipment, and implementaton

of statewide voter registration lists. 

To assist the States in their efforts to

comply with the law, in FY 2005 EAC

aggressively moved forward to develop

the VVSG, which were submitted for

public comment on June 27. In

addition, EAC issued voluntary

guidance on the implementation of

statewide voter registration lists and

advisories on provisional voting and

identification requirements. Most of

the remaining 2005 appropriation was

focused on EAC programs that serve

the States, such as distributing HAVA

funds and monitoring the use of

funding through reporting and

auditing programs. 

In FY 2005, EAC’s appropriation was

$13.8 million. The largest portion—31

percent—was allocated to improving

voting technology, which included

$2,777,600 for NIST to help create the

VVSG and for establishing the national

laboratory accreditation program.

Other activities conducted to improve

voting technology included developing

election management guidelines and

publishing Federal Register notices

related to these activities. 

Twenty-seven percent of the

appropriation was dedicated to the

internal operations of the agency,

including rent, equipment, salaries

and benefits, public meeting and

hearing expenses, and other

administrative costs. 

To fulfill the mandates of HAVA to

conduct research on election

administration issues, 22 percent was

used to study issues related to the

National Voter Registration Form

update, poll worker recruitment and

retention, college poll worker

recruitment and retention, voting

fraud and voter intimidation, vote

count and recount procedures,

provisional voting, and voter

identification. The results of these

research projects will be provided to

the States to assist in their efforts to

improve election administration, to

Congress, and to the public.

Fiscal Year 2005 Annual Report 5
6 U.S. Election Assistance Commission

Clearinghouse activities, which include

guidance and advisories for the States,

represented 7 percent of EAC’s

budget. Related activities included

conducting and distributing the 2004

Election Day Survey and establishing

the Legal Resources Clearinghouse.

Other activities included developing

and issuing guidance for HAVA

mandates, such as the implementation

of the statewide voter registration list.

This percentage also included costs for

issuing related Federal Register

notices.

Eight percent of the budget was used

to distribute and manage HAVA

funds. This budget item included costs

related to establishing an audit

program and procuring the services of

an acting inspector general. 

Activities related to EAC’s Standards

Board and Board of Advisors

represented 5 percent of the budget,

which funded meetings held to review

EAC guidance, provide advice

regarding research projects, and assist

in developing the VVSG. 

The four commissioners cast votes on

a wide variety of issues, and all of

them were passed unanimously. The

commissioners cast several important

votes during public meetings, such as

the adoption of the voluntary

EAC Funding Breakdown

31% Improving Voting Technology

27% EAC Administration

22% Election-related Research 8% Funds Management

7% 

Clearinghouse

5% EAC 

Advisory Boards
guidance on statewide voter

registration lists, the VVSG, and the

election of officers. All votes are

recorded and available to the public. A

summary of FY 2005 votes is shown

below in the following tables. 

Fiscal Year 2005 Annual Report 7

2005 Consensus Votes

Title Decided by Certified

Vote of Date

1. Recommendaton of Anthony C. Reissig—EAC/NIST Consultant 4 3/24/05

2. Recommendation of Laiza Otero—Research Associate Consultant 4 3/24/05

3. Recommendation of Charlotte Cleary—EAC Consultant 3* 5/20/05

4. Consulting Contract To Assist With EAC System Certification Process 3 6/7/05

Development

5. Accepting Travel Expenses From a Non-Federal Source 3 6/29/05

6. Resolution 2005-02 To Honor Chet Kalis 3 7/18/05

7. Scendis, LLC—Human Resource Policies and Procedures Development 3 7/20/05

Contract

8. Resolution 2005-02 To Honor Walter Fox McKeithen, Secretary of State 3 7/21/05

9. Carol Paquette—Personal Services Contract 3 7/25/05

10. Daniel Murphy—Poll Worker Recruitment and Training Project Consultant 3 7/25/05

11. Modification to EAC 0524 Survey Analysis Support Contract 4* 8/30/05

12. Legal Resources Clearinghouse 4 9/2/05

13. Contract with NASED, Connie Schmidt and Brit Williams 4 9/2/05

14. Contract to assist EAC with identifying and promulgating best practices for 4 9/6/05

poll worker recruitment, training, and retention

15. Contract to assist EAC with identifying and promulgating best practicesfor 4 9/6/05

recruitment, training, and retention of college poll workers

16. Research assistance for the development of best practices on vote count 4 9/7/05

and recount precedures

17. Consensus memorandum to commissioners on statewide voter registration 4 9/7/05

database implementation and online forums for discussion of ongoing 

concerns

18. Modification to Election Data Services Contract—Distribution of Data 4 9/8/05

to States

19. Consensus Memorandum to the Commissioners on the Improving 4 9/9/05

Election Administration Data Collection Project

20. Vendor to assist the EAC with records management policy and procedures 4 9/9/05

21. Consensus memorandum to commissioners on voter hotline feasibility study 4 9/9/05

22. EAC Style Manual 4 9/19/05

23. Amendment Scendis, LLC—Human Resource Policies and Procedures 4 9/27/05

Development Contract

* From late April through mid-August, there was a vacancy on the commission.
8 U.S. Election Assistance Commission

2005 Tally Votes

Title Decided by Certified

Vote of Date

1. Disbursement of HAVA Title II Requirements Payments to Rhode Island 4 1/11/05

2. Federal Register Publication of Charges to Puerto Rico's HAVA State Plan 4 1/11/05

3. Disbursement of HAVA Title II Requirements Payments of Two States 4 2/8/05

4. Disbursement of HAVA Title II Requirements Payments of Two States 4 2/16/05

5. Federal Register Publication of Changes to Three State Plans 4 3/3/05

6. Disbursement of HAVA Title II Requirements Payments to Puerto Rico 4 3/3/05

7. Disbursement of HAVA Title II Requirements Payments to Two States 4 3/7/05

8. Federal Register Publication of Changes to Two States Plans 4 3/30/05

9. Disbursement of HAVA Title II Requirements Payment to New Jersey 4 4/12/05

10. Federal Register Publication of Proposed Voluntary Guidance on 4 4/13/05

Implementation of Statewide Voter Registration Lists

11. Disbursement of HAVA Title II Requirements Payment to South Dakota 4 4/18/05

12. Disbursement of HAVA Title II Requirements Payment to Maine 4 4/22/05

13. Disbursement of HAVA Title II Requirements Payments to Michigan and Texas 4 4/22/05

14. Appointment of David Karmol to the Technical Guidelines Development 4 5/1/05

Committee as a Representative of the American National Standards Institute

15. Award of Contract for RFP-05-01, Request for Proposals for Research 3* 5/4/05

Assistance for the EAC to Support the Development of Voluntary Guidance 

on Provisional Voting and Voter Identification Procedures

16. Disbursement of HAVA Title II Requirements Payment to North Dakota 3 5/5/05

17. MOU Between the Department of the Interior Office of Inspector General 3 5/5/05

(DOI/OIG) and the Election Assistance Commission (EAC) for the Audit 

of HAVA Section 101 Funds Obligated or Spent by the State of California

18. Appointment of Designated Agency Ethics Official and an Alternate 3 5/5/05

Agency Ethics Official

19. Resolution 2005-01—Continuing Authorization of the Technical Guidelines 3 5/10/05

Development Committee (TGDC)

20. Disbursement of HAVA Title II Requirements Payment to Alaska 3 5/13/05

21. Appointment of Tom Wilkey—Executive Director 3 5/24/05

22. Disbursement of HAVA Title II Requirements Payment to California 3 5/21/05

23. Disbursement of HAVA Title II Requirements Payment to New York 3 6/3/05

24. Disbursement of HAVA Title II Requirements Payment to Guam 3 6/9/05

25. Award of Contract for Meeting Planning and Support Services 3 6/23/05

26. Federal Register Publications of Changes to Three States Plans 3 6/22/05

27. Disbursement of HAVA Title II Requirements Payment to Alaska 3 7/6/05

28. Disbursement of HAVA Title II Requirements Payment to Texas 3 7/6/05

29. Award of Contract for Technical Assistance to the EAC for the Collection, 3 7/22/05

Management, Review, and Response to Public Comments Received 

on the Voluntary Voting Systems Guidelines 

30. HAVA Grant to the National Student/Parent Mock Election 3 8/2/05

31. Appointment of Roger LaRouche—Acting Inspector General 3 8/9/05

of the EAC for the Remainder FY2005 and FY2006 Fiscal Years
Fiscal Year 2005 Annual Report 9

Title Decided by Certified

Vote of Date

2005 Tally Votes (continued)

32. Delegation of Authority To Determine Which EAC Employees Must 3 8/18/05

File Confidential Financial Disclosure Forms

33. Federal Register Publication of Changes to Three States Plans 3 8/17/05

34. Federal Register Publication of HAVA Administrative Complaint Procedures 4* 8/22/05

35. Disbursement of HAVA Title II Requirements Payment to Oregon 4 8/31/05

36. Federal Register Publication of Changes to Virginia's HAVA State Plan 4 9/2/05

37. Appointment of John Gale to the Technical Guidelines Development 4 9/8/05

Committee as a Representative of the Standards Board

38. Final Approval and Publication of EAC Advisory 2005-005 4 9/13/05

39. Award of Contract for Indirect Cost Negotiation Assistance 4 9/13/05

40. Final Approval and Publication EAC Advisory 2005-006 4 9/13/05

41. Revised Proposals for Effective Designs for the Administration of Federal 4

Elections

42. Award of Contract for Management Guidelines 4 9/20/05

43. Award of Contract of RFP 05-05, Assistance to the EAC To Identify 4 9/19/05

and Promulgate Efffective Strategies and Best Practices for Poll Worker 

Recruitment, Retention, and Training and RFP 05-06, Assistance to 

the EAC To Identify and Promulgate Effective Strategies and Best 

Practices for Recruitment, Retention, and Training of College Poll Workers

44. Revised Proposal for Voter Roundtables to Identify Barriers to Voter 4 9/19/05

Participation and Requirements for Voter Education (Council for Excellence 

in Government)

45. Technical Support for Statewide Voter Registration Database 4 9/19/05

Implementation With Online Forums for Discussion

46. Award of Contract for Consulting Assistance With Developing an EAC 4

Voting Fraud and Voter Intimidation Project

47. Award of Contract for Research Assistance to the EAC for the Development 4 9/19/05

of a Legal Resources Clearinghouse

48. Award of Contract for Research Assistance to the EAC for the Development 4 9/19/05

of Records Management Policies and Procedures

49. Award of Contract for Research Assistance to the EAC for the Development 4 9/19/05

of Best Practices on Vote Count and Recount Procedures

50. Award of Contract for RFP-05-09, Request for Proposals for Research 4 9/20/05

Assistance Commission To Study the Feasibility and Advisability 

of Establishing a Voter Hotline Pilot Project

51. Award of Contract for RFP-05-08, Request for Proposals for Research and 4 9/20/05

Management Assistance to the Election Assistance Commission To Plan 

and Administer a Voter Information Public Access Portal Design Conference

52. EDS Contract Amendment 4 9/20/05

53. Federal Register Publicaton of Changes to Pennsylvania's HAVA 4 9/23/05

State Plan

54. Election Day Survey and Executive Summary 4 10/3/05

* From late April through mid-August, there was a vacancy on the commission.
10 U.S. Election Assistance Commission

Keeping the Public Informed

and Involved

In FY 2005, EAC aggressively moved

forward to help States comply with

HAVA. Along with those efforts came

the responsibility to keep the public

informed about EAC activities. In FY

2005, the commission held 17 public

meetings and hearings, during which

participants representing many

different points of view testified and

shared their expertise and opinions on

topics such as voter identification,

voting systems, voting system

certification, and accessibility issues. 

On Election Day 2004, EAC received

calls from the public from 6:30 a.m.

until 10:30 p.m. The vast majority of

the calls involved questions regarding

the location of a polling place, voting

hours, and the status of voter

registration.

EAC met its civic education

responsibilities under HAVA Section

295(a) by issuing grants to the

National Student/Parent Mock

Election (NSPME) to carry out voter

education activities for students and

parents. According to the report filed

by NSPME in 2005 regarding its FY

2004 grant of $198,820, these HAVA

funds were used to support and

operate the national office, which had

the responsibility of preparing a

curriculum and procedural guides,

preparing the ballots, coordinating the

national data collection systems, and

supporting State coordinators. 

Congress earmarked $200,000 from

EAC's operating fund for the fiscal

year grant to NSPME. A Federal

rescission reduced that amount to

$198,400. An interim report on the

FY 2005 grant disclosed that the funds

were used to (1) prepare for the 2006

mock election to be held in 50 States,

the District of Columbia, and U.S.

enclaves overseas; (2) sponsor awards

for outstanding voter education

projects; and (3) expand NSPME's

unique Web-based voter education

initiative, The Road to the Capitol.

The final FY 2005 NSPME report is

due March 31, 2006.

In FY 2005, EAC commissioners

traveled to 21 States, providing

briefings to and gathering input from

election officials and the public as well

as observing local elections. EAC

commissioners and staff also attended

conferences held by the National

Association of Secretaries of State; The

National Association of State Election

Directors; the International

Association of Clerks, Recorders,

Election Officials and Treasurers; the

National Conference of State

Legislatures; and the National

Association of Counties. The purpose

of attending conferences held by

professional organizations was to brief

them on HAVA mandates and

funding, discuss EAC guidance, and

hear about innovative election reform

efforts taking place throughout the

country. EAC commissioners and staff

also met with representatives from

advocacy groups such as the League of

Women Voters and the United States

Access Board.

In FY 2005, the EAC added more

information to its Web site, including

all advisories and guidance and
materials presented at public meetings

and hearings. The EAC also used the

Web site as a primary communication

vehicle for publicizing public meetings

and hearings, letters, news releases,

and clearinghouse documents. 

During the fiscal year, the EAC Web

site received more than 14 million hits

and 1.375 million page views. The

most activity occurred in October

2004, the month preceding the

November presidential election, when

the site recorded more than 9 million

hits and 600,000 page views. During

October 2004, the site averaged

300,000 hits and 20,000 page views

per day, while during the rest of the

year the site recorded an average of

14,000 hits and 2,100 page views per

day. The Web site encountered more

than 340,000 unique visitors, with a

little less than half visiting during the

peak month of October 2004 and the

remainder distributed across the rest

of the year. Top page destinations

included Register to Vote, the

Electoral College, the Best Practices

Report on Voting by Uniformed and

Overseas Citizens, Election Resources,

News Releases, Voluntary Voting

System Guidelines, Become a Poll

Worker, EAC Publications, Frequently

Asked Questions, Standards and

Advisory Boards, Events/Hearings,

and Programs.

Official meeting minutes and agendas

are available for all FY 2005 public

meetings and hearings on EAC’s Web

site at www.eac.gov. 

Fiscal Year 2005 Annual Report 11

Top Pages by Visits Trend

Top Pages by Visit

Top Pages—FY 2005

Pages

1.

2.

3.

EAC Home Page

http:/ / www.eac.gov/ 

Register To Vote

http:/ / www.eac.gov/

register_vote.asp?format=none

National Mail Voter Registration Form

http:/ / www.eac.gov/ register_vote_forms.asp
12 U.S. Election Assistance Commission

Percentage of Registered Voters Using Equipment

Optical Scan 39% Optical Scan 39%

Punchcard

9%

Unknown

8.2%

Unknown

Mixed 7.3% ed 7.3%

Electronic Voting 22.6%

Paper 1.7%

Lever Machine

12.2%

Source: EAC’s 2004 Election Day Survey.

As the Help America Vote Act

(HAVA) ushered in election reform,

States were faced with the dual

challenge of interpreting the law’s

language and preparing to meet its

deadlines. The law assigns the role of

interpretation to the Election

Assistance Commission (EAC) and,

consequently, many election officials

looked to the commission for

guidance about the law and for

assistance about how to make the

mandates work in the polling place. 

Interpreting HAVA

In its first full year of operations, EAC

made it a priority to not only

distribute the remaining HAVA funds

but also to provide interpretive

assistance to election officials who

were preparing to meet the January 1,

2006, deadlines for implementing a

statewide voter registration list and for

meeting the requirements of Section

301(a) of HAVA. The guidance that

EAC issued in FY 2005 was directly

related to these deadlines and reflects

the requests for information made by

election officials throughout the

country. All advisories and guidance

are available at www.eac.gov.

Complying With Section

301(a)

Many election officials had inquiries

regarding how the requirements of

Section 301(a) would impact the

voting systems currently in use in their

States. In response, EAC issued several

advisories to help these election

officials make decisions regarding

compliance with Section 301(a).

Guidance and Assistance to States
Fiscal Year 2005 Annual Report 13

On July 20, the EAC issued Advisory

2005-004: How To Determine if a

Voting System Is Compliant With

301(a). The intent of this advisory was

to address gaps between the 2002

Voting System Standards adopted by

the Federal Election Commission

(FEC) and the requirements of Section

301(a). The advisory illustrated the

steps that States using 2002-compliant

voting systems would have to take to

comply with HAVA. In response to the

many inquiries regarding the

accessibility requirements of the law,

the advisory also included a detailed

explanation of these requirements.

On September 8, in response to several

inquiries from election officials, EAC

issued Advisory 2005-005: Lever

Voting Machines and HAVA Section

301(a). The advisory provided EAC’s

careful review of Section 301(a) and

the commission’s subsequent

conclusion that lever machines have

significant barriers that would make

compliance with the law difficult and

unlikely. The advisory cited four areas

of concern regarding lever machines:

audit capacity, error rate, alternative

language accessibility, and accessibility

for individuals with disabilities.

Statewide Voter Registration

Lists

HAVA requires States to develop,

maintain, and administer a single,

statewide list of registered voters.

These lists must be in place by January

1, 2006. Implementing the statewide

lists was a monumental task for many

election officials. EAC began working

to provide assistance to these election

officials and to share information from

States that already had statewide voter

registration lists in place. 

In May, EAC issued draft guidance

about implementing the voter lists and

received more than 300 comments

from election officials, public interest

groups, and the general public. Each

comment was considered and, as a

result, the document was reorganized

to improve readability; definitions

were expanded; and guidance about

security, registration, coordination,

and list maintenance was expanded. In

July, EAC issued voluntary guidance

on the Implementation of Statewide

Voter Registration Lists. 

The final voluntary guidance included

definitions of common terms and

covered topics such as the types of

databases that meet HAVA

requirements, coordination with State

and Federal agencies, voter

verification, list maintenance, record

retention, and security protocols.

Provisional Voting

HAVA mandates that a ballot be

provided to an individual seeking to

vote in a Federal election whose name

is not on the list of registered voters or

whose eligibility or registration status

is challenged or questioned when they

present themselves to vote. Although

some States already offered provisional

voting, this method of voting was first

required for all Federal elections in

2004. It quickly became apparent that

there was a lack of clarity regarding the

processing of provisional ballots. To

address some of the questions

EAC issued Advisory

2005-004 to help States

comply with Section

301(a) of HAVA.
14 U.S. Election Assistance Commission

surrounding provisional voting, EAC

issued Resolution 2004-02 in October

urging all States to have in place clear

and written procedures regarding

provisional voting; to train poll

workers about administering

provisional ballots; to use HAVA funds

to educate voters about provisional

voting; and, in States where

provisional ballots can be cast only in

the voter’s assigned polling place or

precinct, to make information

available to poll workers that will allow

them to determine the voter’s assigned

precinct or polling place. 

In response to further inquiries from

election officials regarding provisional

voting, EAC issued Advisory 2005-

006: Provisional Voting and

Identification Requirements. The

advisory reviewed the plain language

of HAVA, Section 302, examined the

differences between traditional and

provisional ballots, and analyzed the

implementation of provisional voting.

The advisory stated that an

identification requirement may not be

imposed that would limit a potential

voter’s access to and submission of a

provisional ballot. It also concluded

that a State, according to its laws,

would make the final determination

of whether the provisional ballot

would be counted.
Fiscal Year 2005 Annual Report 15

Congress appropriated more than $3

billion to be distributed to the States

to implement the Help America Vote

Act (HAVA). Most of that money goes

toward requirements payments, also

known as Title II payments. Of the

$2,261,094,736 in Title II payments

that have been distributed, in FY 05

$927,241,903 was disbursed to 25

States.1 By the end of the fiscal year,

every State and territory had received

some amount of HAVA funding. Title

II funds are designed to assist States in

meeting the uniform and nondiscriminatory election technology and

administration requirements of Title III

of HAVA. These requirements include

voting system standards, accessible

voting equipment, provisional voting

and voting information requirements,

a computerized statewide voter

registration list, and identification

requirements for first-time voters who

register by mail. 

HAVA Funds Management

Requirements Payments Processed by EAC in Fiscal Year 2005

Date FY 2003 FY 2004 Total Payments

Approved State Funds* Funds* to State*

10/20/04 Arizona $14,523,463.00 $26,061,052.00 $40,584,515.00 

11/22/04 Hawaii $4,150,000.00 $0.00 $4,150,000.00

11/22/04 Kansas $0.00 ** $13,748,141.00 $13,748,141.00

11/22/04 Nevada $0.00 ** $10,381,400.00 $10,381,400.00

11/22/04 Tennessee $0.00 ** $29,690,196.00 $29,690,196.00

12/13/04 Florida $0.00 ** $85,085,258.00 $85,085,258.00

12/13/04 Utah $5,892,900.00 $10,574,281.00 $16,467,182.00

1/11/05 Rhode Island $0.00 ** $7,446,803.00 $7,446,803.00 

2/8/05 Illinois $35,283,025.00 $0.00 $35,283,025.00

2/8/05 Virginia $0.00 ** $36,916,377.00 $36,916,377.00

2/16/05 Illinois $0.00 ** $63,312,227.00 $63,312,227.00

2/16/05 Oklahoma $9,898,202.00 $17,761,436.00 $27,659,637.00

3/3/05 Puerto Rico $830,000.00 $1,489,361.00 $2,319,361.00

3/7/05 Nebraska $0.00 ** $8,829,173.00 $8,829,173.00

3/7/05 U.S. Virgin Islands $830,000.00 $1,489,361.00 $2,319,361.00

4/12/05 New Jersey $0.00 ** $43,709,107.00 $43,709,107.00

4/15/05 South Dakota $4,150,000.00 $7,446,803.00 $11,596,803.00

4/22/05 Maine $0.00 ** $7,446,803.00 $7,446,803.00

4/22/05 Michigan $0.00 * $14,778,422.00 $14,778,422.00

4/22/05 Texas $0.00 * $74,688,004.97 $74,688,004.97

5/5/05 North Dakota $0.00 ** $7,446,803.00 $7,446,803.00

1 All available requirements

payments were distributed by

December 2005.
16 U.S. Election Assistance Commission

The Proper Use of HAVA

Funds

On January 18, 2005, EAC offered

guidance to States on the management

of HAVA funds by issuing three

funding advisories, which are available

on the EAC Web site at www.eac.gov.

In Advisory 05-001, which dealt with

the use of requirements payments

under Title II of HAVA, EAC advised

that a State may use funds that are set

aside by county or local governments

and maintained under the control of

those governments as their matching

funds for purposes of receiving

requirements payments. EAC

stipulated, however, that the State

continued to have its own obligations

regarding funding and adherence to

other Federal election laws and that

written agreements between the State

and counties would be required

regarding the use of those funds. 

To address questions regarding the

5-percent match required by HAVA,

EAC issued Advisory 05-002, which

explained that a State may receive a

requirements payment in an amount

less than the total amount authorized

and appropriated to the State for a

single fiscal year. The advisory

permitted States that had not yet

appropriated the full 5-percent match

for their share of requirements

payments to apply for a partial

payment based on the amount

awarded for the match.

EAC Advisory 05-003 stated that

interest earned by a State on Title I,

Section 101 funds did not have to be

remitted to the Federal Government

and that, while this interest earned

may be used to further the State’s

efforts to meet the requirements of

Title III and to improve the

administration of Federal elections,

the funds cannot be used as any part

of the State’s matching funds for

purposes of receiving Title II

requirements payments. 

Requirements Payments Processed by EAC in Fiscal Year 2005 (continued)

Date FY 2003 FY 2004 Total Payments

Approved State Funds* Funds* to State*

5/13/05 Alaska $4,150,000.00 $0.00 $4,150,000.00

5/31/05 California $0.00 ** $169,677,955.00 $169,677,955.00

6/6/05 New York $54,900,465.00 $98,513,965.00 $153,414,430.00

6/9/05 Guam $830,000.00 $1,489,361.00 $2,319,361.00

7/6/05 Alaska $0.00 ** $7,446,803.00 $7,446,803.00

7/6/05 Texas $0.00 ** $28,499,166.03 $28,499,166.03

8/31/05 Oregon $0.00 ** $17,875,589.00 $17,875,589.00

Total $135,438,055.00 $791,803,848.00 $927,241,903.00

* Figures are rounded to the nearst dollar.

** State already has received its 2003 requirements payment.
Fiscal Year 2005 Annual Report 17

Recordkeeping, Reporting,

and Auditing HAVA Funds

In February, EAC issued guidance

documents to assist States on the

management and reporting of HAVA

funds. The guidance material was

featured at a workshop held at a joint

Winter Conference of the National

Association of Secretaries of State

(NASS) and The National Association

of State Election Directors (NASED).

The HAVA Fund Reporting Calendar

provided States with information on

the types of reports required to be

filed under HAVA as well as the

information required, reporting

periods, due dates, and the name and

address of the agency to receive the

reports. 

To further assist States in their efforts

to account for the use of HAVA funds,

EAC also issued a document titled

Permissible Uses of HAVA Funds

Made Available to States, which

contained information on the proper

use of Title I, Section 101 (election

administration improvement

payments) and Section 102 (lever

machine and/or punch card voting

system replacement) funds. The

document also covered the use of Title

II, Section 251 funds, which are the

requirements payments; Title II,

Section 261 funds, which cover

accessibility for individuals with

physical disabilities and visual

impairments; and Title II, Section 291

funds, used by State protection and

advocacy systems. EAC staff also

presented information on the use of

HAVA funds at the 2005 NASS

Summer Conference.

Audit Program

In FY 2005, most of the remaining

appropriated HAVA funds were

distributed to the States. Reports on

the use of Title I funds are due at the

end of February of each year, and

reports on the use of Title II funds are

due at the end of March of each year.

EAC developed a policy and protocol

for reviewing these reports.

To augment these efforts, EAC

executed an agreement in August 2005

with the U.S. Department of the

Interior to obtain the services of an

acting inspector general. The inspector

general was instructed to create an

independent and objective unit to

conduct and supervise audits and

investigations relating to EAC

programs and operations and keep the

agency and Congress fully informed

about activities related to programs

administered by EAC. Objectives

included conducting activities and

making recommendations designed to

(1) promote economy, efficiency, and

effectiveness in administering

programs and operations of EAC,

including States’ use of HAVA

payments and grants; (2) prevent and

detect fraud, waste, and abuse in

programs and operations of EAC,

including States’ use of HAVA

payments and grants; and (3) keep the

EAC chairperson and Congress fully

informed about problems and

deficiencies in EAC’s programs and

operations and the necessity for

progress of corrective actions. 

On January 27, 2005, EAC adopted a

general policy for conducting special

audits that applied to all States.
18 U.S. Election Assistance Commission

Special audits differ from regular

audits in both timing and scope. The

policy included the following

components:

• Regularly review single audits and

reports filed by States as well as

other credible information on State

HAVA spending.

• When a discrepancy or potential

lack of compliance is revealed,

analyze the risk to HAVA funds.

The analysis should identify the

source as well as the severity of the

threat.

• Determine the need for additional

review and information. If

additional information is needed,

consider voting to conduct a special

audit. If the discrepancies are

evident and the existing

information sufficiently identifies

them, EAC will act to refer the

discrepancies to the appropriate

enforcement agency, including the

U.S. Department of Justice, the

U.S. Comptroller General, and/or

other appropriate State or Federal

enforcement agencies. 

• Define the scope and type of audit.

The audit may be one or more of

the four types of audits: financial,

performance, compliance, and

agreed-upon procedures. The scope

the audit should include the term

of the audit and the funds that will

be audited. 

• Develop a scope of work for the

inspector general, a contractor, or

other Federal Government agency

that will conduct the audit on

behalf of EAC. 

After adopting the audit policy,

commissioners also unanimously voted

to conduct a special audit of

California’s use of Federal funding for

election reforms under HAVA. The

commissioners scheduled the special

audit on the basis of an internal audit,

conducted by the California State

auditor, which identified numerous

deficiencies in the administration of

HAVA funds by the California Office

of Secretary of State. The special audit

will focus on approximately $27

million disbursed to the State under

the Title I, Section 101 of HAVA. In

May, EAC entered into an agreement

with the U.S. Department of the

Interior’s Inspector General’s office to

conduct the California special audit.
Fiscal Year 2005 Annual Report 19

States have the freedom to choose

voting systems as long as they meet the

requirements of Section 301(a). In the

past, many election officials relied on

national standards to assist them in

determining which voting systems

provide the necessary functionality

and security capabilities to maintain

the integrity of the election process.

The first set of national voting system

standards was created in 1990 by the

Federal Election Commission (FEC).

In 2002, FEC updated the standards,

and the Help America Vote Act

(HAVA) mandated that the Election

Assistance Commission (EAC) develop

a new iteration of the standards—

which would be known as the

Voluntary Voting System Guidelines

(VVSG)—to address advancements in

information and computer

technologies. The law also stated that

EAC assumes responsibility for the

certification of voting systems and the

accreditation of testing laboratories

approved by the National Institute of

Standards and Technology (NIST). 

HAVA mandated a 9-month period for

the Technical Guidelines Development

Committee (TGDC) to develop the

initial set of VVSG. The TGDC,

working with NIST, technology

experts, accessibility experts, and

election officials, completed the first

draft and delivered it to EAC in May.

In addition to providing technical

support to the TGDC, NIST also

reviewed the 2002 Voting System

Standards (2002 VSS) to identify

issues to be addressed in the 2005

guidelines, drafted core functional

requirements, categorized requirements

into related groups of functionality,

identified security gaps, provided

recommendations for implementing a

voter verifiable paper audit trail, and

provided usability requirements. NIST

also updated the VVSG’s conformance

clause and the glossary. Dr. Hratch

Semerjian, acting director of NIST in

2005, served as chair of the TGDC. 

After conducting an initial review,

EAC released the two-volume

proposed guidelines for a 90-day

public comment period. 

Volume I, the Voting System

Performance Guidelines, included new

requirements for accessibility, voting

system software distribution, system

setup validation, and the use of wireless

communications. It also contained a

set of requirements for a voter

verifiable paper audit trail component

for direct recording electronic voting

systems for States that have decided to

require this feature for their voting

systems. An updated glossary of terms

and a conformance clause were also

included in Volume I. 

Volume II, the Voting System National

Certification Guidelines, provided an

overview of the national certification

testing process. It was revised to reflect

the new EAC process for the national

certification of voting systems. 

EAC proposed a 24-month effective

date for the VVSG but anticipated

being prepared to test voting systems

against the VVSG in 2006 if States

chose to adopt the VVSG sooner than

the effective date. 

Improving Voting Systems
20 U.S. Election Assistance Commission

The guidelines greatly expanded

accessibility requirements, with the

number of requirements rising from

29 in the 2002 standards to

approximately 120. New accessibility

requirements included the following: 

• Making buttons and controls easier

to distinguish and use.

• Providing disabled voters access to the

voting system regardless of whether

they have their own personal

assistive device. For instance, the

proposed guidelines state that

voting systems shall provide these

voters with items such as headsets

or other interface devices that assist

voters with limited mobility.

• Making sure the audio presentation

of information is readily

comprehensible.

• Improving accessibility for voters with

dexterity and mobility impairment.

New security requirements included

requiring all voting system vendors to

submit software to the National

Software Reference Library, which will

provide local election officials with a

resource to make sure the software

they purchased is the same as the

software that has been certified by

EAC. In addition, the VVSG included

requirements for the use of wireless

technology. EAC also included

requirements for a voter verifiable

paper audit trail (VVPAT) in

recognition of the 25 States that

passed laws requiring it for their voting

systems. VVPAT is an increasingly

used technology, and EAC considered

it important to provide States with

guidance to make sure this component

is accurate and reliable and that it does

not compromise a voter’s right to privacy.

The VVSG included usability

requirements for the first time. These

requirements addressed voting system

interaction as it relates to all voters.

Some of the usability requirements

indicated that (1) vendors should

perform usability testing, (2) direct

recording electronic (DRE) machines

should provide navigation controls

that enable the voter to advance to the

next contest or go back to the previous

contest before completing a vote, and

(3) no key or control on a voting station

should have a repetitive effect as a result

of being held in its active position.

During the development of the latest

iteration of the guidelines, EAC made

it a priority to engage the public in the

process. EAC worked to involve as

many people as possible from diverse

backgrounds by making it as easy as

possible to view the voluntary guidelines

and to also submit comments and

view all of the comments submitted.

During the 90-day public comment

period, EAC held public hearings in

New York City, Pasadena, and Denver

to discuss the guidelines. 

The guidelines were posted on EAC’s

Web site and could be viewed in its

entirety or by section. The glossary was

available for simultaneous viewing to

assist the readers as they viewed the

document. EAC received 6,599

comments, which could be submitted

and viewed on the Web site. EAC also

accepted comments by mail, e-mail,

and fax. EAC and NIST reviewed the

comments and many were

incorporated, resulting in a more

comprehensive document. Some

comments were forwarded to the

TGDC and EAC’s management
Fiscal Year 2005 Annual Report 21

guidelines working group for

consideration in their work to develop

future iterations of the VVSG.

Voting System Certification

Prior to the passage of HAVA, a

process for accrediting Independent

Testing Authorities leading to the

qualification of voting systems by the

States was conducted by The National

Association of State Election Directors

(NASED). NASED is a nonpartisan

membership association consisting of

election directors from throughout the

Nation. Voting systems were tested

against either the 1990 or 2002 voting

system standards. Even though

participation in the national

certification program is voluntary,

approximately 39 States used some

element of the national certification

program. 

HAVA mandated that EAC provide for

the certification, decertification, and

recertification of voting systems and

the accreditation of testing

laboratories, marking the first time the

Federal Government will be

responsible for these activities. HAVA

describes a dual role for NIST and

EAC: NIST will provide EAC with a

recommended list of accredited voting

system laboratories, and then EAC will

decide whether to approve laboratories

from the list provided by NIST. 

To provide the list of recommended

laboratories, NIST will rely on its

National Voluntary Laboratory

Accreditation Program (NVLAP).

During FY 2005, EAC earmarked

approximately $250,000 in funds

transferred to NIST specifically for the

laboratory accreditation program.

At an August public meeting in

Denver, EAC adopted the initial

procedures for the Nation’s first voting

system certification and laboratory

accreditation programs, marking the

initial step in transferring the programs

from NASED. The initial framework

included the following:

• Developing an interim accreditation

program for testing laboratories

currently accredited by NASED to

ensure that the process is not

interrupted for the election officials

throughout the country who were

working to meet the January 1, 2006,

HAVA deadlines.

• Developing procedures for EAC

accreditation of Voting System Test

Laboratories.

• Creating procedures for EAC

certification, decertification, and

recertification of voting systems,

which includes working with experts

to review technical data packages,

test plans, and reports from

accredited testing laboratories;

developing a process to provide

interpretation of voting system

standards and a certification appeal

process; and providing more public

access to the process.

The purpose of the national voting

system certification program is to

independently verify that voting

systems conform to the functional

capabilities, accessibility, and security

requirements necessary to ensure the

integrity and reliability of system

operation.
22 U.S. Election Assistance Commission

One of the Election Assistance

Commission’s (EAC’s) responsibilities

under the Help America to Vote Act

(HAVA) is to collect data about

election administration issues and

share it with election officials to help

them make decisions at the local level.

EAC also has an obligation to help

these officials interpret the law and to

provide guidance about meeting its

mandates. 

Sharing Information and

Offering Assistance 

In August, one of the most deadly

hurricanes ever to come ashore in the

United States hit the States of

Alabama, Mississippi, and Louisiana.

Public officials spent weeks saving

lives, clearing debris, and trying to

help the thousands of residents who

had lost their homes. As these efforts

progressed, election officials realized

that, in addition to the hardships of

loss of life and property, they were not

sure if they would have the resources

or employees to conduct elections in

the next cycle. In addition, they did

not have a way to find the many

residents who had relocated to notify

them about potential changes in the

election calendar. 

As a national clearinghouse for

election administration, EAC had a

responsibility to step in and offer

assistance to these election officials.

On September 21, EAC held a

meeting in Washington, DC, that was

attended by election officials in the

impacted areas, Capitol Hill staffers,

and representatives from Federal

agencies such as the U.S. Departments

of Justice and Homeland Security.

Also attending were representatives

from the National Association of

Secretaries of State, The National

Association of State Election

Directors, and the National

Conference of State Legislatures. In

addition, public officials who had

faced natural disasters shared their

challenges and solutions with the

election officials from the Gulf Coast.

Pat Owens, former mayor of Grand

Forks, ND, discussed how her city was

affected when it was hit by a

devastating flood and the steps it took

to rebuild the city and hold elections.

David Leahy, former elections

supervisor of Miami-Dade County,

discussed the preparations his city

took before Hurricane Andrew hit the

area and the steps it took to ensure

that elections would take place. 

After the initial meeting, EAC

designated a staffer to work with Gulf

States election officials to help them

identify resources and communicate

with and coordinate requests with

Federal agencies and to share

information and solutions from their

peers and professional organizations.

EAC will continue to assist these

officials as they work to make sure that

elections will be held and that voters

will continue to be able to exercise

their right to vote. 

2004 Election Day Survey

In September, EAC released the 2004

Election Day Survey, the largest and

most comprehensive survey on

Clearinghouse Activities
Fiscal Year 2005 Annual Report 23

election administration ever

conducted by a U.S. governmental

organization. The purpose of the

survey was to fulfill EAC’s

clearinghouse role under HAVA by

compiling a set of national statistics on

election practices and voting that

would inform Congress and the

Nation about the status of election

administration.

The results provided data about voting

and elections practices throughout the

country, as well as critical statistics on

voter registration and turnout, voting

equipment, and other information

about the voting process. Key findings

included the following:

• 60.7 percent voter turnout rate

(based on citizen voting age

population).

• 96.9 percent of absentee ballots

were counted.

• 64.5 percent of provisional ballots

were counted.

• Lowest presidential drop-off rate

since World War II at 1.02 percent.

The Election Day Survey was

distributed to election administrators

in all 50 States, the District of

Columbia, Guam, Puerto Rico,

American Samoa, and the U.S. Virgin

Islands. The results were based on the

information received from 6,568

election administration jurisdictions.

The survey included 43 questions

covering topics such as voter

registration, election results,

provisional and absentee ballots,

overvotes and undervotes, polling

places and workers, disability access,

and types of voting equipment. 

The survey was conducted by

requesting data from all election

jurisdictions, not by using a sampling

method. The results were based on the

information provided by the

jurisdictions that participated. 

The survey provided a great deal of

information about voting and election

practices throughout the country but

also identified many issues that

deserve closer examination, such as

voting equipment and accessibility

issues. EAC will work to gather more

information about these issues in its

next Election Day Survey. 

The Impact of the National

Voter Registration Act of 1993

In June, EAC submitted its first report

on the impact of the National Voter

Registration Act (NVRA) on the

administration of elections for Federal

office during the 2-year period from

November 2002 to November 2004.

HAVA shifted the responsibility of

submitting the NVRA report from the

Federal Election Commission (FEC) to

the EAC. 

The report was based on survey results

from 48 states, the District of

Columbia, and three territories—

American Samoa, Puerto Rico, and

the U.S. Virgin Islands. Highlights

include the following: 

• States reported a total of 49.6

million voter registration

applications processed nationwide. 

• Some 26 million applications were

valid new registrations.

• Nearly 3.5 million applications were

duplicates of valid registrations.
24 U.S. Election Assistance Commission

• Some 15.2 million applications

were requests for change of name,

address, or political party affiliation.

• Nearly 12.6 million names were

removed from voter lists under the

list verification procedures of

NVRA, while another 10.7 million

names were transferred from active

to inactive status.

Research Projects Under Way

in 2005

As States worked to meet the

deadlines of HAVA and identify

methods to improve election

administration, the EAC worked to get

research projects and studies under

way to provide solid data that would

assist election officials, legislators, and

government officials in the

decisionmaking process. These

research projects were driven by the

requirements in HAVA and also in

response to research requests from

election officials. 

Election Management Guidelines

On June 29, 2005, EAC published its

proposed Voluntary Voting System

Guidelines (VVSG) for public

comment. These guidelines augmented

and updated the 2002 Voting System

Standards, which were issued by the

FEC. The first set of standards was

promulgated in 1990. 

For many years, the Voting Systems

Board of the National Association of

State Election Directors (NASED) has

called for the development of a set of

election management guidelines to

complement the technical standards

for voting equipment. The EAC

recognized the need to create election

management procedures to accompany

the 2005 guidelines and in FY 2005

issued a contract to develop election

management guidelines. 

Activities will begin by assembling a

working group of experienced State

and local election officials to provide

subject matter expertise and to help

the project managers develop the

guidelines. The project will focus on

developing procedures related to the

use of voting equipment and

procedures for all other aspects of the

election administration process. The

election management guidelines will

be available to all election officials if

they wish to incorporate these

procedures at the State and local levels. 

Public Access Portal Design

Conference

Section 245(a) of HAVA mandates

that EAC conduct a thorough study of

issues and challenges presented by

incorporating communications and

Internet technologies. Section

245(a)(2)(C) indicates that EAC may

investigate the impact the new

communications or Internet

technology systems for use in the

electoral process could have on voter

participation rates, voter education,

and public accessibility. In addition,

HAVA allows EAC to periodically

study election administration issues,

including methods of educating voters

on all aspects of participating in

elections.

One emerging technology enabling

voters to obtain information about

voting that may affect participation
Fiscal Year 2005 Annual Report 25

rates and public accessibility is the

public access portal, which is a Web

site that disseminates voter education

information. EAC conducted research

to determine what information was

available to voters during the last

election cycle, and staff discovered that

the information was duplicative and

sometimes erroneous. Therefore, EAC

will perform additional research on

dissemination of information to

voters, and then conduct a conference

with election officials and technology

experts to discuss the elements of

implementing effective public access

portals. EAC will then share the

findings with election officials

throughout the country to help them

create access portals that will serve

their respective communities. 

Legal Resources Clearinghouse

EAC issued a contract to develop a

legal resources clearinghouse which

will be a Web-based application that

will house a database containing

statutes, regulations, and rules, as well

as State and Federal court decisions

that impact the administration of

elections for Federal office under

HAVA and/or the NVRA. It will

provide election officials, State

legislators, government officials, and

the general public with a central

location to conduct election

administration research. 

Best Practices for Recruiting,

Training, and Retaining Poll

Workers

Sections 241(a) and 242(b) of HAVA

direct EAC to periodically “conduct

and make available to the public

studies regarding. . . methods of

recruiting, training, and improving the

performance of pollworkers.” In

response to this mandate and to the

many election officials who continue

to have difficulty recruiting and

retaining poll workers, the EAC issued

a contract to identify strategies to

address the shortage of poll workers. 

The project will include conducting

research about the State rules and

procedures regarding poll workers and

the kinds of resources available in the

States to maintain adequate numbers

of poll workers. EAC will then produce

a tool kit encompassing a collection of

best practices in poll worker recruitment,

training, and retention; specific steps

required to implement effective poll

worker programs; and sample

recruiting and training materials. 

Best Practices for Recruiting,

Training, and Retaining College

Poll Workers

Section 501 of HAVA requires EAC to

implement the Help America Vote

College Program. HAVA Section 502

states that EAC shall “develop materials,

sponsor seminars and workshops,

engage in advertising targeted at

students, make grants, and take such

other actions as it considers appropriate”

to implement this program. 

In accordance with HAVA sections

501 and 502, EAC conducted a grant

program in 2004 designed to (1)

encourage students enrolled at

institutions of higher education to assist

State and local governments in the

administration of elections by serving

as nonpartisan poll workers or assistants;
26 U.S. Election Assistance Commission

and (2) encourage State and local

governments to use the services of the

students participating in the program.

The 2004 Help America Vote College

Program was extremely well received

overall, but several issues, most notably

a short implementation timeline, may

have hindered the program’s success.

Final reports on the use of the grants

were filed in FY 2005 by 9 of the 15

grantees. As of December 31, 2004, six

grantees had residual funds from the

proposals for the use of the funds for

the Help America Vote College

Program through December 2005.

Five grantees submitted proposals that

were accepted by EAC.

Congress earmarked $200,000 of

EAC's operating funds for the Help

America Vote College Program in FY

2005. EAC used all these funds in

addition to EAC research to identify

and build upon aspects of this

program that were successful, to

identify successful methods employed

in the United States for similar

programs, and to allow for replication

in as many jurisdictions as possible.

This project will examine the

differences among community

colleges, public institutions, and

private universities. It will seek to

determine if varying strategies for

college poll worker recruitment are

more effective at different types of

educational institutions. 

The overall objectives of the project

are to (1) collect information on

relevant State requirements; issues and

options in college poll worker and poll

assistant recruitment, training,

retention; and effective methods of

recruiting, training, and retaining such

election workers, including sample

materials used in these efforts; (2)

produce a user-friendly recruitment

tool kit that includes marketing and

training materials; (3) conduct a pilot

program in conjunction with colleges

or universities in a minimum of three

election jurisdictions during the 2006

election cycle; and, (4) based on the

pilot programs, provide

recommendations for revisions to the

tool kit and for future activities to

benefit efforts to recruit, train, and

retain college poll workers. 

Vote Counts and Recounts

Section 341(b)(13) of HAVA allows

EAC to study the laws and procedures

used by each State that govern

recounts of ballots cast in elections for

Federal office, contests of

determinations regarding whether

votes are counted in such elections,

and standards that define what will

constitute a vote on each type of

voting equipment used in the State to

conduct elections for Federal office.

Consequently, in FY 2005, EAC

issued a contract to conduct research

activities to develop best practices on

vote count and recount procedures. 

The major tasks associated with vote

count research include (1) reviewing

and analyzing data collected on

definitions of what constitutes a vote

for each State by voting system, (2)

drafting a comprehensive report that

includes the data analysis and State-byState summary of definitions of what

constitutes a vote for each voting
Fiscal Year 2005 Annual Report 27

system, and (3) reviewing literature for

methodologies used to establish best

practices and developing definitions of

what shall constitute a best practice

with respect to vote counts. 

The major tasks associated with

recount research include (1) reviewing

and analyzing States’ recount

procedures, (2) drafting a

comprehensive report that includes

the data analysis and the State-by-State

summary of recount and contest

procedures, and (3) developing

definitions of what shall constitute a

best practice with respect to recounts

and contests of determinations.

After conducting the research, EAC

will provide election officials

throughout the country with a set of

best practices for both vote counts and

recounts. 

Voting Fraud and Voter

Intimidation

Section 241 enumerates a number of

periodic studies of election

administration issues that the EAC

may elect to conduct. “On such

periodic basis as the Commission may

determine, the Commission shall

conduct and make available to the

public studies regarding the election

administration issues described in

subsection (b).” Sections 241(b)(6) and

(7) list the following election

administration issues: nationwide

statistics and methods of identifying,

deterring, and investigating voting

fraud in election for Federal office;

and identifying, deterring, and

investigating methods of voter

intimidation. 

Building on this reference to studies of

voting fraud and voting intimidation,

EAC contracted with two consultants

to conduct preliminary research on

these issues. The consultants are

required to (1) identify what

constitutes voting fraud and voter

intimidation affecting Federal

elections; (2) perform background

research, including Federal and Stateby-State administrative and case law

review related to voting fraud and

voter intimidation and a review of

current voting fraud and voter

intimidation activities taking place

with key government agencies and

civic and advocacy organizations; (3)

identify, in consultation with EAC,

and convene a working group of key

individuals and representatives of

organizations knowledgeable about the

topics of voting fraud and voter

intimidation; and (4) write a report

summarizing the key findings,

including suggestions for specific

activities that EAC may undertake to

address these topics. 

Voter Identification

HAVA Section 303(b) mandates that

first-time voters who register by mail

for a Federal election provide proof of

identity before being allowed to cast a

ballot. The law prescribes certain

requirements concerning this section,

but it also leaves considerable

discretion to the States for its

implementation. In 2005, some States

enacted new voter identification

requirements in addition to what is

required for Federal elections,

resulting in many inquiries to EAC

regarding the implications of these
28 U.S. Election Assistance Commission

new State laws. To provide States with

assistance when making decisions

regarding voter identification laws,

EAC issued a contract to research all

the relevant State laws and procedures

relating to voter identification,

produce a related report, and will

make the report available to election

officials before the 2006 elections. 

Provisional Voting 

Provisional voting in Federal elections

was created as a response to people

who believed that they were registered

to vote in 2000 but were turned away

from the polling places because their

names did not appear on the poll lists.

HAVA Section 303(b) mandates that

any eligible voter who appears at the

polls must be given a provisional ballot

if their name does not appear on the

poll list. Provisional voting was not a

new concept for all States, but in those

jurisdictions enacting provisional

voting for the first time, a lot of

confusion surrounded the issue.

Therefore, EAC issued a contract to

research the provisional voting

requirements in each State, U.S.

territory, and the District of

Columbia. EAC will then issue best

practices for implementing this

important HAVA mandate and make

this information available to election

officials before the 2006 elections. 

States’ Acceptance of Provisional Ballots

States where provisional ballots can be cast

anywhere in the voter’s home jurisdiction

States where provisional ballots can be cast only 

in the voter’s home precinct

Note (shown in green): North Dakota has no voter registration and is exempt from offering

provisional ballots in Federal elections. Idaho, Minnesota, and New Hampshire have Election 

Day registration and are also exempt.

Source: EAC’s 2004 Election Day Survey.
Fiscal Year 2005 Annual Report 29

Effective Designs for the

Administration of Federal Elections

Section 302(b) of HAVA requires the

appropriate State or local election

official to publicly post voting

information at each polling place on

the day of each election for Federal

office. Section 241(b) of HAVA

describes ballot designs for elections

for Federal office as one of the

election administration issues to be

periodically studied to promote

effective administration of Federal

elections. Therefore, EAC issued a

contract to develop best practices

regarding the design of ballots and

voter information posted in the

polling place on Election Day. This

effort will also include assistance with

the redesign of the National Mail

Voter Registration Form required by

the National Voter Registration Act to

make it more accessible to all voters in

terms of readability and usability. 

Hispanic Working Group

Section 241 of HAVA allows the EAC

to carry out studies and other activities

with the goal of promoting effective

administration of Federal elections.

Effective administration methods are

to be the most convenient, accessible,

and easy to use for voters, including

voters with limited proficiency with

the English language. Sections 241(b)

(5) and (14) directly refer to

conducting studies to address issues

faced by voters with limited

proficiency in the English language. To

meet these requirements, EAC

convened its first Hispanic Working

Group meeting in August to provide

guidance to the commission as it

focuses on research to address

language barriers to voting as well as

input on the readability and usability

of the National Mail Voter

Registration Form and the updated

List of Translated Election Terms.

After conducting an initial assessment

of these issues, the Working Group

will help the EAC develop a best

practices document containing

methods of effective administration of

Federal elections affecting the

Hispanic and Spanish-speaking

communities. 

Results and findings of all EAC

research projects, best practices, and

guidance will be available to the public

at www.eac.gov.
30 U.S. Election Assistance Commission

The next year will be a pivotal one for

election reform and for the Help

America Vote Act (HAVA). The

deadlines for voting systems to meet

the HAVA Section 301(a)

requirements and for implementing

statewide voter registration lists

expired on January 1, 2006. Some

jurisdictions will need immediate

assistance and guidance to make sure

they are ready for the 2006 general

elections. 

It is estimated that as many as one in

three voters may vote on a new voting

system in 2006. Many will be voting in

new precincts, and thousands of poll

workers and volunteers will have to be

recruited and trained. And, of course,

we must continue the push to get

more young people to vote. 

Managing these challenges will require

a major effort on the part of election

officials. In fiscal year (FY) 2006, the

Election Assistance Commission

(EAC) will make it a priority to help

these public servants successfully

overcome these obstacles by sharing

information, techniques, and best

practices and by developing sound

procedures. 

In 2006, EAC will fulfill its HAVA

research mandates by conducting

research on Free Absentee Ballot

Postage (Section 246) and Internet

Voting (Section 245), as well as

studying the feasibility and advisability

of using Social Security information to

verify voter registration for Federal

elections. (Section 244). 

Certifying Voting Systems

In addition to making sure the Nation

is prepared to vote in 2006, EAC will

focus on establishing the Federal

Government’s first voting system

certification program, which will

provide States with a list of voting

systems to choose from that have gone

through rigorous and exhaustive

testing. 

The EAC recognizes the need for

transparency for the laboratory

accreditation process and activities

related to future iterations of the

Voluntary Voting System Guidelines

(VVSG). The commission will

continue to provide information to the

public about the commission’s progress

in developing both of these programs.

The accreditation of testing

laboratories and the certification of

voting systems are very important

responsibilities, and EAC will

continue working with the National

Institute of Standards and Technology

(NIST) and election officials to ensure

these programs are not interrupted

and are conducted at the highest levels

of proficiency. 

Improving Voting Systems

To ensure that the VVSG keeps pace

with rapidly developing voting

technology, EAC is already working

with the Technical Guidelines

Development Committee (TGDC) and

NIST to develop future iterations of

the guidelines. Research has begun on

Goals for 2006
Fiscal Year 2005 Annual Report 31

wireless technology, software and

hardware testing, identifying more

forms of independent verification,

computer security, usability

benchmarks, and testing protocols for

laboratories. 

Voting system performance and

security issues will also be a top

priority in FY 2006. EAC will collect

voting system malfunction data in the

2006 election cycle to assess issues

regarding the certification and

decertification of voting systems. NIST

and EAC will continue research on

threats to voting systems and how to

prevent these threats. In addition,

both agencies will work to encourage

greater use of the National Software

Reference Library by election officials

to validate their voting system

software. This library has been

designated by EAC as the central

repository for all EAC-certified voting

system software. 

Assistance to States

EAC will issue the results of the

election administration studies

conducted in FY 2005 and conduct

new studies about issues facing

election officials throughout the

country. The results of these studies

will become part of EAC’s

clearinghouse and will be available on

the EAC Web site to both election

officials and the general public.

Commissioners and EAC staff will

continue to conduct briefings for

election officials about HAVA-related

issues. 

EAC will also expand its efforts to

help election officials prepare for the

2006 elections by issuing guidance

regarding election administration,

which will address issues related to all

aspects of conducting an election,

including using new voting

equipment. The 2006 elections will

also be the first time many States use a

statewide voter registration list, and

EAC will be prepared to offer

assistance during this transition.

Another important initiative EAC will

expand upon in 2006 will be sharing

information among election officials

regarding innovative and successful

election administration procedures.

EAC will also continue to provide

regular updates to election officials

and to issue guidance and best

practices documents that reflect their

concerns and inquiries.

Managing HAVA Funds

In FY 2006, EAC’s focus will shift

from distributing HAVA funds to

ensuring that these funds are being

spent in accordance with the law.

EAC’s inspector general will assess

State controls over HAVA funds,

identify high-risk recipients, and

contract for audits within available

funding limits.
32 U.S. Election Assistance Commission

Commissioners’ Bios

Paul DeGregorio was nominated by

President George W. Bush and

confirmed by unanimous consent of

the U.S. Senate on December 9, 2003,

to serve an initial 2-year term on the

U.S. Election Assistance Commission

(EAC). Mr. DeGregorio was elected

Chairman of the EAC for 2006, after

serving as the commission’s Vice

Chairman in 2005.

Mr. DeGregorio is nationally renowned

in the elections field. His areas of

expertise include U.S. election

administration, democracy building,

and international elections. In 2004,

he received the NASS Freedom Award

from the National Association of

Secretaries of State in recognition of

his accomplishments.

As a commissioner, Mr. DeGregorio

has focused his efforts on EAC’s

mandates to review State election

reform plans and distribute $2.3

billion to the States, establish new

voluntary voting system guidelines,

develop best practices in election

administration, provide guidance and

advisories to election officials, and

conduct studies on election reform

issues. All these efforts represented the

first time in U.S. history that the

Federal Government provided such

significant assistance to the States to

improve the conduct of elections and

strengthen the American democracy. 

Prior to his appointment with EAC,

Mr. DeGregorio served as Executive

Vice President and Chief Operating

Officer of the International

Foundation for Election Systems

(IFES), a leading institution involved

in the promotion of democracy

worldwide. He was responsible for the

organization’s day-to-day operation,

overseeing more than 400 employees

in 23 countries. He has provided

technical assistance in election

administration in many countries,

including Russia, Kazakhstan, Moldova,

Ukraine, Romania, Albania, Macedonia,

Bosnia-Herzegovina, China, Slovakia,

Georgia, Cambodia, Thailand, Indonesia,

Sierra Leone, the Democratic Republic

of Congo, Nigeria, and Japan. At IFES,

Mr. DeGregorio also provided leadership

on U.S. election reform initiatives and

led a team that supplied technical

advice in Florida and Missouri during

the November 2002 elections.

From 1985 to 1993, Mr. DeGregorio

served as Director of Elections for St.

Louis County, Missouri’s largest

jurisdiction. During his tenure, he

instituted major improvements in voter

registration, training, accessibility,

counting, and management procedures.

He was recognized for his efforts in

prosecuting voter fraud and drafting

legislation to improve the electoral

process. He served as Co-chair of the

Missouri Election Reform Commission

in 2001.

Paul DeGregorio, Chairman
Fiscal Year 2005 Annual Report 33

A member of the International

Association of Clerks, Recorders,

Election Officials, and Treasurers

(IACREOT) since 1986, during his

tenure as Chairman of the Education

and Training Committee, Mr.

DeGregorio was credited with

initiating the University of Missouri

Chancellor’s Certificate in Public

Administration program for

IACREOT members.

Mr. DeGregorio served for 8 years as

Director of Outreach Development for

the University of Missouri-St. Louis,

where he initiated and had oversight

for four offsite campuses that served

nearly 4,000 students. He also served

as a Research Associate with the

University’s Center for International

Studies. Mr. DeGregorio was a Special

Assistant in President Ronald Reagan’s

administration and served as an

assistant to John Ashcroft during his

first term as Missouri Attorney

General.

Mr. DeGregorio received his degree in

political science from the University of

Missouri-St. Louis. He is married to

Kerry DeGregorio and has four

daughters—Katie (Proffer), Annie,

Debbie, and Emily—as well as son-inlaw Chris Proffer and one

granddaughter, Victoria Ruby Proffer.

Ray Martinez III, Vice Chairman

Ray Martinez III was nominated by

President George W. Bush and

confirmed by unanimous consent of

the U.S. Senate on December 9, 2003,

to serve a 4-year term on the U.S.

Election Assistance Commission

(EAC). Mr. Martinez was elected Vice

Chairman of the EAC for 2006. Prior

to his appointment to the EAC, Mr.

Martinez practiced law in Austin, TX,

with a focus on legislative and

regulatory matters and a client base

consisting primarily of county

governments and related public sector

associations. 

Mr. Martinez began his law practice

after serving as Deputy Assistant to

the President for Intergovernmental

Affairs at the White House. In this

position, he was responsible for

assisting former President Bill Clinton

with various policy issues affecting

State and local jurisdictions. In

addition, while on the White House

staff, Mr. Martinez assisted with the

development of long-term strategies to

stimulate economic growth along the

United States-Mexico border region

and the establishment of the U.S.-

Mexico Border Health Commission.

Before serving as Deputy Assistant to

the President, Mr. Martinez served as

Regional Director for the U.S.

Department of Health and Human

Services in Dallas, where he focused

agency resources on public health

issues such as full implementation of

the Children’s Health Insurance

Program. His Federal Government

service began in 1993, when he was
34 U.S. Election Assistance Commission

appointed White House Liaison to the

U.S. Department of Health and

Human Services and later as Special

Assistant to the President in the

White House Office of Political

Affairs. Prior to his service in the

Federal Government, Mr. Martinez

worked as a legislative liaison for the

Texas Attorney General’s office. 

Recommended to his current position

by former Senate Majority Leader Tom

Daschle, Mr. Martinez has promoted

transparency and access in the voting

process during his term on the EAC.

He has lectured at law schools,

continuing legal education forums,

and major universities and spoken at

numerous election administration

conferences and symposiums

throughout the country. Mr. Martinez

places particular importance on

building partnerships with State and

local governments, public interest

organizations, and other key

stakeholders in striving to improve the

process by which America votes. 

A native of Alice, TX, Mr. Martinez

received his law degree from the

University of Houston Law Center

and his bachelor’s degree from

Southwestern University. He is

married to Beth Stanley Martinez, a

clinical social worker, and they are the

parents of two children—Sofia Grace

and Lorenzo Elder. They currently

reside in Arlington, VA.

Donetta Davidson was nominated by

President George W. Bush and

confirmed by unanimous consent of

the U.S. Senate on July 28, 2005, to

serve on the U.S. Election Assistance

Commission (EAC). Her term of

service extends through December 12,

2007. Ms. Davidson, formerly

Colorado’s Secretary of State, comes

to EAC with experience in almost

every area of election administration—

everything from County Clerk to

Secretary of State. 

Ms. Davidson began her career in

election administration when she was

elected in 1978 as the Bent County

clerk and recorder in Las Animas, CO,

a position she held until 1986. Later

that year, she was appointed director

of elections for the Colorado

Department of State, where she

supervised county clerks in all election

matters and assisted with recall issues

for municipal, special district, and

school district elections. 

In 1994, she was elected Arapahoe

County Clerk and Recorder and was

reelected to a second term in 1998.

The next year, Colorado Governor Bill

Owens appointed Ms. Davidson as the

Colorado Secretary of State, and she

was elected in 2000 and reelected in

2002 for a 4-year term.

She has served on the Federal Election

Commission Advisory Panel and the

Donetta Davidson
Fiscal Year 2005 Annual Report 35

board of directors of the Help America

Vote Foundation. In 2005, Ms.

Davidson was elected President of the

National Association of Secretaries of

State, and she is the former President

of the National Association of State

Elections Directors (NASED). Prior to

her EAC appointment, Ms. Davidson

served on EAC’s Technical Guidelines

Development Committee (TGDC). 

In 2005, Government Technology

magazine named Ms. Davidson one of

its “Top 25: Dreamers, Doers, and

Drivers” in recognition of her

innovative approach to improve

government services. She was also the

1993 recipient of the Henry Toll

Fellowship of Council of State

Governments.

Ms. Davidson has devoted much of

her professional life to election

administration, but her first love is her

family. Ms. Davidson was born into a

military family in Liberal, KS, and

became a Coloradoan shortly

thereafter when her family moved first

to Two Buttes then to Las Animas

where they settled. Whenever possible

Ms. Davidson spends time with her

family, son Todd, daughter and son-inlaw Trudie and Todd Berich, and

granddaughters Brittany and Nicole. 

Gracia Hillman was nominated by

President George W. Bush and

confirmed by unanimous consent of

the U.S. Senate on December 9, 2003,

to serve an initial 2-year term on the

U.S. Election Assistance Commission

(EAC). Ms. Hillman served as Chair of

the EAC in 2005, after serving as the

commission’s first Vice Chair in 2004.

A Massachusetts native who first

entered community service in 1970,

Ms. Hillman has effectively handled

both domestic and international issues

throughout her career. Her areas of

expertise include nonprofit

management, public policy and

program development, and the interests

and rights of women and minorities,

including voting rights. She has

traveled extensively throughout the

United States, meeting with national

and local groups and businesses.

Through her international work, Ms.

Hillman has traveled in Africa, Asia,

the Caribbean, and Europe. She

conducted nonpartisan political

training in Haiti and Kenya and

participated in United Nationssponsored conferences in Vienna,

Beijing, and New York City.

Prior to her appointment with EAC,

Ms. Hillman served as President and

Chief Executive Officer of WorldSpace

Foundation, a nonprofit organization

that uses digital satellite technology to

deliver educational programming to

Africa and Asia. She also served as the

U.S. Department of State’s first Senior

Coordinator for International Women’s

Issues, developing agency-wide strategies

to ensure U.S. foreign policy promoted

and protected women’s rights. 

Gracia Hillman
36 U.S. Election Assistance Commission

Her work experience includes having

served as Executive Director of the

League of Women Voters of the

United States, the Congressional Black

Caucus Foundation, and the National

Coalition on Black Voter

Participation. She also held positions

as Executive Consultant to the

Council on Foundations and

Coordinator of the Voter Law Policy

Project for the Joint Center for

Political and Economic Studies.

Throughout the 1980s, Ms. Hillman

championed nonpartisan and

bipartisan efforts to ensure open

access to the voting process for all

citizens and the continued voting

rights of minority Americans,

including work on the historic 25-year

extension of the National Voting

Rights Act. Her political experience

includes paid and volunteer positions

on numerous campaigns, including a

role as Senior Advisor on

Congressional and Constituent

Relations for the 1988 Dukakis for

President Campaign.

Ms. Hillman has one son and

currently resides in Washington, DC.
Fiscal Year 2005 Annual Report 37

Executive Director’s Bio

Tom Wilkey thought he had

successfully retired when he stepped

down as the Executive Director of the

New York State Board of Elections in

2003. After all, he had observed his

34th year in election administration,

working on everything from counting

ballots to developing voting system

standards to working to craft the most

sweeping election reform in our

nation's history.

Mr. Wilkey was the perfect candidate

to become the first Executive Director

of the U.S. Election Commission

(EAC), the new Federal entity created

by the law he helped craft, the Help

America Vote Act (HAVA) of 2002.

After his brief career as an elementary

school teacher, Mr. Wilkey joined the

Erie County Board of Elections

(Buffalo, NY) in November 1968 as an

elections clerk. He subsequently rose

to the position of Senior Election

Deputy prior to joining the New York

State Board of Elections in 1979 as

Public Information Officer.

In 1985, Mr. Wilkey was promoted to

the newly created position of Director

of Election Operations, which was

formed to administer oversight of New

York's 57 county boards. His new

duties included personal visits to those

county boards, thus enabling him to

see first hand the dynamics of New

York's network of diverse local election

offices. Criss-crossing the State to

review jurisdictions serving the smallest

constituency (4,400) and the largest

(3.3 million), Mr. Wilkey shared his

problem-resolution skills and expertise

at each opportunity. His responsibilities

soon grew to include the creation and

supervision of New York's voting

systems certification program.

Mr. Wilkey was appointed the second

Executive Director of the New York

State Board of Elections in June 1992,

a position he held until August 2003.

Mr. Wilkey was associated with the

Federal Election Commission (FEC)

for many years. In 1983, he served on

the Voting System Standards Committee,

which drafted and reviewed the FEC's

Voting System Standards, a voluntary

testing, qualification, and certification

process used for all voting systems in

the United States.

In 1992, Mr. Wilkey was appointed to

the FEC's Advisory Panel, which

consisted of 20 State, county, and

local election administrators. It

advised the FEC on clearinghouse

projects and allocation of funds for

election administration projects.

During 1983, Mr. Wilkey and a small

group of election administrators from

throughout the country pushed for the

creation of the International Center

on Election Law. Today, the Center

represents more than 1,000 foreign,

State, county, and local election

Thomas Wilkey
38 U.S. Election Assistance Commission

officials. His involvement led to his

appointment as Chair of the Center's

Professional Development Committee,

which now runs the first universitybased professional development

program for election officials. In 1995,

Mr. Wilkey was recognized for his

service by his appointment to the

Board of Directors of the Center.

An early proponent of the creation of

The National Association of State

Election Directors (NASED), Mr.

Wilkey has served as its Secretary,

Treasurer, and Vice President and was

elected President for 1996-97. In

January 1997, Mr. Wilkey was named

Chair of NASED's Independent Test

authority Accreditation Board, which

reviews and approves laboratories and

technical groups for the testing of voting

systems under NASED's national

accreditation program. He was

reappointed as Chair in February 2000.

An early and active promoter of the

National Voter Registration Act

(NVRA), Mr. Wilkey has served as

Chair of the NVRA Committee of

NASED and as a member of the FEC

Ad Hoc Discussion Group for NVRA.

In 1998, the Office of the Secretary of

Defense's Federal Voting Assistance

Program named Mr. Wilkey to its State

and Local Alliance Board. The board

advises the Federal Voting Assistance

Program about ongoing programs to

support and facilitate absentee voting

requirements for military and overseas

voters.

Following the 2000 general election,

Mr. Wilkey was named to several

national commissions to study election

reform, including those representing

the National Association of Secretaries

of State, National Association of

Counties, Council of State Governments,

and the election Center. Beginning in

May 2001, Mr. Wilkey was asked by

the FEC to help draft revised Federal

Voting System Standards, due for

completion in April 2002. In addition,

Mr. Wilkey was actively involved with

the development of the Help America

Vote Act of 2002, which Congress

passed and the President signed into

law in October 2002.
Fiscal Year 2005 Annual Report 39

EAC Board of Advisors

Appointed by First Name Last Name Title City State

National Conference of State Legislatures Sheldon Silver Speaker, New York Assembly Albany NY

National Conference of State Legislatures Christopher Rants Iowa Speaker of the House Des Moines IA

National Governors Association Chris Nelson Secretary of State Pierre SD

National Governors Association Mary E. Herrera County Clerk Albuquerque NM

National Association of Secretaries of State Sam Reed Secretary of State Olympia WANational Association of Secretaries of State Rebecca Vigil-Giron Secretary of State Santa Fe NM

The National Association of State Election Directors Christopher Thomas Director of Elections, State of Michigan Lansing MI

The National Association of State Election Directors Linda H. Lamone Administrator of Elections Annapolis MD

National Association of Counties Wendy Noren Boone County Clerk Columbia MO

National Association of Counties Helen Purcell Maricopa County Recorder Phoenix AZ

National Association of County Recorders, Beverly Kaufman Harris County Clerk Houston TX

Election Officials and ClerksNational Association of County Recorders, David Orr Cook County Clerk Chicago IL

Election Officials and ClerksU.S. Commission on Civil Rights Abigail Thernstrom Vice Chair, Lexington MS

U.S. Commission on Civil Rights

U.S. Commission on Civil Rights Ashley Taylor Commissioner, Richmond VA

U.S. Commission on Civil Rights

Election Center Doug Lewis Executive Director, The Election Center Houston TX

Election Center Ernie Hawkins Former Registrar of Voters, Elk Grove CA

Sacramento County

United States Conference of Mayors TBAUnited States Conference of Mayors TBAInternational Association of Clerks, Recorders, Tony J. Sirvello, III IACREOT Executive Director Houston TX

Election Officials, and TreasurersInternational Association of Clerks, Recorders, Sharon Turner Buie Director of Elections, Kansas City (MO) Kansas City MOElection Officials, and Treasurers Board of Election CommissionersArchitectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board James R. Harding U.S. Access Board Member Tallahassee FL

Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board James Elekes U.S. Access Board Member North Plainfield NJ

Chief, Public Integrity Section, Criminal Division, Noel Hillman Chief, Public Integrity Section, Criminal Washington DC

U.S. Department of Justice Division, U.S. Department of Justice

Chief, Voting Section, Civil Rights Division, VACANTU.S. Department of Justice
40 U.S. Election Assistance Commission EAC Board of Advisors (continued) Appointed By First Name Last Name

Title City State

Director, Federal 

Voting Assistance Program, Polli Brunelli Director, Federal 

Voting Assistance Program,

Washington DC

U.S. Department of Defense

U.S. Department of Defense

House Speaker J.C. Watts Former Member of Congress from Oklahoma

Washington DC

House Minority Leader Douglas Palmer Mayor of 

Trenton, NJ 

Trenton NJ

Senate Majority Leader

Wesley R. Kliner, Jr. Tennessee State Election Commissioner McDonald TN

Senate Minority Leader Thomas H. Short Bull President, Oglala Lakota College

Kyle SD

House Administration—Chair Jim Carnes Deputy Director, Ohio Department St. Clairesville OH

of Natural Resources

House Administration—Chair

Keith Cunningham Director, Allen County Board of Elections Lima OH

House Administration—Ranking Minority Member Joseph F. Crangle Attorney, Colucci & Gallaher, P.C. Buffalo NY

House Administration—Ranking Minority Member Hilary O. Shelton Director, Washington Bureau, NAACP

Washington DC

Senate Rules and Administration—Chair Sue Sautermeister Ridgeland Municipal Election Commissioner Ridgeland MS

and Madison County Election Commissioner

Senate Rules and Administration—Chair

Tamara Somerville Independent Consultant/Lobbyist

Washington DC

Senate Rules and Administration—Ranking Minority Member James C. Dickson

V.P. for Governmental Affairs, American

Washington DC

Association of People With Disabilities

Senate Rules and Administration—Ranking Minority Member Robin Carnahan Secretary of State Jefferson City MO

The following officials served in fiscal year 2005: Minnesota Secretary of State Mary Kiffmeyer; former Colorado Secretary of State and current EAC commissioner Donetta Davidson; former

NASED member and current EAC Executive Director Tom Wilkey; former Speaker of the Missouri House of Representatives Catherine Hana

way; former Counsel to the Assistant Attorney General,

U.S. Department of Justice Hans von Spakovsky; and U.S. Commission on Civil Rights Commissioners Francis Guess and Victoria Wilson.
Fiscal Year 2005 Annual Report 41

EAC Standards Board

State Designee First Name Last Name Title City State

Alabama State Nancy L. Worley Secretary of State Montgomery AL 

Alabama Local Luke Cooley Probate Judge, Houston County Dothan AL Alaska State Laura A. Glaiser Director, Division of Elections, State of Alaska Juneau AK 

Alaska Local Shelly Growden Regional Supervisor (Region III), Division of Elections, State of Alaska Fairbanks AK 

American Samoa State Soliai T. Fuimaono Chief Election Officer Pago Pago AS American Samoa Local Filivaa M. Mageo Election Administrator Pago Pago AS Arizona State Kevin Tyne Deputy Secretary of State Phoenix AZ 

Arizona Local Mitch Etter Assistant Elections Director Phoenix AZ 

Arkansas State Charlie Daniels Secretary of State Little Rock AR Arkansas Local Mary Lou Slinkard Benton County Clerk Bentonville AR California State Bradley J. Clark Assistant Secretary of State Sacramento CA California Local Conny McCormack Los Angeles County Registrar of Voters Los Angeles CA Colorado State VACANT CO Colorado Local Russ G. Ragsdale City and County of Broomfield Clerk and Recorder Broomfield CO Connecticut State Michael Kozik Managing Attorney, Legislation and Elections Administration Division Hartford CTConnecticut Local Sandra Hutton Municipal Town Clerk Middeltown CT Delaware State Frank B. Calio Commissioner of Elections Dover DE 

Delaware Local Howard G. Sholl, Jr. Deputy Administrative Director, Dept. of Elections for New Castle County Wilmington DE 

District of Columbia State Alice P. Miller Executive Director, DC Board of Elections and Ethics Washington DC District of Columbia Local Jonda McFarlane Former Board Member, DC Board of Elections and Ethics Washington DCFlorida State Dawn K. Roberts Director, Division of Elections Tallahassee FL 

Florida Local Bill Cowles Supervisor of Elections, Orange County Orlando FL 

Georgia State Kathy Rogers Director of Election Administrations Atlanta GA Georgia Local Lynn Bailey Executive Director, Richmond County Board of Elections Augusta GA Guam State Gerald A. Taitano Executive Director, Guam Election Commission Hagatna GU 

Guam Local VACANT GU Hawaii State Scott Nago Section Head, Counting Center Operations Honolulu HI 

Hawaii Local Glen Takahashi Election Administrator, City and County of Honolulu Honolulu HI 

Idaho State Timothy A. Hurst Chief Deputy, Secretary of State Boise ID 

Idaho Local Dan English Kootenai County Clerk Coeur d'Alene ID 
42 U.S. Election Assistance Commission EAC Standards Board (continued) State Designee First Name Last Name Title City State Illinois State Daniel W. White Executive Director, State Board of Elections Springfield IL Illinois Local Richard Cowen Chicago Board of Election Commissioners Chicago IL Indiana State Todd Rokita Secretary of State Indianapolis IN Indiana Local Lynne Spevak LaPorte County Clerk LaPorte IN Iowa State Chet Culver Iowa Secretary of State Des Moines IA Iowa Local Renee McClellan Hardin County Auditor Eldora IA Kansas State Ron Thornburgh Secretary of State Topeka KS Kansas Local Donald Merriman Saline County Clerk Salina KS Kentucky State Sarah Ball Johnson Executive Director, State Board of Elections Frankfort KY Kentucky Local Don Blevins Fayette County Clerk Lexington KY Louisiana State Merietta Norton General Counsel, Louisiana Department of State Baton Rouge LA Spencer

Louisiana Local Louie Bernard Clerk of Court, Natchitoches Parish Natchitoches LA 

Maine State Julie L. Flynn Deputy Secretary of State Augusta ME Maine Local VACANT ME 

Maryland State Linda H. Lamone Administrator of Elections Annapolis MD Maryland Local Kim A. Atkins Voter Registration Manager, Harford County Board of Elections Bel Air MD 

Massachusetts State William Galvin Secretary of the Commonwealth Boston MA 

Francis

Massachusetts Local William Campbell City Clerk, City of Woburn Woburn MA 

Michigan State Susan McRill Manager, Election Liaison Division, Bureau of Elections, Department of State Lansing MI

Michigan Local Tonni Bartholomew Troy City Clerk Troy MI Minnesota State Mary Kiffmeyer Secretary of State St. Paul MN 

Minnesota Local Sharon K. Anderson Cass County Auditor-Treasurer Walker MN Mississippi State Jay Eads Assistant Secretary of State Jackson MS 

Mississippi Local Marilyn Avery Election Commissioner, Hinds County Jackson MS 

Missouri State Leslye Winslow Deputy Secretary of State Jefferson City MO 

Missouri Local Richard T. Struckhoff County Clerk, Greene County Springfield MO 

Montana State Elaine Gravely Deputy Secretary of State for Elections Helena MT

Montana Local Vickie Zeier Missoula County Clerk and Recorder / Treasurer Missoula MT 

Nebraska State John Gale Secretary of State Lincoln NE 

Nebraska Local Robert Zoucha Boone County Clerk Albion NE
Fiscal Year 2005 Annual Report 43

EAC Standards Board (continued)

State Designee First Name Last Name Title City State

Nevada State Dean Heller Secretary of State Carson City NV 

Nevada Local Harvard L. Lomax Clark County Registrar of Voters North Las Vegas NV 

New Hampshire State Anthony Stevens Assistant Secretary of State Concord NH

New Hampshire Local Carol Johnson Deputy City Clerk Manchester NH

New Jersey State Markus Green Deputy Chief of Staff, Office of the Attorney General Trenton NJNew Jersey Local Joanne Armbruster Atlantic County Superintendent of Elections Atlantic City NJ New Mexico State Rebecca Vigil-Giron Secretary of State Santa Fe NM 

New Mexico Local David Kunko Chaues County Clerk Roswell NM 

New York State John Haggerty, Jr. Deputy Executive Director, Task Force on Election Modernization Forest Hills NY New York Local Edward J. Szczesniak Onondaga County Commissioner of Elections Syracuse NY 

North Carolina State Johnnie F. McLean Deputy Director Raleigh NC 

North Carolina Local Kathie Cooper Director of Elections, Forsyth County Winston-Salem NC 

Chastain

North Dakota State I. James Silrum Deputy Secretary of State Bismarck ND 

North Dakota Local Michael M. Montplaisir County Auditor Fargo ND 

Ohio State J. Kenneth Blackwell Secretary of State Columbus OH Ohio Local VACANT OH Oklahoma State VACANT OK Oklahoma Local Clint Parr Vice Chairman, Tulsa County Election Board Tulsa OK 

Oregon State John Lindback Director, State of Oregon Elections Division Salem OR 

Oregon Local John Kauffman Director, Multnomah County Elections Portland OR

Pennsylvania State Pedro A. Cortes Secretary of the Commonwealth Harrisburg PA 

Pennsylvania Local Regis Young Butler County Election Director Butler PA Puerto Rico State Nestor J. Colón First Vice President, State Elections Commission San Juan PR 

Berlingeri

Puerto Rico Local Juan M. Toledo-Diaz Second Vice President, State Elections Commission San Juan PR 

Rhode Island State Jan Ruggiero Director of Elections Providence RI Rhode Island Local Marian Clarke Chair, Town of Jamestown Board of Canvassers Jamestown RI 

South Carolina State Marci Andino Executive Director, State Election Commission Columbia SC 

South Carolina Local Marilyn Bowers Director, Pickens County Registration and Elections Pickens SC 

South Dakota State Kea Warne State Election Supervisor Pierre SD 

South Dakota Local Sue Roust Minnehaha County Auditor Sioux Falls SD 
44 U.S. Election Assistance Commission EAC Standards Board (continued) State Designee First Name Last Name Title City State Tennessee State Brook Thompson State Coordinator of Elections Nashville TN Tennessee Local Joe Enoch Dyer County Election Commissioner Dyersburg TN Texas State Roger Williams Secretary of State Austin TX Texas Local Dana DeBeauvoir Travis County Clerk Austin TX Utah State Michael Cragun Director of Elections, Lt. Governors Office Salt Lake City UT Utah Local Dennis Ewing Tooele County Clerk Tooele UT Vermont State Deborah L. Markowitz Secretary of State Montpelier VT Vermont Local Annette L. Cappy Town Clerk, Town of Brattleboro Brattleboro VT Virginia State Jean R. Jensen Secretary, State Board of Elections Richmond VA Virginia Local Allen Harrison, Jr. Vice Chair, Arlington County Electoral Board Arlington VA U.S. Virgin Islands State Corinne Plaskett State Election Official St. Croix VI Halyard

U.S. Virgin Islands Local Natalie Thomas Local Election Official St. Thomas VI

Washington State Nick Handy Director of Elections Olympia WA 

Washington Local Bob Terwilliger Snohomish County Auditor Everett WA 

West Virginia State Benjamin R. Beakes Chief of Staff, Secretary of State's Office Charleston WV West Virginia Local Gary W. Williams Clerk of the Boone County Commission Buckhannon WV Wisconsin State Kevin J. Kennedy Executive Director, State Elections Board Madison WI Wisconsin Local Sandi Wesolowski City of Franklin Clerk Franklin WI 

Wyoming State Peggy Nighswonger State Elections Director Cheyenne WY Wyoming Local Julie Freese Fremont County Clerk Lander WY

The following officials served in fiscal year 2005: Arizona Secretary of State Jan Brewer; former California Secretary of State Kevin Shelley; former Colorado Secretary of State and current EAC

Commissioner Donetta Davidson; Connecticut Secretary of State Susan Bysiewicz; New Haven, CT, Registrar of Voters Rae Tramontano; Kennebunk, ME, Town Clerk Ethelyn S. Marthia; Michigan

Secretary of State Terri Lynn Land; Anoka, MN, Elections and License Bureau Supervisor Gary Poser; Mississippi Secretary of State Eric Clark; General Counsel for the Missouri Secretary of

State Terry M. Jarrett; DeKalb County, MO, County Clerk Mary Berry; former Montana Secretary of State Bob Brown; New Hampshire Secretary of State William Gardner; Town Moderator of

Auburn, NH, C. Donald Stritch; former New Jersey Attorney General Peter C. Harvey; former Director of the Mahoning County, OH, Board of Elections Michael Sciortino; Darlington County, SC,Director of Registration and Elections Hoyt Campbell; former Texas Secretary of State Geoffrey S. Connor; former Utah Director of Elections Amy Naccarato; from the West Virginia Secretary ofState's office, Cindy Smith; and Upshur County, WV, Clerk Debbie Wilfong.
Fiscal Year 2005 Annual Report 45

EAC Technical Guidelines Development Committee

Appointed by First Name Last Name Title City State

Director of NIST Dr. William A. Jeffrey Director of the National Institute of Standards and Technology Gaithersburg MDCommittee ChairStandards Board John A. Gale Nebraska Secretary of State Lincoln NE

Standards Board Alice Miller Director of Elections, District of Columbia Washington DC

Board of Advisors Sharon Turner-Buie Director of Elections, Kansas City Kansas City MOBoard of Advisors Helen Purcell Maricopa County, AZ Recorder Phoenix AZ

Access Board James R. Harding Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board Tallahassee FLAccess Board James Elekes Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board North Plainfield NJ

ANSI David Karmol Vice President of Public Policy and Governmental Affairs, Washington DC

American National Standards Institute

IEEE H. Stephen Berger TEM Consulting, LP—Chair, IEEE SEC 38 (Voting Syst. Stds.), Georgetown TX

Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers

NASED Dr. Britain Williams Retired professor, Kennesaw State, University of Georgia Tucker GA

NASED Paul Craft Florida Department of State, Voting Systems Division Tallahassee FLEAC/NIST Dr. Ronald Rivest Professor, MIT, Dept. of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science Cambridge MAEAC/NIST Dr. Daniel Schutzer Director and SVP, Enterprise Technology Office, Citigroup New York NYEAC/NIST Patrick Gannon President & CEO, OASIS Billerica MAEAC/NIST Whitney Quesenbery President, Usability Professionals' Association High Bridge NJ

The following officials served in fiscal year 2005: Committee Chair Arden L. Bennett, Jr., Director of NIST; Committee Chair Dr. Hratch Semerjian, former Acting Director of NIST; former Colorado

Secretary of State and current EAC Commissioner Donetta Davidson; and Ann Caldas, ANSI Director of Procedures and Standards Administration.

ANSI = American National Standards Institute.IEEE = Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers.

MIT = Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

NASED = The National Association of State Election Directors.NIST = National Institute of Standards and Technology.
EAC Commissioners

Chairman Paul DeGregorio

Vice Chairman Ray Martinez III

Commissioner Donetta Davidson

Commissioner Gracia Hillman 

EAC Staff

Tom Wilkey, Executive Director

Juliet Thompson, General Counsel 

U.S. Election Assistance Commission

1225 New York Avenue, NW

Suite 1100

Washington, DC 20005

866–747–1471 (toll free)

HAVAinfo@eac.gov 

www.eac.gov 

U.S. Election Assistance Commission