U.S. Election Assistance Commission 

633 3rd St. NW, Suite 200 

Washington, DC 20001 

BEFORE THE ELECTION ASSISTANCE COMMISSION 

In the Matter of: ) 

) 

Adopting the Recommendation on the ) 

Allowability of Funds to Counter AI-generated ) 

Election Disinformation Under EAC Policy ) 

Regarding Authority to Issue Funding Decision ) 

on Use of HAVA Funds ) 

CERTIFICATION 

I, Christy McCormick, Chairwoman of the Election Assistance Commission, do hereby 

certify that on February 14, 2024 the Commission decided by a vote of 4-0 the following 

action(s): 

1. 

The Commission has adopted the Recommendation on the Allowability of Funds to 

Counter AI-generated Election Disinformation Under EAC Policy Regarding Authority 

to Issue Funding Decision on Use of HAVA Funds. This vote confirms that states may 

use HAVA Election Security Grant Funds to counter foreign influence in elections, 

election disinformation, and potential manipulation of information on voting systems 

and/or voting procedures disseminated and amplified by AI technologies as an allowable 

cost under HAVA Sec. 101(b)(1)(B). Additionally, states may fund voter education and 

trusted information communications on correct voting procedures, voting rights, and 

voting technology to counter AI-generated disinformation under HAVA Sec. 

101(b)(1)(C). 

Commissioners McCormick, Hovland, Palmer, and Hicks approved the recommendation. 

Attest: 

2/14/2024

Date Christy McCormick 

Chairwoman 
 

 

 

 

 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

________________________________________________________________ 

U.S. Election Assistance Commission 

633 3rd St. NW, Suite 200 

Washington, DC 20001 

TALLY VOTE MATTER 

DATE & TIME OF TRANSMITTAL: Tuesday, February 13, 2024, at 12:00 PM 

BALLOT DEADLINE: Thursday, February 15, 2024, at 12:00 PM 

COMMISSIONERS: McCormick, Hovland, Palmer, and Hicks 

SUBJECT: Approving the Recommendation on the Allowability of Funds to Counter 

AI-generated Election Disinformation Under EAC Policy Regarding 

Authority to Issue Funding Decision on Use of HAVA Funds Confirming 

that Election Security Grant Funds May be Used to Counter Foreign 

Influence in Elections, Election Disinformation, and Potential 

Manipulation of Information on Voting Systems and/or Voting Procedures 

Disseminated and Amplified by AI Technologies 

COMMENTS: ____________________________________________________ 

( ) I am recused from voting. 

( ) I object to the recommendation. 

( ) I disapprove the recommendation. 

)( 

2/14/2024

I approve the recommendation. 

DATE: ________________ SIGNATURE: __________________________ 

A definite vote is required. All ballots must be signed and dated. Please return ONLY 

THE BALLOT to the Office of General Counsel. Please return the ballot no later than 

date and time shown above. 

From: Camden Kelliher, EAC Acting General Counsel 
 

 

 

 

 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

________________________________________________________________ 

U.S. Election Assistance Commission 

633 3rd St. NW, Suite 200 

Washington, DC 20001 

TALLY VOTE MATTER 

DATE & TIME OF TRANSMITTAL: Tuesday, February 13, 2024, at 12:00 PM 

BALLOT DEADLINE: Thursday, February 15, 2024, at 12:00 PM 

COMMISSIONERS: McCormick, Hovland, Palmer, and Hicks 

SUBJECT: Approving the Recommendation on the Allowability of Funds to Counter 

AI-generated Election Disinformation Under EAC Policy Regarding 

Authority to Issue Funding Decision on Use of HAVA Funds Confirming 

that Election Security Grant Funds May be Used to Counter Foreign 

Influence in Elections, Election Disinformation, and Potential 

Manipulation of Information on Voting Systems and/or Voting Procedures 

Disseminated and Amplified by AI Technologies 

COMMENTS: ____________________________________________________ 

( ) I am recused from voting. 

( ) I object to the recommendation. 

( ) I disapprove the recommendation. 

)( 

2/13/2024

I approve the recommendation

DATE: ________________ SIGNATURE: __________________________ 

. 

A definite vote is required. All ballots must be signed and dated. Please return ONLY 

THE BALLOT to the Office of General Counsel. Please return the ballot no later than 

date and time shown above. 

From: Camden Kelliher, EAC Acting General Counsel 
Don L Palmer

________________________________________________________________ 

________________________________________________________________ 

U.S. Election Assistance Commission 

633 3rd St. NW, Suite 200 

Washington, DC 20001 

TALLY VOTE MATTER 

DATE & TIME OF TRANSMITTAL: Tuesday, February 13, 2024, at 12:00 PM 

BALLOT DEADLINE: Thursday, February 15, 2024, at 12:00 PM 

COMMISSIONERS: McCormick, Hovland, Palmer, and Hicks 

SUBJECT: Approving the Recommendation on the Allowability of Funds to Counter 

AI-generated Election Disinformation Under EAC Policy Regarding 

Authority to Issue Funding Decision on Use of HAVA Funds Confirming 

that Election Security Grant Funds May be Used to Counter Foreign 

Influence in Elections, Election Disinformation, and Potential 

Manipulation of Information on Voting Systems and/or Voting Procedures 

Disseminated and Amplified by AI Technologies 

( x) I approve the recommendation. 

( ) I disapprove the recommendation. 

( ) I object to the recommendation. 

( ) I am recused from voting. 

COMMENTS: ____________________________________________________ 

DATE: 2.13.24 SIGNATURE: 

A definite vote is required. All ballots must be signed and dated. Please return ONLY 

THE BALLOT to the Office of General Counsel. Please return the ballot no later than 

date and time shown above. 

From: Camden Kelliher, EAC Acting General Counsel 
 

 

 

 

 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

________________________________________________________________ 

U.S. Election Assistance Commission 

633 3rd St. NW, Suite 200 

Washington, DC 20001 

TALLY VOTE MATTER 

DATE & TIME OF TRANSMITTAL: Tuesday, February 13, 2024, at 12:00 PM 

BALLOT DEADLINE: Thursday, February 15, 2024, at 12:00 PM 

COMMISSIONERS: McCormick, Hovland, Palmer, and Hicks 

SUBJECT: Approving the Recommendation on the Allowability of Funds to Counter 

AI-generated Election Disinformation Under EAC Policy Regarding 

Authority to Issue Funding Decision on Use of HAVA Funds Confirming 

that Election Security Grant Funds May be Used to Counter Foreign 

Influence in Elections, Election Disinformation, and Potential 

Manipulation of Information on Voting Systems and/or Voting Procedures 

Disseminated and Amplified by AI Technologies 

COMMENTS: ____________________________________________________ 

( ) I am recused from voting. 

( ) I object to the recommendation. 

( ) I disapprove the recommendation. 

)( 

2/13/2024

I approve the recommendation

DATE: ________________ SIGNATURE: __________________________ 

. 

A definite vote is required. All ballots must be signed and dated. Please return ONLY 

THE BALLOT to the Office of General Counsel. Please return the ballot no later than 

date and time shown above. 

From: Camden Kelliher, EAC Acting General Counsel 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

U.S. Election Assistance Commission 

633 3rd St. NW, Suite 200 

Washington, DC 20001 

MEMORANDUM 

TO: Commissioners McCormick, Hovland, Palmer, and Hicks 

FROM: Camden Kelliher, EAC Acting General Counsel 

DATE: February 13, 2024 

RE: Allowability of Funds to Counter Election Disinformation Generated by Artificial 

Intelligence Under EAC Policy Regarding Authority to Issue Funding Decision 

on Use of HAVA Funds 

BACKGROUND 

In 2015 the Commission adopted the, “Policy Regarding Authority to Issue Funding Decision on 

Use of HAVA Funds” (Funding Decision Policy). The Funding Decision Policy replaced the 

Advisory Opinion Process originally adopted by the EAC on April 16, 2008. The Funding 

Decision Policy explains that the Commissioners may consider any request related to questions 

of law and factual issues related to HAVA when: 

(1) The legal issue is novel, complex and pertains to an unsettled question of law or 

interpretation of the HAVA statute; or 

(2) The issue relates to an expenditure of HAVA funds that has not been previously 

addressed by OMB, the grant provisions or the EAC and for which it is determined to 

have significant policy implications for the implementation of HAVA; or 

(3) There has been intervening legislation, rulemaking, or litigation since the EAC last 

considered the issue; or 

(4) The request is contrary to or otherwise inconsistent with prior EAC matters dealing 

with the same issue. 

The EAC Office of General Counsel, in consultation with the Commissioners, shall determine 

the eligibility of questions presented under these four categories. 

QUESTION PRESENTED 

The EAC Office of General Counsel has concluded that there is currently a question before the 

agency, appropriately presented United States Senators Amy Klobuchar and Susan M. Collins, 

that is ripe for review under the Funding Decision Policy. That question is summarized as 

follows: 

Can HAVA Election Security Grants be used to counter election disinformation 

generated by Artificial Intelligence (AI) technologies? 

RECOMMENDATION 
 

 

Under the Policy Regarding Authority to Issue Funding Decision on Use of HAVA Funds, the 

EAC Commissioners should consider whether a state may use Election Security Funds to counter 

election disinformation generated by AI. As documented in the supporting memorandum 

provided by the Office of General Counsel, there are important policy considerations involved in 

this determination. This is highlighted by the changing election administration landscape and the 

growing threat of election disinformation. 

Because the EAC has discretion over what constitutes an “improvement”, I recommend that the 

Commission consider expenditures to counter foreign influence in elections, election 

disinformation, and potential manipulation of information on voting systems and/or voting 

procedures disseminated and amplified by AI technologies as an allowable cost under HAVA 

Sec. 101(b)(1)(B). Additionally, because HAVA Sec. 101(b)(1)(C) allows for voter education, I 

recommend that the Commission consider expenditures to fund voter education and trusted 

information communications on correct voting procedures, voting rights, and voting technology 

to counter AI-generated election disinformation as allowable. 

Attachment. 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

U.S. ELECTION ASSISTANCE COMMISSION 

633 3rd St. NW, Suite 200 

Washington, DC 20001 

M E M O R A N D U M 

TO: EAC Commissioners McCormick, Hovland, Palmer, and Hicks 

FROM: Camden Kelliher, EAC Acting General Counsel 

DATE: February 13, 2024 

RE: Guidance on the Use of HAVA Funds as it Relates to Countering Election 

Disinformation Generated by Artificial Intelligence 

The Election Assistance Commission (EAC) Office of the General Counsel (OGC) is providing 

this memorandum regarding the use of Election Security Grant funds to counter potential threats 

from artificial intelligence (AI). Specifically, this memorandum recommends that the 

Commission confirm that it is allowable to use Election Security Grants to fund voter education 

and trusted information communications on correct voting procedures, voting rights, and voting 

technology. Additionally, states may use Election Security Grants to counter foreign influence, 

disinformation, or potential manipulation of information on voting systems and/or voting 

procedures that may be disseminated and amplified by AI technologies. 

EAC FUNDING DECISION POLICY 

In 2015 the Commission adopted the, “Policy Regarding Authority to Issue Funding Decision on 

Use of HAVA Funds” (Funding Decision Policy). The Funding Decision Policy replaced the 

Advisory Opinion Process originally adopted by the EAC on April 16, 2008. The Funding 

Decision Policy was adopted, “to provide a means for persons and entities to have legal or 

factual questions related to the implementation of Help America Vote Act of 2002 (HAVA) 

considered by Commissioners outside of EAC's audit resolution process.” The Funding Decision 

Policy is not intended to replace or disrupt the role of the Office of Grants Management (OGM), 

which is responsible for issuing guidance, support and, when appropriate, approval/denial of 

certain expenditure of Federal funds under HAVA and the relevant Office of Management and 

Budget (OMB) Circulars found in 2 C.F.R. Parts 220, 225, 215, and 230. The approval package 

of the Funding Decision Policy specifically maintains that OGM will respond to day-to-day and 

routine HAVA questions that do not have policy implications. 

To distinguish what questions are outside of the “day-to-day and routine HAVA questions,” the 

policy explains that the Commissioners may consider any request related to questions of law and 

factual issues related to HAVA when: 

(1) The legal issue is novel, complex and pertains to an unsettled question of law or 

interpretation of the HAVA statute; or 

(2) The issue relates to an expenditure of HAVA funds that has not been previously 

addressed by OMB, the grant provisions or the EAC and for which it is determined to 

have significant policy implications for the implementation of HAVA; or 

1 
 

 

 

 

 

 

(3) There has been intervening legislation, rulemaking, or litigation since the EAC last 

considered the issue; or 

(4) The request is contrary to or otherwise inconsistent with prior EAC matters dealing 

with the same issue. 

The EAC Office of General Counsel, in consultation with the Commissioners, shall determine 

the eligibility of questions presented under these four categories. 

QUESTION PRESENTED 

On January 30, 2024, the EAC received an inquiry from United States Senators Amy Klobuchar 

and Susan M. Collins. That inquiry expressed concerns about the use of AI-generated election 

disinformation and requested that the EAC take additional steps to assist election officials’ 

response to this novel threat. Specifically, the Senators requested, “comprehensive guidance to 

state and local election administrators about how they can defend against AI-generated 

disinformation.” Comprehensive guidance would include a policy on the use of HAVA funds on 

the topic. Therefore, the question presented on HAVA funding is as follows: 

Can HAVA Election Security Grants be used to counter election disinformation 

generated by Artificial Intelligence (AI) technologies? 

APPLICABILITY OF POLICY TO QUESTION PRESENTED 

OGC has determined that this is clearly a novel interpretation and therefore fits under section one 

of the Funding Decision Policy. The EAC adopted this Policy with the intent that "substantive 

questions with policy implications from HAVA stakeholders are routed through the General 

Counsel's office to Commissioners for consideration and possible response.” The Congressional 

Research Service (CRS) has highlighted that the election administration landscape has changed 

significantly since the passage of HAVA in 2002.1 CRS also noted that foreign efforts to 

interfere with the 2016 election highlighted security as a primary consideration for elections 

policymaking.2 Here, Senators Klobuchar and Collins, as HAVA stakeholders, have presented 

the EAC with a question on a new technology in the form of AI. Therefore, the Commissioners 

may consider the question presented under the Funding Decision Policy. 

ANALYSIS 

HAVA Sec. 101 sets forth the allowable use of funds for a payment made to states under that 

section.3 The allowable use of funds includes and is limited to: (A) Complying with the 

requirements under subchapter III [of HAVA]; (B) Improving the administration of elections for 

federal office; (C) Educating voters concerning voting procedures, voting rights, and voting 

technology; (D) Training election officials, poll workers, and election volunteers; (E) 

Developing the State plan for requirements payments to be submitted under subpart 1 of part D 

1 Congressional Research Service, “The Help America Vote Act of 2002 (HAVA): Overview and Ongoing Role in 

Election Administration Policy” (R46949, May 8, 2023). 

2 Id. at 20. 3 52 U.S.C. § 20901 

2 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

of subchapter II [of HAVA]; (F) Improving, acquiring, leasing, modifying, or replacing voting 

systems and technology and methods for casting and counting votes; (G) Improving the 

accessibility and quantity of polling places, including providing physical access for individuals 

with disabilities, providing nonvisual access for individuals with visual impairments, and 

providing assistance to Native Americans, Alaska Native citizens, and to individuals with limited 

proficiency in the English language; (H) Establishing toll-free telephone hotlines that voters may 

use to report possible voting fraud and voting rights violations, to obtain general election 

information, and to access detailed automated information on their own voter registration status, 

specific polling place locations, and other relevant information.4 

Of note, the EAC previously released guidance titled, Allowable Use of Funds: Physical Security 

Services and Social Media Threat Monitoring. That guidance determined that physical security 

services and online threat monitoring improved the administration of federal elections and were 

thus allowable under HAVA Sec. 101(b)(1)(B).5 The analysis in that guidance regarding the use 

of funds for physical security services and social media threat monitoring is applicable and 

analogous to using funds for AI to protect against disinformation. Additionally, countering 

election disinformation qualifies as allowable under HAVA Sec. 101(b)(1)(C), “[e]ducating 

voters concerning voting procedures, voting rights, and voting technology.” 

Allowable Use of HAVA Funds Under Sec. 101(b)(1)(B) 

In the January 30, 2024, inquiry to the EAC, Senators Klobuchar and Collins identified concerns 

regarding the use of AI to spread disinformation about elections. Specifically, they cited 

instances of AI being used to generate robocalls using the President’s voice to tell people not to 

vote and other instances of AI-generated deepfakes that deceptively show candidates saying 

things they never said. As such, there is a significant bipartisan concern that this deceptive AIgenerated content poses challenges to state and local election officials in their abilities to 

effectively administer elections. 

The EAC is within its discretion to determine that expenditures related to countering AI 

disinformation are allowable under HAVA Sec. 101(b)(1)(B) for “[i]mproving the administration 

of elections for federal office.” The U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) previously 

determined that the EAC has discretion to determine what qualifies as an “improvement.”6 The 

EAC previously determined that funds expended under HAVA Sec. 101(b)(1)(B) for physical 

security services and social media threat monitoring were allowable and improved the 

administration of federal elections.7 Given that there is past precedent of the EAC finding that 

expenses related to social media and cybersecurity8 are allowable, it would be reasonable to 

4 52 U.S.C. § 20901(b)(1)(A-H) 5 See US EAC, Allowable Use of Funds: Physical Security Services and Social Media Threat Monitoring (2022), 

https://www.eac.gov/sites/default/files/paymentgrants/Allowable_Use_of_Funds_Physical_Security_Services_and_ 

Social_Media_Threat_Monitoring_EAC.pdf 

6 U.S. Gov’t Accountability Off., B-333826, Election Assistance Commission—Use of Grant Funds for Security 

Services 5 (April 27, 2022) 7 See Allowable Use of Funds: Physical Security Services and Social Media Threat Monitoring 

8 See US EAC, EAC Grants Guidance: Allocability of Cybersecurity Enhancements (2023), 

https://www.eac.gov/sites/default/files/2023-

08/EAC_Grants_Guidance_on_the_Allocability_of_Cybersecurity_Enhancements.pdf 

3 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

conclude that expenditures related to countering AI-generated disinformation are allowable 

under HAVA Sec. 101(b)(1)(B). 

Allowable Use of HAVA Funds Under Sec. 101(b)(1)(C) 

Under HAVA Sec. 101(b)(1)(C), states may use HAVA funds for “[e]ducating voters concerning 

voting procedures, voting rights, and voting technology.” Notably, voting procedures, voting 

rights, and voting technology are not defined by HAVA, and the EAC has discretion to 

determine their scope under (C). As such, EAC is within its discretion to determine that expenses 

related to countering AI disinformation regarding elections are allowable under (C). Therefore, it 

would be reasonable to conclude that states may fund voter education and trusted information 

communications on correct voting procedures, voting rights, and voting technology to counter 

AI-generated disinformation. 

Cost Allocation 

The allocation of an expense depends on whether it is expender under Sec. 101(b)(1)(B) or Sec. 

101 (b)(1)(C). In short, an expense under (B) must be properly allocated between federal and 

non-federal activities. An expense under (C) is fully allocable to HAVA funding if it is allowable 

and solely for the stated purpose of subsection (C). Unlike subsection (B), (C) does not contain 

the word “federal.” As such, costs under (C) are fully allocable to HAVA funding if they are 

solely for the stated purpose of subsection (C). However, if a cost is allowable and confers a 

benefit to the state/territory for an additional non-election related purpose, then the cost must be 

allocated based on the proportional benefit between the election and non-election related 

purposes. EAC OGM has discretion to determine if an allowable cost may be fully allocated to 

HAVA under (C). 

Reasonable and Necessary 

Expenses under HAVA must also be reasonable and necessary. A cost is considered reasonable 

if, by its nature and amount, it does not exceed what a prudent person would pay under the 

circumstances. This can be based on frequency of use, actual cost for the products, and other 

relevant factors.9 Generally, the necessity of a cost can be questioned when a less expensive but 

equally effective alternative is available for use. 

RECOMMENDATION 

Under the Policy Regarding Authority to Issue Funding Decision on use of HAVA Funds, the 

EAC Commissioners should consider whether a state may use HAVA Election Security Grants 

be used to defend against AI-generated disinformation. As documented in this memorandum, 

there are important policy considerations involved in this determination. This is highlighted by 

the changing election administration landscape and the growing threat of election disinformation. 

Because the EAC has discretion over what constitutes an improvement, I recommend that the 

Commission consider expenditures to counter foreign influence, election disinformation, and 

potential manipulation of information on voting systems and/or voting procedures disseminated 

and amplified by AI technologies as an allowable cost under HAVA Sec. 101(b)(1)(B). 

9 2 CFR 200.404 

4 
 

 

Additionally, because HAVA Sec. 101(b)(1)(C) allows for voter education, I recommend that the 

Commission consider expenditures to fund voter education and trusted information 

communications on correct voting procedures, voting rights, and voting technology to counter 

AI-generated election disinformation as allowable. 

5