u.s. ELECTION ASSISTANCE COMMISSION 

1225 NEW YORK AVENUE, N,W., SUITE 1100 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005 

OFFICE OF THE VICE CHAIR 

REMARKS BY COMMISSIONER RAY MARTINEZ 

HOUSE ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE HEARING 

JUNE 8, 2006 

Good morning Chainnan Ehlers, Ranking Member Millender McDonald, and members of the 

Committee. My name is Ray Martinez, and I currently serve as vice chair of the U.S. 

Election Assistance Commission. I appreciate the invitation to join my colleagues today for 

this important hearing. 

I would like to very briefly address two additional areas where the EAC has made significant 

progress in implementing HA VA. 

ISSUANCE OF VOLUNTARY GUIDANCE 

First, the issuance of voluntary guidance. As you know, HAVA contains several technology 

and administration requirements that must be implemented by every State. These 

requirements include, among other things, voting system standards for all touch screen and 

optical scan voting systems; a requirement for at least one accessible voting system per 

polling place which would allow a person with disabilities to vote privately and 

independently; the implementation of provisional voting; and the development of statewide 

voter registration databases. 

Where any ambiguity exists, the EAC is mandated to issue voluntary guidance to assist States 

in meeting these requirements. The EAC has met this responsibility in the following ways: 

• In July 2005, the EAC issued its first set of voluntary guidance to assist States in 

developing their statewide voter registration databases. This important requirement -

designed with the dual goal of improving accuracy of voting lists while also reducing 

Tel: 202-566-3100 www.eac.gov Fax: 202-566-1392 

Toll free: 1-866-747-1471 

1 
the possibility of fraud - has been a particularly difficult requirement for many States 

to implement. Some States, such as Michigan and Kentucky, have served as national 

models for such a system. And yet, most States had no such systems in place when 

HA V A was passed, so the EAC has worked diligently by seeking broad public input 

to provide interpretive guidance, as well as technical assistance to States through an 

on-going partnership we have established with the National Academics of Science. 

• Additionally, the EAC has issued other voluntary interpretive opinions to assist States 

in meeting their obligations, including opinions on the use oflever machines; matters 

involving the conditioning of provisional ballots to voter identification requirements, 

and an important analysis regarding the differences between the voluntary Voting 

System Standards promulgated by the FEC in early 2002 and the voting system 

standards that are mandated by the plain language of HA V A. 

ASSISTANCE TO STATES 

Second, is our efforts to assist States. While HA V A requires the distribution of 

unprecedented Federal funds to all States, these funds are to be used not only to improve 

voting system technology, but also to broadly address the "people" aspect of election 

administration. In order to facilitate this, the EAC is developing voluntary "management 

guidelines," which will offer a vast array of information and "best practices" dealing with 

nearly every phase of election administration, including poll worker training and voter 

education; protocols on security of electronic voting systems; and prudent practices for 

procurement, set-up and storage of voting systems. 

Finally, since HA V A represents both an unprecedented and significant financial commitment 

by Congress to improve the administration of Federal elections, it is imperative that the EAC 

conduct its due diligence in assisting States to use these important new Federal funds for their 

intended purposes. We are doing so by working on a daily basis with state and local 

jurisdictions to answer their numerous questions on the use ofHAVA funds and when 

necessary, issuing advisories to inform all jurisdictions of our decisions. Additionally, EAC 

staffhas traveled to various conferences throughout the country to conduct training and 

2 
information sessions in order to directly inform election administrators and answer their 

questions. 

Moreover, now that all appropriated HA V A funds have been fully distributed by the EAC, 

we have implemented an audit program through the establishment of an Office of Inspector 

General at the EAC. Since the establishment of this office, the EAC's Inspector General has 

moved assertively to begin regular oversight activities based upon objective criteria, such as 

the expenditure ofHAVA funds. Additionally, when allegations were raised in 2004 about 

the possible inappropriate use and management ofHAVA funds by a now-former Secretary 

of State, the EAC initiated a special audit that has resulted in a determination of repayment of 

some $3 million. 

CONCLUSION 

Clearly, Mr. Chairman, we have come a long way in a very short period of time. As the 

process of election administration becomes more complex and thus, more challenging on 

state and local election administrators, it is all the more imperative that the EAC diligently 

stick to the important task it was assigned in HA V A. We are doing just that, Mr. Chairman, 

and, in my view, with each passing month and year, the EAC is becoming an importantand increasingly valued - partner in the process of election administration. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I would be glad to address any specific questions. 

3