1-IUSCH BLACKWELL 

Harvey M. Tettlebaum 

Partner 

235 East High Street, P.O. Box 1251 

Jefferson City, MO 65102-1251 

Direct: 573.761.1107 

Fax: 573.634.7854 

harvey.tettlebaum@huschblackwell.com

October 19, 2010

VIA E-MAIL and U.S. MAIL 

EAC Regulations 

Election Assistance Commission Regulations 

U.S. Election Assistance Commission 

1201 New York Avenue, N.W., Suite 300 

Washington, D.C. 20005 

Re: Election Assistance Commission National Voter Registration 

Act Regulations — Docket # EAC-2010-0025 

Dear Members of the Commission: 

This letter is sent to make comment upon the regulations included in the Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking published at 75 Fed. Reg., No. 152 (August 9, 2010) at pages 

47729 through 47734. 

Please note the following comments regarding the following sections of the 

Proposed Rule: 

• § 9428.4(a)(6) — The Proposed Rule adds to the existing regulation the phrase 

"or as required by Federal law" with respect to the voter identification number. 

I am not aware of any requirement in current Federal law for a "Federal voter 

identification number" or any number "required by Federal law". If the intent 

of this phrase is to reference the social security number of the voter which can 

be used as an identification number for registration purposes, then I 

recommend that the phrase be changed to specify "social security number" to 

avoid any confusion in that regard. The phrase may be misunderstood to imply 

that each voter has a "Federal voter identification number". It does not appear 

to be the intent of the change in the existing regulation and any confusion in 

JEF-235449-1 HUSCH BLACKWELL LLP
HUSCH BLACKWELL 

Election Assistance Commission Regulations

October 19, 2010

Page 2 

that regard can be eliminated by reference to the social security number, if that 

it what is meant by the phrase. 42 U.S.C. § 15483(a)(5)(A) and (B) reference 

social security numbers as well as drivers license numbers. Therefore, the 

social security number seems to be what is meant. 

• The Notice of Proposed Rulemaking requests comment on several ideas. The 

first is the request for comment on "amending the regulations to incorporate 

new technologies to facilitate applicants' use of the Federal form. EAC is 

particularly interested in receiving comments of how EAC's regulations may 

be amended to accommodate the use of new technologies in an accessible and 

usable format, consistent with Federal statutes and regulations." 

Current Federal law does not give the EAC the authority to go beyond 

describing a voter registration form. Any requirement or even option to submit 

such a form by electronic means such as e-mail over the Internet is beyond the 

jurisdiction of the EAC. Furthermore, even were the EAC to have that 

authority, the technology is not sufficiently secure to avoid significant 

problems with the detailed information on that form being captured by persons 

not authorized to receive that information to be used for identity theft or to be 

used to further a scheme of voter fraud. The issue of Internet-based voter 

registration or electronic voting has been the subject of scrutiny by the 

American Bar Association's Election Law Committee on which I serve. That 

Committee has been unwilling to move forward in that direction because of 

legitimate concerns raised about Internet and electronic voting security. The 

recent experience of the District of Columbia Board of Elections and Ethics 

with an Internet-based voting system is, perhaps, best evidence that use of the 

Internet or other types of electronic voting or registration are premature at best. 

After D.C. spent $300,000 in Federal grant money on a project to develop 

some type of Web-voting system, security vulnerabilities have resulted in its 

suspension of this concept until the technology is more mature. The 

aforementioned concerns apply as well to electronic signatures. Internet 

security has not yet matured to the point where there can be any 

confidence is that the ability of those with bad intentions could be 

prevented from abusing this method.

HUSCH BLACKWELL LLP 

JEF-235449-1
HUSCH BLACKWELL 

Election Assistance Commission Regulations

October 19, 2010

Page 3 

Finally, the EAC should continue to give deference to the States and their 

requirements for voter registration and obtain benefit from the unique 

experience of each State with its own systems before requiring any type of 

electronic registration system irrespective of its authority. This would include 

requiring states to accept electronic signatures if their state laws do not 

recognize this method of signing absentee ballot applications. 

I want to express my appreciation for the invitation by the EAC to comment on these _ subjects.

Respectfully submitted, 

HARVEY M. TETTLEBAUM 

HMT:tw

HUSCH BLACKWELL LLP 

JEF-235449-1