## 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