{ "id": "RL31417", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "number": "RL31417", "active": false, "source": "EveryCRSReport.com", "versions": [ { "source": "EveryCRSReport.com", "id": 101245, "date": "2002-05-15", "retrieved": "2016-05-24T20:10:35.688941", "title": "Election Reform Legislation: Comparison of House and Senate Versions of H.R. 3295", "summary": "In the wake of the November 2000 presidential election, Congress, the states, and various\ncommissions have examined election procedures, the reliability and costs of different voting\ntechnologies, whether national standards are necessary, and the federal role in the election process. \nMore than 80 bills addressing various aspects of federal election reform have been introduced in the\n107th Congress. One bill, H.R. 3295 , has passed the House and Senate in different\nforms and is awaiting conference. The Help America Vote Act (Ney-Hoyer), passed the House on\nDecember 12, 2001. The Martin Luther King, Jr. Equal Protection of Voting Rights Act of 2002\n(Dodd-McConnell), passed the Senate on April 11, 2002.\n Both bills establish a new federal commission to replace the Office of Election Administration\n(OEA) of the Federal Election Commission and also to perform new functions as described in the\nbills. The House version also establishes two boards, with broad-based membership, under the new\ncommission to address aspects of voting system standards. The Senate version establishes a\ntemporary committee to study Internet voting and related topics.\n Both bills provide grants to state and local governments for replacing and improving\nregistration and voting systems and for improvements in election administration. Ney-Hoyer\nprovides $2.25 billion total through FY2004 in formula matching grants to replace or improve\npunchcard voting systems and for state election funds for general voting improvements. \nDodd-McConnell provides $3.5 billion total through FY2006 in categorical grants to help states and\nlocalities meet the requirements described in the bill, to improve election systems, and to make\npolling places accessible, with the last two programs requiring matching funds. \n Both bills establish federal standards or requirements, but differ in what those standards address\nand how they are applied. They both require that provisional ballots be made available and that\nstates using voter registration have statewide systems that are accurately maintained. \nDodd-McConnell includes requirements for voter identification. With respect to voting systems and\ntechnology, both address error correction by voters, accessibility for disabled persons, and\nauditability. Dodd-McConnell also addresses machine error rate and alternative languages. \nNey-Hoyer provides a statutory basis for the voluntary federal voting system standards and for\ncertification of voting systems. It addresses performance benchmarks for state voting systems. It\nalso requires states to develop standards for what constitutes a vote and to implement safeguards for\nvoting by uniformed and overseas voters. Dodd-McConnell requires the federal government to\npromulgate implementation guidelines for its registration, provisional ballot, and voting system\nrequirements Ney-Hoyer leaves the specific methods of implementing its standards to the discretion\nof the states. Both bills would create programs to recruit students to work at the polls on election\nday and would make several changes in current law relating to military and overseas voters.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "PDF", "encoding": null, "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/RL31417", "sha1": "c47f9df8ddc7acf278e5f1ef0b3899e3cdbb8771", "filename": "files/20020515_RL31417_c47f9df8ddc7acf278e5f1ef0b3899e3cdbb8771.pdf", "images": null }, { "format": "HTML", "filename": "files/20020515_RL31417_c47f9df8ddc7acf278e5f1ef0b3899e3cdbb8771.html" } ], "topics": [] } ], "topics": [ "American Law", "Economic Policy", "National Defense" ] }