HAVA: THE FEDERAL LAW THAT CHANGED HOW AMERICA MAINTAINS ITS VOTER ROLLS
ELECTION LAW 101 — PART 8
After the disputed 2000 presidential election exposed serious weaknesses in election administration, Congress acted again. In 2002, it passed the:
HELP AMERICA VOTE ACT — HAVA.
HAVA addressed voting systems, provisional ballots, voter information, certain identification requirements—and something enormously important to the election system we have today:
ONE OFFICIAL STATEWIDE LIST
Under 52 U.S.C. §21083, covered states must maintain a:
“single, uniform, official, centralized, interactive computerized statewide voter registration list.”
- That database must contain the name and registration information of every legally registered voter in the state.
- It must serve as the official voter-registration list for federal elections.
- Each legally registered voter must be assigned a unique identifier.
This isn't a suggestion.
It is a federal requirement
AND CONGRESS REQUIRED LIST MAINTENANCE.
HAVA says the computerized list must be regularly maintained.
And Congress got remarkably specific. List maintenance must be conducted in a manner that ensures:
1. EACH REGISTERED VOTER APPEARS ON THE LIST.
2. ONLY PEOPLE WHO ARE NOT REGISTERED OR NOT ELIGIBLE ARE REMOVED.
And:
3. “DUPLICATE NAMES ARE ELIMINATED FROM THE COMPUTERIZED LIST.”
HAVA also requires provisions designed to ensure voter-registration records are accurate and regularly updated, while protecting eligible voters from being removed in error.
Notice the balance again:
PROTECT THE ELIGIBLE VOTER.
MAINTAIN THE ACCURACY OF THE LIST.
Congress required BOTH.
HAVA ALSO CONNECTS THE DATABASE TO IDENTITY VERIFICATION.
The law requires coordination with other state agency databases and establishes procedures involving driver's-license numbers and, for applicants without one, the last four digits of a Social Security number.
It also requires agreements enabling certain voter-registration information to be matched with motor-vehicle records to verify information provided on registration applications.
Why does identifying information matter?
Because an election system has to distinguish:
ONE LEGALLY REGISTERED PERSON FROM ANOTHER
AND ONCE AGAIN: WHO DID CONGRESS AUTHORIZE TO ENFORCE THE FEDERAL REQUIREMENTS?
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES.
Under 52 U.S.C. §21111, the Attorney General may bring a civil action against a state or jurisdiction in federal district court to enforce HAVA's uniform and nondiscriminatory election-technology and administration requirements.
ONCE AGAIN CONGRESS CREATED FEDERAL REQUIREMENTS AND A FEDERAL ENFORCEMENT MECHANISM.
…THEN CONGRESS TOOK IT FURTHER – SIMILAR TO NVRA, HAVA ALSO GAVE CITIZENS A FORMAL COMPLAINT PROCESS.
Congress required states receiving HAVA funding to establish a uniform and nondiscriminatory administrative complaint procedure. Under 52 U.S.C. §21112, any person who believes a violation of HAVA's Title III requirements has occurred, is occurring, or is about to occur may file a written, notarized, signed and sworn complaint. If the complainant requests it, there must be a hearing on the record.
And Congress put the process on a clock. The state generally must issue a final determination within 90 days of filing, unless the complainant agrees to an extension. If a violation is found, the state must provide an appropriate remedy; if no violation is found, it must dismiss the complaint and publish the results. If the state misses the 90-day deadline, HAVA requires the complaint to move into alternative dispute resolution and be resolved within another 60 days.
In other words: HAVA didn't just establish federal election-administration requirements - it created a formal process citizens can use to challenge alleged violations of those requirements.
KNOW THE CONSTITUTION. KNOW THE LAW. FOLLOW THE FACTS.
Follow
@Unite4Freedom to Follow the Facts
#Unite4Freedom
#ElectionSecurity
#ElectionValidity
#DOJ