This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/27/us/politics/election-security-mitch-mcconnell.html

The article has changed 3 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
House Passes Election Security Package, With an Eye on Mitch McConnell House Passes Election Security Package, With an Eye on Mitch McConnell
(about 2 hours later)
WASHINGTON — The House on Thursday approved expansive election security legislation that would mandate the use of backup paper ballots and postelection vote audits to guard against potential foreign meddling, seeking to pressure Senator Mitch McConnell to lift his blockade of election legislation in the upper chamber.WASHINGTON — The House on Thursday approved expansive election security legislation that would mandate the use of backup paper ballots and postelection vote audits to guard against potential foreign meddling, seeking to pressure Senator Mitch McConnell to lift his blockade of election legislation in the upper chamber.
Timed to coincide with the July 4 holiday, the House bill, which passed 225-184, largely along party lines, is the first and most expansive in a blitz of new measures that House Democrats say they will pass to address vulnerabilities identified by the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III. Mr. Mueller’s report concluded that Russia had conducted “sweeping and systematic” interference in the 2016 presidential election, and members of both parties fear that not enough is being done to prevent that from happening again next year. Timed to coincide with the July 4 holiday, the House bill, which passed 225 to 184, largely along party lines, is the first and most expansive in a blitz of new measures that House Democrats say they will pass to address vulnerabilities highlighted by the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III. His report concluded that Russia had conducted “sweeping and systematic” interference in the 2016 presidential election, and members of both parties fear that not enough is being done to prevent that from happening again next year.
Other legislation could include a requirement that political campaigns report to the F.B.I. any offer of assistance from a foreign power, new sanctions to punish Russia and other foreign powers that interfere with the American democratic processes, and mandates for social media platforms like Facebook to disclose the purchasers of political advertisements. Other legislation could include a requirement that political campaigns report to the F.B.I. any offer of assistance from a foreign power, new sanctions to punish Russia and other foreign powers that interfere with the American democratic processes, and bipartisan mandates for social media platforms like Facebook to disclose the purchasers of political advertisements.
But with the Senate in Republican hands, Democrats have another, more immediate target in mind: Trying to shame Mr. McConnell, the majority leader, into dropping his opposition to proposals — even bipartisan ones — and allowing his chamber to consider measures to better protect the vote. House leaders excoriated Mr. McConnell on Thursday and have urged their colleagues to hold events promoting the legislative action as they scatter across the country during the weeklong holiday recess. But with the Senate in Republican hands, Democrats have another, more immediate target in mind: trying to shame Mr. McConnell, the majority leader, into dropping his opposition to proposals — even bipartisan ones — and allowing his chamber to consider measures to better protect the vote. House leaders excoriated Mr. McConnell on Thursday and have urged their colleagues to hold events promoting the legislative action as they scatter across the country during the weeklong holiday recess.
“Unfortunately Senator McConnell, self-described crepe hanger, has vowed to kill our bill as the president declares he sees no problem with foreign intervention in our election,” Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California said on the floor of the House Thursday morning. “The G.O.P. Senate and the White House are giving foreign countries the green light to attack our country. But the House will do our part to protect America.” “Unfortunately, Senator McConnell, self-described crepe hanger, has vowed to kill our bill as the president declares he sees no problem with foreign intervention in our election,” Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California said Thursday morning on the floor of the House. “The G.O.P. Senate and the White House are giving foreign countries the green light to attack our country. But the House will do our part to protect America.”
Mr. McConnell has showed little sign of budging. Colleagues say that he, like some other members of their party, ideologically opposes the federal government wading further into election administration, which has traditionally been carried out by the states. And he has expressed confidence that a 2017 package of Russia sanctions and $380 million in grants Congress allocated to states last year, along with executive branch actions, have already set the country on the right path. Mr. McConnell has showed little sign of budging. Colleagues say that he, like some other members of the Republican Party party, ideologically opposes the federal government wading further into election administration, which has traditionally been carried out by the states. And he has expressed confidence that a 2017 package of Russia sanctions and $380 million in grants Congress allocated to states last year, along with executive branch actions to step up deterrence and support state election authorities, have already set the country on the right path.
In a brief interview on Thursday, Mr. McConnell called the House bill a “nonstarter” in the Senate.In a brief interview on Thursday, Mr. McConnell called the House bill a “nonstarter” in the Senate.
The bill, the Securing America’s Federal Elections Act, would set new federal standards for vendors and operators of voting systems that most security experts argue will significantly limit the risk of foreign intrusions. In addition to authorizing $600 million for Election Assistance Commission grants to update voting technology, the bill would require states to use backup paper ballots that can be verified by voters and election counters, institute postelection audits to search for possible irregularities and prohibit voting systems from connecting to the internet.The bill, the Securing America’s Federal Elections Act, would set new federal standards for vendors and operators of voting systems that most security experts argue will significantly limit the risk of foreign intrusions. In addition to authorizing $600 million for Election Assistance Commission grants to update voting technology, the bill would require states to use backup paper ballots that can be verified by voters and election counters, institute postelection audits to search for possible irregularities and prohibit voting systems from connecting to the internet.
Many states have already adopted those changes, but experts who argue for federal assistance say not all local election authorities have the money, personnel or know-how to keep systems up-to-date. The $380 million that Congress signed off on last year helped, they say, but it only began to address the need. Many states have already adopted those changes, but experts who argue for federal assistance say not all local election authorities have the money, personnel or know-how to keep systems updated. The $380 million that Congress signed off on last year helped, they say, but it only began to address the need.
“The states are not responding with the alacrity that this situation demands,” said Susan Greenhalgh, a vice president for the National Election Defense Coalition, a nonpartisan group trying to unite the left and right around election security issues. “It is a national security crisis — nothing less — and that requires a federal response.”“The states are not responding with the alacrity that this situation demands,” said Susan Greenhalgh, a vice president for the National Election Defense Coalition, a nonpartisan group trying to unite the left and right around election security issues. “It is a national security crisis — nothing less — and that requires a federal response.”
In an interview, Ms. Greenhalgh praised the House bill but cautioned, “We don’t pass one bill and call it a day and say our elections are secure now.”In an interview, Ms. Greenhalgh praised the House bill but cautioned, “We don’t pass one bill and call it a day and say our elections are secure now.”
Republicans in the House echoed parts of Mr. McConnell’s argument on Thursday, calling the House vote unnecessarily rushed and accusing Democrats of ramming through a partisan bill when their party was willing to back a range of more limited proposals.Republicans in the House echoed parts of Mr. McConnell’s argument on Thursday, calling the House vote unnecessarily rushed and accusing Democrats of ramming through a partisan bill when their party was willing to back a range of more limited proposals.
“What we are debating here today will put more unfunded and underfunded mandates onto states like Illinois,” said Representative Rodney Davis, Republican of Illinois, the top Republican on the House panel responsible for the bill. “That is not what local election officials in my state asked for.” “What we are debating here today will put more unfunded and underfunded mandates onto states like Illinois,” said Representative Rodney Davis of Illinois, the top Republican on the House panel responsible for the bill. “That is not what local election officials in my state asked for.”
White House officials convened a briefing with senior law enforcement and intelligence officials this week to tout actions being taken without Congress’s prodding hand. They stressed that the executive branch was already preparing for attempts by Russia, China, Iran and other foreign actors to try to tamper with the American political process.
One senior administration official, who spoke anonymously at the White House’s direction, said that officials from agencies responsible for fending off foreign intrusions had already briefed every presidential campaign on the threat to the 2020 elections and the federal resources available to them.
Mr. McConnell’s critics have taken a more cynical view, though, arguing that he is simply afraid of stirring the ire of President Trump, who views talk of Russia’s election interference as tantamount to questioning the legitimacy of his election.Mr. McConnell’s critics have taken a more cynical view, though, arguing that he is simply afraid of stirring the ire of President Trump, who views talk of Russia’s election interference as tantamount to questioning the legitimacy of his election.
The House has already passed many of the provisions in Thursday’s bill in an omnibus “good governance” package. But Mr. McConnell has ridiculed that bill as an attempt by Democrats to strengthen their own campaigns, so Democrats chose to break the election security measures off into a single bill.The House has already passed many of the provisions in Thursday’s bill in an omnibus “good governance” package. But Mr. McConnell has ridiculed that bill as an attempt by Democrats to strengthen their own campaigns, so Democrats chose to break the election security measures off into a single bill.
Their efforts have gotten a boost not only from Mr. Mueller, but also from Mr. Trump, whose comments in recent weeks that he would be open to accepting foreign assistance without necessarily telling the F.B.I. ignited a political firestorm. Their efforts have gotten a boost not only from the attention brought by Mr. Mueller, but also from Mr. Trump, whose comments in recent weeks that he would be open to accepting foreign assistance without necessarily telling the F.B.I. ignited a political firestorm.
In the Senate, Democrats pushing Mr. McConnell to act have tried to be crafty — but so far have had little success. This week, they proposed a series of amendments to the annual must-pass defense policy bill that would have included many of the same provisions getting votes in the House. Mr. McConnell blunted that effort though, by limiting the amendment process on the defense bill. In the Senate, Democrats pushing Mr. McConnell to act have tried to be crafty — but so far have had little success. This week, they proposed a series of amendments to the annual must-pass defense policy bill that would have included many of the same provisions getting votes in the House. Mr. McConnell blunted that effort, though, by limiting the amendment process on the defense bill.
Now they are eying the annual appropriations process, where they believe they have more leverage to at least allocate additional funds for state grants to update election systems. But a defense policy bill, which was approved Thursday by the Senate, did contain some additional provisions to aid law enforcement and intelligence agencies responsible for detecting and deterring foreign threats. They included the creation of an independent Social Media Data Analysis Center meant to ease information sharing on foreign influence campaigns, like Russia’s, between private companies and the government. It also would codify changes adopted since 2016 within American intelligence agencies designed to streamline the federal response, better study the Russian threat and keep Congress better informed.
The Senate’s defense bill and its intelligence provisions will still have to be reconciled with House versions before becoming law.
Democrats who want money for state election infrastructure are also eying the annual appropriations process, where they believe they have more leverage to at least allocate additional funds.