United States Election Assistance Comittee

Register to Vote!

Use the National Mail Voter Registration Form to register to vote, update your registration information with a new name or address, or register with a political party.

Note: If you wish to vote absentee and are a uniformed service member or family member or a citizen living outside the U.S., contact the Federal Voting Assistance Program to register to vote.

EAC Newsletters
and Updates

Sign up to receive information about EAC activities including public meetings, webcasts, reports and grants.

Give Us Your Feedback

Share your feedback on EAC policy proposalsElection Resource Library materials, and OpenEAC activities. Give feedback on general issues, including the Web site, through our Contact Us page.

Military and Overseas Voters

EAC has several projects under way to assist states in serving military and overseas citizens who register and vote absentee under the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act. Learn more

Virtual Public Forum Comments

Please provide search criteria below
Comment Date:
ChapterPageParagraphCommentUserCreate Date
   Resolution 2009-05 Agree that the size and turnover of the Standards Board require viable methods for maintaining continuity and efficiency of the Executive Committee and the full memberhsip of the Standards Board.admin@bloomfieldtwp.org7/22/2011
   Resolution 2009-04 Agree that the EAC staff should conduct regular briefings and updates of proposed voting system standards to the Executive Committee oftheSTandards Board and that information should be available to the entire membership.admin@bloomfieldtwp.org7/22/2011
   Resolution 2009-02 Highly recommend this policy for the sake of venders and the election officials. admin@bloomfieldtwp.org7/22/2011
   Resolution 2007-16 Recommend that this resolution should be applied prior to the final adoption of the next iteration of the standard.admin@bloomfieldtwp.org7/22/2011
   Resolution 2007-13 Recommend adoption.admin@bloomfieldtwp.org7/22/2011
   Resolution 2007-10 Highly recommend the EAC consider the impact of early voting and vote centers for all election administrators. Logistics, staff and budget play critical roles in determining the feasibility of early voting and ovting centers.admin@bloomfieldtwp.org7/22/2011
   Resolution 2007-08 Highly recommend that EAC concentrate on equipment standards rather than mandate election procedures. admin@bloomfieldtwp.org7/22/2011
   Resolution 2007-06 Highly recommend that the EAC continue to seek and research with NIST alternatives to software independence.admin@bloomfieldtwp.org7/22/2011
   Resolution 2007-04 Strongly agree that the Standards Board establish a regular schedule for future changes to the VVSG that maintains each new eversion narrow in scope and understandable for election officials and the public. Affordability, user-friendly features, and logistics must be inherent when recommending new guidelines.admin@bloomfieldtwp.org7/22/2011
   Resolution 2007-03 Highly recommend that EAC's NVRA report include observations regarding the impact of the law from the public and election officials.admin@bloomfieldtwp.org7/22/2011
   Resolution 2007-02 Agree that this resolution be adopted and that the NIST and TGDC broaden their field of independent election expert groups and selected equipment vendor task forces.admin@bloomfieldtwp.org7/22/2011
   Resolution 2007-01 The EAC should make every effort to promote HAVA and how the funds are being implemented to Congress,state and local election officials,and the citizens of the United States.admin@bloomfieldtwp.org7/22/2011
   Resolution 2006-03 Recommend that the EAC limit its activities and funds to those specified by Title II of HAVA as Congress reviews the very existence of EAC.admin@bloomfieldtwp.org7/22/2011
   Resolution 2006-02 Agree with the resolution to maintain the 1/4 staff year exclusively for operating the Standards Board. admin@bloomfieldtwp.org7/22/2011
   Resolution 2006-01 Recommend that Election Day survey questions be repeated for at least two consecutive periods to provide election officials with a basis of expectations and consistency in preparing to answer the questions.admin@bloomfieldtwp.org7/22/2011
   Resolution 2009-03: A problem did arise during the review process of the 2010 EAVS data which may highlight a general concern of the Standards Board. The EAC’s contractor for the survey, sub-contracted with the Associated Press to conduct the initial review of the data submitted by the states. Officials were surprised when the initial review was returned and had questions regarding interpretation and analysis as opposed to a strict review of the raw data. The contractor indicated that the AP was used as a subject matter expert, given their expertise in reporting on election matters. Recommend the EAC not use third party contractors in their research without strict controls against bias or prejudice in analysis, and that third parties such as AP which are not subject matter expert regarding administrative data should not have a say in the direction and analysis of the research. John.Gale@nebraska.gov 7/22/2011
   Resolution 2007-04: The EAC’s has not addressed the Standards Board’s concern of establishing a regular schedule of updates and keeping those updates narrow in scope. John.Gale@nebraska.gov 7/22/2011
   Resolution 2007-06: Although NIST research did outline alternatives; it nonetheless recommends Software Independence as the standard. There is no indication that the VVSG will move away from Software Independence as a requirement. John.Gale@nebraska.gov 7/22/2011
   Resolution 2007-05: While the EAC has not adopted such a policy statement, the EAC has followed this approach in its practice.John.Gale@nebraska.gov 7/22/2011
   Resolution 2007-02: Recommend that this resolution be continuing for all parts except for the words “Be it further resolved…” and thereafter. John.Gale@nebraska.gov 7/22/2011
   Resolution 2007-01: The EAC appears to be limited in their power to the extent that they cannot proactively engage Congress on matters relating to election law. The Standards Board resolution appears to require the EAC move beyond the scope of their legal abilities. This resolution deals with old issues and should be replaced. Nonetheless, the EAC should proactively engage State Election Officials on funding concerns and work toward proposals and solutions regarding continued funding for election administration. John.Gale@nebraska.gov 7/22/2011
   Resolution 2006-03: The EAC action addresses some of the Standards Board’s concerns, but does not address the most serious concern that the EAC refrain from research projects that exceed the plain language meaning of HAVA. Further the EAC explains that they have the authority to study “such other matters that the commission deems appropriate.” It seems that the response simply justifies the ability of the EAC to authorize funding for any projects it may choose, without restraint. The EAC should focus on the priority projects that can be accomplished by its own staff of researchers and forgo third party research that is removed from HAVA language and more likely to be tainted by bias or prejudice. The EAC should continue to conduct studies and research without deviating from the scope of the HAVA language. Additionally, the public comment period is a good approach to evaluation of studies, but special weight should be given to Election Official’s comments on those studies since Election Officials will be instituting the EAC’s recommendations. John.Gale@nebraska.gov 7/22/2011
   Resolution 2006-02: Recommend that the EAC dedicate a full one quarter staff year to Standards Board support, including present support from the special assistance to the DFO and from the meeting coordinator; Executive Board needs more substantive support for Board Surveys, Studies, and White Papers. John.Gale@nebraska.gov 7/22/2011
   Resolution 2006-01: The EAC statements outline objectives and current research topics and upcoming reports, however the statements do not address the concern of ensuring that research findings are based on facts…“that are clearly defended by quantitative data, rather than suspicions or assumptions.” Additionally, the Standards Board resolution stated that: “Election Day survey questions be considered and completed and noticed to states no later than two years before the election in which the data is to be collected.” This did not materialize with the 2010 Survey since the final version was made available in May 2010. Also, the draft of the proposed 2012 Survey will be available September 2011 (quorum pending). 1. Recommend the EAC review the ongoing research to ensure that the facts and subsequent conclusions are based on quantitative data appended or footnoted to the research document to ensure accountability. 2. Also recommend that Election Day Survey questions finalized less than two years before the election of interest be substantially similar to the questions two years previously to allow software updates in a timely manner. John.Gale@nebraska.gov 7/22/2011
Rows: 1 - 24 of 24   Page: 1 of 1