Skip to main content

National Journal: House Administration May Reassert Itself on Election Oversight

September 20, 2018
In the News

A link to this article can be found here.

Since its creation in 1946, oversight of federal elections has been one of the chief tasks delegated to the House Committee on Administration. Yet this year, amid unprecedented challenges to the nation's voting systems, the committee hasn't held one hearing on the topic. In fact, the panel has met only 11 times in 2018, typically on matters such as the Capitol Police and the Library of Congress.

That could all change next year, should Democrats take the House in November. Its members—six from the majority party and three from the minority—have jurisdiction over a number of facets of election law, including campaign finance, corrupt practices, and election administration; it also certifies that elected members are qualified to serve, and can be involved in recounts that are not resolved by the start of the new session.

Democrats feel that the committee has been hamstrung in recent years by a GOP leadership uninterested in election oversight. "I would hope the committee would be plussed up and enabled to start doing some of the work that's been neglected for some time," said former Texas Democratic Rep. Charlie Gonzalez, who served on the committee. "It's probably more important today than ever, even if you just get back to the basics of accurate vote counting and verifying the results."

A number of the bills stuck in the committee could pass early in the next Congress as part of a wide-ranging ethics package announced by Minority Whip Steny Hoyer last week. Hoyer has already named provisions that aim to increase disclosure requirements for political spending, expand early and weekend voting, and implement automatic voter registration. Hoyer also called for hearings with voting equipment vendors and passage of the Election Security Act, introduced by Illinois Democrat Mike Quigley.

"There's a sincere effort to move forward a reform agenda," said Washington Democratic Rep. Derek Kilmer, who has introduced bills on ad-spending disclosure and restructuring the Federal Election Committee that have languished in the Administration Committee.

Multiple House Democrats expressed a willingness to explore resurrecting the Administration subcommittee on elections, which existed from 2007-2013, as a way to conduct greater oversight over a diffuse election system that gives significant power to the states.

A Hoyer spokesperson said in a statement, "We believe a similar subcommittee could work well in the 116th Congress."

California Democrat Zoe Lofgren formerly chaired that subcommittee and stands to chair the larger panel should Democrats win the majority. "We want to work by consensus with the Democratic caucus and the committee, but I think having subcommittees has value," she said. "To have a subcommittee to help do that work would be really cool."

The subcommittee "played an important role" in working with state secretaries of state and overseeing the Help America Vote Act and voting equipment, said Gonzalez, who served as ranking member of the panel. He said a select committee on election security "may be worth exploring" given the national environment, but cautioned that it would involve hiring a new staff.

Some other experts support a jurisdictional change for certain, perhaps shifting them from Administration to the Judiciary or Oversight and Government Reform committees. But such discussions will likely wait until after the midterm elections. "They're so in the trench focused on November that few people have been fully thinking through the opportunity and how to get there," said one former official who was involved in House administrative matters.

Elliot Mincberg, who was chief oversight counsel for the House Judiciary Committee Democrats from 2007-2011 and is a senior fellow at People for the American Way, said he "could see it as a possibility" that election security is moved to another committee.

"I'm open to anything," said Wisconsin Democratic Rep. Mark Pocan regarding a general switch in jurisdiction. He went on to say, "I don't know if the process is as important as the product we put together."

Aaron Scherb, legislative director at Common Cause, was cool on the idea of moving election security to another committee. "There's a lot of expertise within the committee and the staff, so keeping it within CHA makes sense to centralize that."

But Quigley, a leading voice in the party on election security, may point the way to a compromise between rival panels. He favors "a task force and an ongoing select committee" composed of members from various committees, including Intelligence and Appropriations. Quigley is in position to lead the appropriations subcommittee responsible for the Election Assistance Commission if Democrats take the chamber.

"A select committee is an excellent idea so we can understand what happened in the 2016 election and what measures are necessary to prevent that from happening again," agreed Rhode Island Democrat David Cicilline.

Lofgren favors keeping election legislation under the committee. "This has traditionally been the jurisdiction of the Administration Committee," she said. "When we were in the majority we did a pretty good job. … On the other hand, this is a decision the caucus will have to make. We're going to have a lot of new members and we need to make sure the broad breadth of expertise in the caucus is added to the committee."

Issues: