Comité Rules de la Cámara de Representantes, 23 de junio de 2026

Transcripción

72 turnos. Seleccione un tiempo para reproducir ese momento del video.

1. 0:02:11

   Okay. Thank you. Thank you members of the committee for coming up with us this morning so quickly. Uh, we're gonna open up the meeting. We'll call it to order and ask, uh, Dean Greene to open us with a word of prayer, please.

2. 0:02:22

   Let us pray. Almighty God, as we come to you this morning, we come humbly before you asking for your blessings. We ask you to provide us with wisdom and guidance this morning. And Father, we just ask you to go with us throughout the rest of this session. Be with us, oh Father, as we pray for those individuals that are in need this morning, those that are hurting. And Father, we just thank you for their blessings.

3. 0:02:53

   Guide us now, Father, and as we conclude this session, may it be to the glory of your, your service. And Father, we thank you for everything. In thy holy name we pray, amen.

4. 0:03:09

   Amen.

5. 0:03:09

   Thank you, Dean.

6. 0:03:10

   Yes.

7. 0:03:12

   Okay. Gonna recognize Chairman Anderson to explain to, uh, Senate Bill 3EX.

8. 0:03:22

   Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh-

9. 0:03:22

   Would you start by giving them the LC number-

10. 0:03:24

    Yes, sir. Yes, sir

11. 0:03:25

    ... and make sure everybody's got the right one, please.

12. 0:03:26

    I'd like to, uh, reference LC474417S.

13. 0:03:37

    The, uh, this bill was a result of a lot of discussion over the last, basically, year and a half. We've had many opportunities and options to, uh, to address the issue that we're here in this special session for. Uh, this is a bill that was, uh, created out of many of those discussions and, uh, taking pieces and parts from many solutions that have been presented over the last, uh, year, particularly in this past session and since. Uh, real quickly to go through the bill.

14. 0:04:09

    Section one outlines the Election Equipment Specification and Standards Committee, which is a joint committee made up of legislators from both the House of Representatives and the Senate, as well as, uh, gubernatorial appointments, and, uh, has access to numerous subject matter experts as deemed necessary. There's no limitation there. The, uh, the committee is established to define and recommend what the specifications going forward for the next uniform voting system in Georgia is.

15. 0:04:47

    It is tasked with preparing this recommendation by January 31st to present to the legislature, uh, as well as the executive branch. There is a provision in here which explicitly prohibits the, the current secretary of state from participating and influencing this group. Uh, and, uh, and then we added a provision in here to allow non-legislative members to, uh, receive a per diem for participation. Section two is, uh, the original section two, which came from the Senate on SB3EX.

16. 0:05:21

    This was the portion that contained, in the original version, the mandatory hand count for the top two elections in every race. We have worked with the Senate and come up with a, what we feel is a very workable and viable alternative. What it basically says is, for the top two state-level statewide races, which are gonna be the governor and the lieutenant governor, during the general election cycle, just the general election, if those races are within one half of 1%, the winner versus the next, uh, highest vote-getter, currently in state law, the, the loser has the option to request a recount.

17. 0:06:05

    Uh, what we have done with this is, if they're within that one half of 1% margin in the general election for those two offices, then that triggers a mandatory hand recount that will be funded by the state. There's a, a provision in here which the, uh, last paragraph, "The state shall reimburse counties, uh, the reasonable cost incurred by such counties in any recount conducted pursuant to this section." Section three retains the additional risk-limiting audits that we had in the original, uh, bill proposed.

18. 0:06:43

    Uh, risk-limiting audits are a sampling audit which can trigger an additional hand count, but it has to, uh, it has to meet certain guidelines to do that, and we've expanded that from currently there are two required in every race. This part applies to every race, not just the general election, but every election. Uh, and we've expanded that to add about, depending on the race and the, and the election cycle, five to six additional risk-limiting audits. This was all reviewed and gone over with, uh, by Gavrio and even individual local election officials.

19. 0:07:18

    Everyone is on board with what we proposed in all facets of this bill. Uh, section four then takes and makes the implementation date for section seven of Senate Bill 189 from 2024, January 1st of '28. What that does is that ensures that the system or systems or processes that is selected by the next secretary of state and the next administration, based on the re- recommendations from the c- committee that we've outlined in section one, all of that is in place and functional by the first part of 2028 in order to catch the presidential preference primary.

20. 0:08:01

    Uh, that's pretty much the bill.

21. 0:08:05

    Okay. Okay, you, you heard the chairman's explanation. Are there questions? I have a question. If you are not where you can use a mic, please come to this podium and we will turn that mic on for you up there so you can be heard

22. 0:08:18

    You recognize? Yes, ma'am. Ms. Hugley.

23. 0:08:26

    Thank you, Mr. Chairman. To the author of the bill, uh, you mentioned that the state is going to reimburse the counties. Is there a fiscal note, or how much do you anticipate this will cost? The- there is not a fiscal note. This bill originated in the Senate. Uh, they made a determination through passage that a fiscal note was going to be waived on this particular, uh, bill for their own reasons. Uh, the, uh... We, at this point, do not know how much it will cost because this provision only triggers if an election in those two categories is within that one half of 1%.

24. 0:09:03

    In addition to that, we do currently have budgeted in our fiscal year '26 budget, we've got $15 million earmarked to assist counties, so it is c- excuse me, it is considered a budgeted item at this time. One other question, if you don't mind. Yes. So is it your anticipation that once, uh, we go to a new system, that we will no longer h- be under these requirements? That is a question for future legislative consideration, but I think that would very well be a consideration depending on, on where we stand and, and the, uh, the auditability and what capabilities we have with that system, so.

25. 0:09:43

    Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Uh, Representative Evans had a question. Would you please use the mic so they can hear you? Thank you.

26. 0:09:56

    Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, two discrete areas for question. One, um, a two-part question, though, I guess. In section one, when we're talking about who's gonna be on this committee, I assume that the intent of the committee is to come up with proposals that will be acceptable to the state as a whole and, and have everyone have faith in our election process. Would that be fair? Uh, uh, that is fair, yes. Why would there not be any, um, intentional effort to make sure that the committee makeup is bipartisan as opposed to leaving it to the whims of the people that are, um, making the proposals?

27. 0:10:33

    Not even a, a list of recommendations from the minority party or, or any, any sort of comparable balance. Why, why not have something like that? Yep. Thank you for the question. And honestly, I have faith in our speaker in the House. I don't think there's a committee in the House, a study committee in the House that does not have bipartisan representation. My conversation with them is that that would be appropriate, but we did not want to restrict the speaker as to, uh, who those appointments would be, and I have faith that he will exercise that appropriately as he has in the past.

28. 0:11:07

    It looks like there will be at le- at least nine legislative m- members or maybe six. Could we agree that one Democrat among all of those is not sufficient representation of a minority party? I, I would leave that up to the appointing bodies, which would be the speaker in the House, who again has a record of minority representation on all of our committees and the committee on assignments in the Senate, which has the same record. Mm-hmm. Yeah, but there's usually one. Um, uh, my other question is, um, in the section starting on line 44 where it seems like great pains have been taken to make sure that the current secretary of state not only has no authority but also has no role.

29. 0:11:49

    Um, and I was wondering what the wisdom of the committee was in essentially barring the person that's currently in office where there might be some institutional knowledge, some information, some historic research or anything. The committee's intent is that, that, that information, that input is just completely illegal for him to have any role, share any advice, make any suggestions, comment on anything. Is that the intention? Uh, that, that is not necessarily the intention.

30. 0:12:21

    If you go back to line 31, we actually, uh, explicitly state not as a required participant, but as an allowed and preferred participant that the election director of the secretary of state's office or his or her designee, uh, when it comes to the conduct of elections and even the, uh, the procurement, maintenance, and operation of equipment, uh, the secretary himself has a very, uh, has a very ministerial function there. Uh, the secretary of state's, uh, election director and his reports are the ones who actually conduct and have that knowledge.

31. 0:12:54

    Is the election director allowed to confer with the secretary of state in fulfilling this role? I, I see nothing in what we have here that would prevent that in his capacity as an advisor. Okay. You wouldn't consider that a role? Uh- A role. The secretary of state, the current secretary of state, according to line 46, is not allowed to have any role, R-O-L-E. Right. So it, it, talking to his director who then comes and talks to the committee, you would not consider that to be a role? I, I'm not really familiar enough with a definition to define what role would be in that particular case, but I would see that as, as being just an advisory function.

32. 0:13:33

    Thank you. Sam Park.

33. 0:13:40

    Thank you, Mr... Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh, thank you, uh, Chairman Anderson, for the bill. Um, you know, my understanding is that the purpose of this is to avoid unnecessary confusion with respect to the QR barcode. Uh, but I think my concern is that the governor's po- proclamation with respect to why we're here was written in a very narrowly tailored manner. I know in committee this was raised with respect to the constitutionality of these additional provisions, but can you help me understand how section two in particular, which amends section 21-2-495, relates to the second point in the governor's proclamation, which again is specifically related to code section 21-

34. 0:14:25

    Uh, dash two three 79. Um, there's... A- a- and just to kind of clarify the question, how does the... Or perhaps, um, the question asked another way, how does this hand count provision relate to the 2024, uh, Georgia Law Act 697, again, stipulated by the governor's pro- proclamation?

35. 0:14:46

    I- in consultation with legislative council and with the governor's legal council, uh, and, and this is a question that, that I raised from the very beginning, uh, there's, there's very limited case law, uh, to, to affect this. Most of it's 100-plus years old, but the determination of both councils was that the underlying subject matter of the bill directly addresses the governor's call. The additional provisions in this bill facilitate that. In other words, section two, and even the addi- increase in the, uh, section three, the increase in the risk limiting audits, both of those provide su- support for the ultimate, uh, portion that, that is directly affected by the governor's call, and that is to take the date and move it out to give us time to implement that.

36. 0:15:36

    So it is a mechanism that helps to achieve that me- that end.

37. 0:15:40

    The, the hand count helps with respect to moving the QR code back?

38. 0:15:43

    It, it helps from the standpoint of providing additional assurance of our electors.

39. 0:15:49

    Uh, so, so again, I don't think that's a sufficient reason, at least from my understanding and just from a common plain meaning of the terms of the, in the government's proclamation. Uh, one final question, if I may. Um, in the event that there is a close election, 'cause again, these are very narrow circumstances given how y'all have narrowed the bill, which I appreciate, um, is it not true that a candidate could potentially challenge this provision as falling outside the governor's proclamation, which could ultimately create further chaos, which could simply be avoided had we simply done what was in the governor's pro- proclamation?

40. 0:16:23

    Uh, I- that's a question I would not have a, an a- an answer or a legal opinion on. I'm not a lawyer.

41. 0:16:29

    Thank you.

42. 0:16:29

    Thank you.

43. 0:16:30

    Representative Holcomb.

44. 0:16:37

    Thank you, Mr.- thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, Chairman Anderson, for, for your work. I appreciate it. I, I think this is a lot better than what it was, but I do have specific questions. Um, on line 80, it states, um, backing up to line 79, "If upon such recount it is determined that the original count was incorrect." I wanna start there. How are we defining incorrect? Is it one vote off? Is it 10 vote off? Is there some type of scale to help with the interpretation of that? Because I think most of us would, would agree that a technical application of incorrect is if there's any disparity between the two numbers.

45. 0:17:17

    But if it's only, like, one or two votes, is that significant or substantial in, in leading to it? Uh, what I'm wondering is, is how a judge is going to interpret this, is sort of the thrust of my question. So do you have any context of how incorrect would be interpreted in that situation?

46. 0:17:36

    Uh, and, and thank you for the question. If you refer to lines 81 through 82, uh, uh, we, we reference, uh, subsection I of code section 21-2-493.

47. 0:17:47

    Mm-hmm.

48. 0:17:48

    Uh, and the code, the, the language used in this portion of the bill, 79 through 82, basically, uh, is language that already exists in code. Uh, in Georgia, we give our election, county election officials great range of authority. And, uh, ultimately, if there is a discrepancy, they try to cure and, and alleviate that discrepancy. If it gets down to a point to where there is some type of in- irreconcilable der- uh, discrepancy, in current code, that local county election superintendent is to, is to determine what is the correct count.

49. 0:18:28

    Okay. So OCGA 21-2-493 subsection I states, "If any error or fraud is discovered, the superintendent shall compute and certify the votes justly, regardless of any fraudulent, erroneous returns presented to him or her, and shall report the facts to the appropriate district attorney for action." That doesn't strike me as giving extremely clear guidance in terms of how to resolve those discrepancies. That's my concern-

50. 0:18:58

    Yeah

51. 0:18:58

    ... is just how this is going to be operationalized.

52. 0:19:00

    Uh, I understand your concern, and that's something we may need to address in the future in, in legislation specific to that particular subject matter. We are referencing code that is already in place and currently in practice.

53. 0:19:11

    Okay. So, so if we pass this, then it will be to the discretion of whoever the superintendent is and what that person views as being justly-

54. 0:19:22

    It-

55. 0:19:22

    ... and that's the whole statutory guidance.

56. 0:19:24

    In, in the circumstances to where a clear, uh, remedy is not able, is not obvious or able to be discerned, then that-

57. 0:19:34

    Okay

58. 0:19:34

    ... that is, again, current code and current practice.

59. 0:19:36

    Okay. Um, my, my final sort of statement is just our code in this section really does need a lot of work. There are inconsistent-

60. 0:19:45

    I do agree

61. 0:19:46

    ... statements. There are undefined terms, and it's just, stripping all the politics of this issue right now, it's really, really confusing to, to read this part of the law. Just saying.

62. 0:19:55

    Uh, and I thank you, and, and you and I have had some brief conversation related to some actions that I'm working on related to that.

63. 0:20:00

    Yeah.

64. 0:20:00

    Thank you.

65. 0:20:00

    Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

66. 0:20:01

    Thank you. Okay, we've exhausted our questions there. Mr. Chairman, thank you for your explanation. All right, we need to set a calendar for today. So under modified structure, Senate Bill 3EXLC47-4417S, is there a motion?

67. 0:20:26

    There is a move.

68. 0:20:26

    There is a move and a second. Is there opposition? All- Yes. Excuse me? Opponent objection. We have an objection. Okay. All those in favor of putting LC47-441S, 17S under modified structure on the calendar for today will say yes.

69. 0:20:45

    Yes.

70. 0:20:46

    Yes. All those opposed will say no.

71. 0:20:49

    No.

72. 0:20:49

    It's on. Thank you very much. We're adjourned.