House Governmental Affairs Committee, June 22, 2026

Transcript

507 turns. Select a time to play that moment of the video.

1. 0:09:56

   Oh, wait.

2. 0:11:53

   Okay, if I can have everyone's attention, please. Uh, apologize for the minor delay. Uh, we're about to get started on the Governmental Affairs Committee hearing today, and, uh, I'd like to recognize Chairman Gullett to, uh, offer a word of invocation.

3. 0:12:09

   Bow your heads. Father God, we love you. We thank you. We bless those here today. We bless those, uh, here making decisions and weighing in on the, the future of our state. Please give us direction, give us guidance, and give us your love as we continue to move forward. Bless those, again, who are here and who are leaving to go home after this, and just continue to give us, uh, grace and guidance and, and lead us your way. In your name we pray. Amen.

4. 0:12:33

   Thank you. Uh, by way of announcement this morning, this meeting will be hearing only. And what we are... And we will have, uh, as time permits, public testimony following, uh, the, uh, presentation and committee questions. The, uh, bill we are considering is SB 3EX as passed by the Senate. Uh, we'll have the, uh, author of the bill come up, the sponsor of the bill come up in just a moment to present the bill. Uh, but, uh, just to, to kind of give a little context to that, uh, the Senate, uh, passed this bill, and as normal, we are very deliberative in consideration of our legislation.

5. 0:13:14

   Normally, uh, in a regular session, this bill would've gone to our election subcommittee, then come to full committee. So we brought it to full committee, so we're gonna have a hearing only, uh, discussion today with public testimony as time allows. Like I said earlier, many of us have caucus meetings, uh, around lunchtime. So with that, I'll invite Senator Burns, if you'd like to come to the... Would you prefer the table or the podium?

6. 0:13:39

   The table's good.

7. 0:13:40

   Table. Okay. And, uh, before we get that started, uh, Representative Oliver.

8. 0:13:46

   Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I believe that there's a good many people working on a substitute bill to this. Do you have an opinion about when we might see a substitute for consideration?

9. 0:13:58

   We, we will be... Uh, the plan at this point is to schedule another committee meeting, possibly tomorrow morning. Uh, we should know a little later today. There are discussions going on between the chambers, uh, regarding potential substitutes and, uh, and that sort of thing. So, uh, just stay tuned for an announcement later today. We'll definitely have a decision on that by, uh, announcements during session today.

10. 0:14:24

    Thank you, sir.

11. 0:14:25

    Yes. Representative Roberts.

12. 0:14:26

    And will public testimony be allowed on the actual bill that we're voting on when that happens?

13. 0:14:31

    That, I'm hoping to be able to do that. I'll, I'll let you know for sure.

14. 0:14:35

    Thank you.

15. 0:14:36

    Thank you. Okay. With that, we'll, uh, I'll turn the, uh, microphone over to our esteemed colleague, Senator Burns, to present Senate Bill 3EX.

16. 0:14:49

    Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Committee. Uh, good morning. Happy Monday. I know we're all excited to be here on this day, and, uh, consider Senate Bill 3EX. I'm working from SB3EX as passed by the Senate, that is, uh, I guess it's SB3EX/FA. Is that correct? Is that correct? Okay. So what I'd like to do this morning is quickly walk you through the bill. Uh, it's straightforward. Uh, you can certainly review it in a minimal amount of time.

17. 0:15:21

    I'll, I'll, uh, quickly review the bill. I'll review the amended change to the bill that, that occurred yesterday, and, uh, I'll also, I'll be happy to answer any questions from the committee. So, uh, this is a bill that allows us to move forward in our election journey. We have worked on this legislation, uh, for quite a period of time worth the, with the House and with the governor's office to do, uh, three things.

18. 0:15:53

    One is to determine how to move forward in a future election systems by the establishment of an Election Equipment Specification and Standards Committee. The second is to, uh, enhance the use of risk-limiting audits that are currently in Georgia code and are used in a limited way. We're expanding that. And then the third thing is to, um, adjust the implementation date from Senate Bill 189 Section 7 to January the 1st of 2028.

19. 0:16:25

    So let's quickly work through the bill as well as the adjustments made by the Senate yesterday. So the first thing deals with the Election Equipment Specification Standards Committee. It establishes really a temporary committee that will define the specifications and standards and requirements for Georgia's next uniform voting system. It's critical that the legislature have a, a major role in that decision, and this committee does the groundwork to provide the information to the legislature to make those decisions.

20. 0:16:59

    Those decisions will be made in the, uh, 2027 session, regular session. So the committee is composed of nine individuals: three electors by the governor, three electors by the com- uh, committee on assignment... Uh, excuse me, three senators appointed by the committee on assignments in the Senate, and then three representatives appointed by the speaker. Uh, they may also additionally consult experts in multiple areas. We can certainly talk about that, but, uh, we welcome the input of cybersecurity experts, uh, election officials, uh, accessibility, uh, experts, and those things.

21. 0:17:36

    So those additional, uh, insights will be welcomed by this, uh, Election Equipment Specification and Standards Committee It is tasked with providing these requirements and recommendations and specifications by January 31st of 2027. That will allow the legislature to make decisions in '27 for procurement and implementation in 2028. Uh, it also points out that the current secretary will not have a role in this because he will be transitioning out of the secretary of state's office.

22. 0:18:10

    Yesterday, an amendment was offered and passed that required a manual hand count on the top two races on any ballot, and that that hand count occur prior to certification. So that, uh, change is section 1.1 in your bill. Um, don't have the line number in front of me. I guess it's line number 50 and following, 50 to 63. Uh, it would require a manual hand count to verify the accuracy of the machine count of every election and special election and runoff and primary after this bill becomes law.

23. 0:18:52

    Uh, that would require that our election officials do that prior to certification, and that if the original count was found to be incorrect, that they would make corrective, uh, decisions. So it would be corrected prior to the certification. Section two deals with risk-limiting audits. Risk-limiting audits are not new to Georgia. If you look at, uh, code 21-2-498, it defines the use of rich li- risk-limiting audits, and how that is done.

24. 0:19:23

    What this section does is expands the use of risk-limiting audits to provide additional assurance and additional confidence that the elections are correct so that there would be risk limiting audits on, uh, a number of races, president, US Senate, US House, governor, lieutenant governor, secretary of state, attorney general, uh, and then some additional contest of, uh, other statewide offices, um, uh, less... Uh, one of, one of, I think, four. And then finally, in section three, we change the effective date of SB 189, section 7 to January the 1st of 2028.

25. 0:20:04

    So Mr. Chairman, that's the bill. That's where we are today. I'm happy to take, uh, questions, uh, from the committee.

26. 0:20:13

    Okay. Thank you, Senator. Uh, first question, Representative Sanchez.

27. 0:20:22

    Thank you, Chairman. Thank you for bringing forward this bill. I have a couple questions. Um, so first off, talking about section 1.1, um, talking about hand recounts. So there is not a single state in the entire country that mandates hand recounts in their elections, and in fact, Texas recently tried it and realized how terrible it was and rescinded it pretty quickly.

28. 0:20:52

    Why would we choose to put a system that is clearly shown to fail?

29. 0:20:57

    Uh, thank you for the question. I appreciate that. I think the reason to have this section included is to add confidence by Georgians that the elections that they just participated in were accurately tabulated. So we're-- this is not new to Georgia, um, Representative. We've done hand recounts or hand counts in the past. Um, in, in, in 2024, I believe the secretary of state did a full hand count.

30. 0:21:28

    I recognize the timing of this is a challenge, but I would suggest to you that our election officials have been up to every challenge that we've asked them to complete. So the reason for this is to ensure the accuracy of every election in Georgia.

31. 0:21:44

    I, I understand the, what you're talking about, but you say confidence. I don't... Studies have shown that hand recounts have between a 9 and 25% error rate, so how does that instill confidence when you have up to a quarter of it being an error rate? I don't understand how that instills confidence. And also to further point, this is not just putting a hand recount. It's saying that the hand recount will be prioritized over the machine recount, which even though, once again, the human error rate is much higher with hand recounts than it is with machines. So why would we put something that's less reliable as a priority?

32. 0:22:17

    It is a hand count to validate the election that was tabulated by the machine. Uh, and again, it is designed to ensure that the accuracy of the election is confirmed. Um, recognizing reality, we have to ensure that Georgians believe the results and have confidence in their, in their outcome and in their accuracy. This is a s- this is a second look, a second opportunity to confirm.

33. 0:22:49

    Oh, I 100% agree with that. We should make sure we restore confidence in our elections, and, you know, I think, uh, risk-limiting audits help with that f- much more than a hand recount. But before we go further, I do have a question on section one. Um, you know, I know I wasn't h- I wasn't a representative in the legislature in 2019, but I was working in the Capitol in 2019 when we did the original procurement process under House Bill 316. How do we, uh... Obviously, since then, there's been a lot of criticism on that. Um, how do we ensure that... I know this is not a procurement process yet. This is just a study committee, but how do we make sure that the new procurement process doesn't, uh, create as many issues as the current system has that's led us to this point?

34. 0:23:28

    Uh, I appreciate the question. I, I was not in the legislature, uh, when the current system was procured, and I did not participate in the process. I think what this, uh, bill does is it clearly establishes the legislature as the decision maker in procuring future election systems, as opposed to delegating it to, uh, to, uh, an agency or an entity. So I, I think that's a very positive thing. I think at the end of the day, uh- The legislature as a whole in twenty twenty-seven will determine the future of the election processes in Georgia.

35. 0:24:04

    Thank you. Okay. Next is, uh,

36. 0:24:10

    Representative Roberts. Sure. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, it's my understanding that, uh, the Senate did not ask for a fiscal note on this bill. There was no fiscal note addressed associated with this legislation. However, in the twenty twenty-seven appropriation, there was allocated, I believe it was eighteen million dollars. Was it fifteen or eighteen? I think it was under the twenty twenty-six amended.

37. 0:24:40

    Twenty twenty-six amended. Thank you for the correction. And it was, uh, fifteen, fifteen million. Fifteen million. Fifteen million in the twenty twenty-six amended. Thank you for the correction. To ensure that any, any request from the legislature would be funded. So there are funds currently available to the Secretary of State's office to, um, to complete any assignment associated with this legislation.

38. 0:25:07

    Okay. Okay. Thank you. Uh, Representative Bazemore. Let's see. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and good morning. You're welcome. Thank you, Senator, for your presentation. However, my question is, is this subject matter outside the scope of the governor's proclamation for this special session? I, I appreciate the question, and I, I'm not an attorney. Uh, so I have to defer to, uh, constitutional attorneys and, and accept, uh, their recommendation and their advice.

39. 0:25:41

    My understanding is that this is within the scope of the call because it addresses elections. It is an election issue and an election bill. So this is within the scope of the governor's call. We just happen to have an attorney in the room, and, uh- I bet we do. Yes. We- I'd like to recognize, uh, Legislative Counsel Stuart Bill Reilly.

40. 0:26:06

    Um, so, so to the question about whether this falls within the call or not, um, the Constitution does provide that, um, during a special session, the General Assembly is limited on enacting laws that are, um, related to the, uh, matters outlined in the call. Um, so I think the first place we would, would need to look would be the, at Governor Kemp's call for the special session as it was amended. Um, and the second, um, therefore clause of the proclamation states that, um, the General Assembly is called to address issues created by the effective date change on, uh, Code Section 21-2-379.23 and Senate Bill 189 from the twenty twenty-four session.

41. 0:26:52

    Um, so there does appear to be some language in that, uh, you know, provision where the General Assembly could consider multiple issues related to, um, issues relating to, uh, Senate Bill 289's effective date on the, the QR code ban. Um, there are two cases from the Georgia Supreme Court which provide some insight into this con- constitutional provision, both of them from the early twentieth century. Um, the first one would be, uh, Carroll versus... Or early twentieth century. Um, the first one is Carroll v.

42. 0:27:24

    Wright, a case from 1908. Uh, in that case, the, uh, General Assembly w- the governor called the General Assembly in to broadly consider legislation to provide for the, uh, disposition of persons convicted of crimes. Um, as part of the legislative package, the General Assembly enacted a tax on, um, imitation alcoholic beverages. Um, I believe it was, there was a tax on near beer, um, to pay for the, um, to pay for the, um, prison system that was to be provided in the special legislation.

43. 0:28:01

    Um, that provis- the, the tax was challenged, and the Supreme Court found,

44. 0:28:09

    Supreme Court found that the General Assembly largely has discretion to determine what matters are germane to the call to, uh, constitute legislation that would accomplish the matters covered by the, um, the governor's call. The second case is from 1920, Jones v. State. In that case, um, in the twenty, in the 1915, in 1915, a special session was called where the call was to answer, consider, consider the question of amending the automobile licensing tax, um, authorized by a specific act of the General Assembly in 1913.

45. 0:28:47

    Um, in addition to up- taking up legislation to address the automobile licensing tax in 19, uh, in, in the, in the 1915 special session, the General Assembly also adopted a piece of legislation which, among other things, provided a 30 mile per hour speed limit on all public roads and prohibited, prohibited, um, driving under the influence. Um, in 1918, a gentleman had too much to drink, got in his automobile, drove over 30 miles an hour, got in an accident, killed, I believe, two individuals, and was convicted of involuntary, a felony involuntary manslaughter.

46. 0:29:30

    Uh, the Supreme Court ultimately threw out the conviction, finding that the enactment of the speed limit and the DUI statute in 1915 went beyond the governor's call because those did not address the limited nature of the call addressing the question of the automobile licensing tax. So these are the only two gu- this, these cases are the only guidance the Georgia Supreme Court has provided on this matter. But it does appear that base- if the wording of the call

47. 0:30:01

    does allow for sufficient interpretation by the General Assembly. The General Assembly is well within its powers to determine what matters are germane to the call. Um, in my reading, the call that Governor Kemp issued this year is much closer to the wording of the call in the Carroll v. Wright case in 1908 than the limited call in, um, 1920. Now, ultimately it would be for the courts to decide how to interpret these two precedents, but it does appear that with the limited precedents on the books, there is suf- probably sufficient room for the General Assembly to determine what matters fall within issues arising from the effective date in, uh, Senate Bill 189.

48. 0:30:46

    Okay. Thank you.

49. 0:30:50

    It's spinning right now.

50. 0:30:52

    Okay, I'm gonna recognize Chairman Momtahan.

51. 0:30:59

    Thank you, Senator Burns. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

52. 0:31:00

    Good morning.

53. 0:31:01

    Good morning. Um, had just a question. I'm trying to figure out, uh, who we got on line 32. It says, "By January 31, 2027, the committee shall prepare a report," and it goes on from there.

54. 0:31:21

    If the committee doesn't make a selection or prepare a report, then who ultimately makes that choice?

55. 0:31:30

    Well, first of all, the committee does not make a selection. It, it really doesn't make a recommendation. It simply provides the specifications and requirements and provides that information to the General Assembly, and the General Assembly, through legislation, would determine which systems would be considered and f- and resourced and funded in 2027. So this is not a selection committee. This is not a decision committee.

56. 0:32:00

    It is an advisement committee.

57. 0:32:02

    So if they do nothing at all?

58. 0:32:05

    They have to, because the, the statute requires them to complete a task, and they must provide that information to the legislature by January 31st of 2027, and it's, it's timely in the fact that they have to do it by then in order to ensure the legislature has time to address the, the, the procurement process. By this time, we will have a new secretary of state, we'll have a new legislature, and we'll be in a position to move forward.

59. 0:32:35

    M- Mr. Chairman, if I may, and if they don't?

60. 0:32:40

    Then the legislature will have to take up the challenge without the additional information.

61. 0:32:45

    Because it says here, "The selection report shall be sufficient detail as to allow legislative and executive policymakers to develop those appropriations based on that report."

62. 0:32:54

    Correct.

63. 0:32:56

    So if they don't, then they don't. I see that you say that they shall, and I understand that they shall, but I'm, uh, I'm trying to understand the meaning of 32 to 39 without any type of, you know, stick.

64. 0:33:13

    I, I would suggest that it is routine practice of the legislature to establish these types of committees, and that these types of committees have consistently, uh, met their, uh, task and their challenge, and I would expect this to be no different, and I would hope that whoever would be on the committee would complete their task in a timely manner and provide the information to the legislature so that the legislature can make the ultimate decision.

65. 0:33:39

    And if they don't, Mr. Chairman?

66. 0:33:41

    Then the legislature will have to make the decision without that insight.

67. 0:33:44

    Thank you.

68. 0:33:46

    Okay. Representative Oliver?

69. 0:33:49

    Good morning, Mr. Chairman.

70. 0:33:50

    Good morning.

71. 0:33:52

    The, um, Senate chose not to take any testimony on Saturday. Is that correct?

72. 0:33:58

    That's incorrect. The, the s- the committee chose not to take verbal testimony. We took, we took written testimony. We had sign-up sheets. We asked individuals to, uh, indicate whether they supported or opposed the legislation. We were, as you are, under a challenging time constraint, so we certainly accepted testimony, and we have shared that with the committee.

73. 0:34:24

    Thank you for that clarification. You're committed, uh, because I'm, I'm sure you will sit through the testimony that'll be-

74. 0:34:30

    I will

75. 0:34:30

    ... verbally given this morning about the cost of this and the inability and the failure of this hand count process to go nationally. You'll be with us this morning.

76. 0:34:39

    I will be here till you choose to adjourn.

77. 0:34:42

    The Senate on April 2nd refused to address the issue of the timetable of the QR code. I'm gonna be frank with you, Mr. Chairman. Uh, I'm concerned that the Senate is not going to stay with us in this special session to address the QR code deadline today. Have you been a part of any c- communications or any discussions where the Senate plans to adjourn early tomorrow-

78. 0:35:08

    I have not

79. 0:35:08

    ... and not allow the House to weigh in on this bill?

80. 0:35:11

    I have had no communication or conversation to that effect. Uh-

81. 0:35:15

    Are you committed to staying in the Senate?

82. 0:35:17

    I'm committed to staying here as long as the legislature needs to conduct business. Uh, I, I, I have a voice, but I do not have a, a, I'm not the decision maker in that, so I would certainly advocate for allowing the House to do its work and allow the Senate to respond as appropriate.

83. 0:35:36

    Finally, Mr. Chairman, do you believe that our failure, the Senate's failure on April 2nd and our possible failure to address the timetable of the QR is a major problem for us to conduct elections in November 2026?

84. 0:35:52

    I don't see that as a major problem. I see it as a process. We are working through a process to ensure the best possible outcome. We're here today to continue that process.

85. 0:36:02

    I hope we will be able to complete that process. Thank you, sir.

86. 0:36:05

    I share your hope.

87. 0:36:11

    Thank you. Uh, Representative Adesanya.

88. 0:36:15

    Thank you, Chairman.

89. 0:36:16

    Good morning.

90. 0:36:16

    Senator. Um, so if I heard correctly, um, so the tabulation machines, uh, the tabulation machines are still going to count and then we recertify the top two races on it hand count?

91. 0:36:28

    We, we will continue to pr- process ballots as we do now with the current tabulation system that generates the official count. This is a hand count to verify the accuracy of the machine count.

92. 0:36:44

    And that's the top two races. It's not all the-

93. 0:36:46

    Of the top two races. Correct.

94. 0:36:47

    Okay. So for context, um, let me give this to you for numbers. My home county in Cobb, we have the top two races. Um, we have about 312,000, um, voters. 312,000, um, ballots. So if you have to count the two, um, top races, we're looking at 624,000, um, um, ballots, and that is estimated to be about 1,104 hours. Um, that's a lot of time, and that's inefficient.

95. 0:37:19

    Now, I don't know why we need to recount manually. Um, le- let me ask you this. Do you know on average what your attention span is?

96. 0:37:34

    Well, it, it certainly varies from day to day, uh, uh, but I-

97. 0:37:37

    On the best day

98. 0:37:38

    ... I would say most people's attention span is relatively short, and I, I concede that. I would also point out this is not new. We have done this before. The secretary of state mandated it, and the election officials in Georgia conducted manual counts to validate an election. This is not new.

99. 0:37:59

    And that was very inefficient, and that's why we moved to computer systems. And look, like, um, think about it. When you go to the bank, right, we have a counting machine that counts the money for you. Imagine if you have to be a teller. You're sitting right there, and you count, manually counting a lot of the money. You would never get to attend to all of the customers. You're gonna spend the whole day, and that's inefficient, and that's why we progressed to ma- to inventing machines to doing that. And now taking us backwards to manually count, that is inefficient.

100. 0:38:30

     I, I appreciate your concern, and I appreciate the challenge and the efficiency issue. I would suggest respectfully that accuracy is the most important component of this discussion-

101. 0:38:43

     Hear, hear

102. 0:38:43

     ... not, not timeliness or efficiency.

103. 0:38:45

     Mr. Chairman.

104. 0:38:45

     Yeah.

105. 0:38:45

     Just very quickly. I just don't know how much accuracy human can give when compares to machine.

106. 0:38:53

     Thank you.

107. 0:38:54

     All right. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

108. 0:38:55

     Okay. Thank you. Uh, Chairman Momtahan.

109. 0:38:58

     Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just want to clarify something. I've never been to a bank where they didn't count my money and then verify it in the machine. So they do hand count those bills. I've seen them, and I've dealt with a lot of cash.

110. 0:39:10

     Um, I, I, I would suggest, uh, Representative that if, if they don't, I will. Okay?

111. 0:39:15

     Amen to that.

112. 0:39:16

     Okay. Representative Olaleye.

113. 0:39:19

     Thank you, Chairman. Good morning, Chairman.

114. 0:39:21

     Good morning.

115. 0:39:21

     Um, I, I want to redirect our attention back to Section 1.1, and I, I don't mean to, to beat a dead horse here, but, um, to take Representative Adesanya's comments a step further. The, the top two races at the ba- at the ballot, if we're looking at our, our last statewide cycle in '22, uh, both the governors and lieutenant governors', uh, seats, you're looking at upwards of four million votes per race.

116. 0:39:53

     We're talking hundreds of election offices across the state being mandated to hand count upwards of almost 10 million ballots. You just said yourself, and I agree with you, sir, the most important thing is the integrity of our election result. Do you believe that thousands of different individuals across the state counting upwards of eight million ballots would result in a more accurate vote tally than a machine?

117. 0:40:31

     I appreciate the c- the question, and I agree with many of your points. I would suggest that as we work through the hand count, the manual count, we are confirming the machine.

118. 0:40:42

     Yeah.

119. 0:40:42

     And if it does not confirm, we correct.

120. 0:40:45

     Correct.

121. 0:40:46

     This is not-

122. 0:40:48

     Well, Ch- Chairman, just to-

123. 0:40:50

     Okay. If, if we c- if, if I may real quick, uh, Representative. Uh, if we can keep the extraneous noise down, please. We, we operate with decorum in this committee, and, uh, I don't wanna have to clear the room. Thank you.

124. 0:41:02

     Uh, Chairman, correct me if I'm wrong. I'm looking at line 60 to 63, and it said that, that the manual hand count would override.

125. 0:41:11

     It, it says that-

126. 0:41:13

     In the event that there's inconsistency between the two

127. 0:41:15

     ... it says that if there is a discrepancy-

128. 0:41:17

     Which there will be

129. 0:41:18

     ... if there is a discrepancy-

130. 0:41:20

     Not likely. There will be

131. 0:41:20

     ... the discrepancy is resolved. It doesn't say one overrides the other. It says it will be resolved. So if you look at line 60 through 63, and you look carefully, if upon the conclusion of a recount pursuant to paragraph one of this subsection it is determined that the original count was incorrect, if it is determined that the original count, the returns and paper, and all papers prepared by the superintendent and secretary of state shall be corrected accordingly prior to certification of the election by the superintendent.

132. 0:41:57

     What does that mean?

133. 0:41:58

     That means that if we in a hand count cannot confirm the tabulated count, we make corrections at the local level prior to certification

134. 0:42:11

     That, that, that, I mean, that, that, that statement just introduces so many more questions than answers. And w- we're talking again about the integrity of our elections. Nothing matters more than that. Um, and, and, and again, outside of the administrative cost, right? Out- outside of the administrative burden, um, this does not make our elections outcome, uh, uh, uh... It, it doesn't introduce any more confidence in that process.

135. 0:42:41

     And so I'm, I'm just, I'm really confused why we would even include this. It just mucks up a process and, and undermines the entire intent of the bill.

136. 0:42:52

     I, I... Thanks for your input.

137. 0:42:53

     Thank you.

138. 0:42:54

     Okay. Thank you. Uh, Chairman Leverett. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Senator. I know you've put a lot of effort into this effort, and I, I appreciate you for that. Um, so 1.1 appears to be the, the provision that's of great interest to the committee and to everybody here, I suspect. Um, was... And I understand that 1.1 was a result of that blessed institution and procedure known as the Senate floor amendment.

139. 0:43:30

     It is revered and appreciated. It is also cursed.

140. 0:43:34

     Indeed. As many, for me, as, as many, uh, natural disasters are revered and appreciated, it is appreciated. It has had that effect on some of my legislation, so I have great experience with it.

141. 0:43:47

     As Adam said. Mine as well.

142. 0:43:49

     Yeah. I would imagine. We all can tell stories and share them. So I- I'm assuming then this didn't, did not get testimony in committee.

143. 0:43:59

     It was not considered in committee, no.

144. 0:44:00

     Okay. And when your, your bill came out of comm- this bill came out of committee Saturday?

145. 0:44:07

     Saturday morning.

146. 0:44:08

     Saturday morning. And did it go to Rules and then get on the floor?

147. 0:44:12

     Uh, let me, let me correct that. It came out of committee Thursday afternoon. Was that correct, or was it morning? Uh, the days are running together. It was on the Senate floor Saturday morning.

148. 0:44:24

     Okay. Did it, did it go to Rules and then-

149. 0:44:26

     It went to Rules on Thursday after a- adjournment of the Senate.

150. 0:44:31

     Okay.

151. 0:44:31

     So it was in Rules, uh, Thursday early afternoon.

152. 0:44:36

     Then it got, got on the floor, and then this amend- 1.1 was added by floor amendment.

153. 0:44:40

     It, it, it, it was-

154. 0:44:40

     Saturday

155. 0:44:40

     ... added by floor amendment on, on, uh, yesterday morning.

156. 0:44:45

     Oh, no. Saturday.

157. 0:44:45

     Saturday morning.

158. 0:44:46

     Which was yesterday in terms of legislative days.

159. 0:44:48

     Which was yesterday to me, but yeah.

160. 0:44:49

     Yeah. Okay.

161. 0:44:49

     I, I lost, uh, Father's Day, but so did many others.

162. 0:44:53

     Yeah, we all did. Um, and th- th- so as I understand this, this requires a manual recount regardless of the margin by which a victor is, uh, cl- declared from the machine.

163. 0:45:07

     That is, uh, that is accurate, yes, sir.

164. 0:45:09

     Which is-

165. 0:45:09

     It requires a manual count of the top two races

166. 0:45:12

     ... And it is a pre-certification manual recount.

167. 0:45:15

     That is correct.

168. 0:45:16

     Okay. And a- as I understand, this is paragraph D.1, so we're adding a new paragraph to Section 21-2-495, which already provides for recounts-

169. 0:45:27

     Yes

170. 0:45:27

     ... if I am not mistaken.

171. 0:45:29

     I believe you're correct.

172. 0:45:30

     Okay. And a- as I understand, the current recount, it is not manual. It is not a hand recount. It's done by m- m- machines, for lack of a better word, and it's done post-certification. Is that correct?

173. 0:45:47

     I believe, again, you are correct.

174. 0:45:49

     Okay.

175. 0:45:49

     This would require validation of the tabulation prior to certification-

176. 0:45:55

     Okay

177. 0:45:55

     ... on the top two races.

178. 0:45:56

     Now, now to Representative Olaleye's question, as I read 60 through 63, it, it, it would seem to me you're determining that the tabulation count was incorrect based on the hand count, and when you correct accordingly, you go with the hand count.

179. 0:46:16

     You would go with the resolved count. So if, if in the, in determining the count and comparing it to the tabulation, to the machine tabulation, there is a discrepancy, you verify both and go with the most accurate count.

180. 0:46:35

     Okay.

181. 0:46:40

     I, that, so I,

182. 0:46:44

     I would

183. 0:46:46

     th- I, I guess I don't see that in the language that's there. Um, I, I mean, that, that makes sense to me, but I, I think it would-

184. 0:46:54

     If you, if you look at line 62, "The superintendent or secretary shall be corrected accordingly." Now, that word accordingly is the operative word that says which count is accurate. Let me suggest to you they should agree. Is that not true? Do we, do we have consensus on the fact that a tabulation count and a hand count should be the same?

185. 0:47:23

     I think we agree on that-

186. 0:47:24

     I think we agree on that

187. 0:47:25

     ... in a theoretical world.

188. 0:47:26

     Theoretically. I would also suggest, as many of the committee have pointed out, it's hard for manual counts to be, uh, consistent and accurate. But what you do is verify that the hand count was accurate, verify the machine count was accurate, and they should be the same. That's the objective.

189. 0:47:44

     And all that is to take place prior to certification.

190. 0:47:47

     That is correct. And let me, uh, if I may, Mr. Chairman. Um,

191. 0:47:56

     if we were to not do it prior to certification, the challenge becomes what if the tabulated count was not confirmed, and how would you then resolve a contest that had been certified? And, um, in, in, in speculation, the, the, the only likely, uh, resolution would be through some legal action to void the election, which we wish to avoid.

192. 0:48:33

     We do not wish any election to be challenged and be voided, and that there ... That then is the reason for this count happening prior, because it confirms. It's a confirming count. It is a manual hand count that confirms the accuracy of the tabulation.

193. 0:48:57

     A- a- and I, I appreciate those concerns. I, I, I think the, the, the trouble I'm having, and I haven't heard testimony yet, but I've h- received input that hand-counting all the jurisdictions in the state, in some jurisdictions that is feasible. Although strenuous and difficult, it is feasible prior to certification. But for some jurisdictions it, it is just not physically feasible unless, unless we, we obtain staffing at numbers that's far in e- excess of anything that's ever been achieved thus far.

194. 0:49:33

     And i- I guess wh- the, the, the, the,

195. 0:49:41

     the provision of existing law that seems inconsistent with the concern you expressed about trying to do this prior to certification is our current recount procedure provides for a post-certification tabulation recount, not pre-certification, and that's using a machine that's a lot quicker. And so it would seem to me that if we currently allow a recount to occur post-certification, and my understanding is there's some legal reasons why you do that. The certification is sort of the, is the state declaration that damages me if I think the count's wrong, that ...

196. 0:50:18

     W- I- I guess my thought is why don't we just change the existing s- paragraph C to provide for a manual recount rather than a tabulation recount when you're within a margin of error that would indicate a recount might, uh, be justified?

197. 0:50:31

     Uh, I, I would suggest that, uh, the committee here can make whatever changes or adjustments they deem appropriate. Um, I, I would also, uh, remind the committee that, uh, the reason we're here is the Secretary of State failed to implement Georgia law.

198. 0:50:50

     Oh.

199. 0:50:52

     And at the end of the day, the, the driving component in all of this has been a code that the elector cannot interpret. So the reason to do the manual count is to provide confidence to that elector that their vote did count. And, um, I recognize the challenge. I would also point out we have experience in hand-recounting a presidential election.

200. 0:51:28

     When?

201. 0:51:29

     2020. W- wait, was it '4?

202. 0:51:31

     I'm sorry, in terms of certification.

203. 0:51:33

     Ah. Now, we have experience in hand count.

204. 0:51:38

     Post-certification.

205. 0:51:39

     And, and, uh, here's ... I think it was post. I don't know.

206. 0:51:42

     Yeah.

207. 0:51:44

     So I, I, I respect what you're trying to do. I'm just trying to strike a balance between that which we would like to happen-

208. 0:51:51

     I-

209. 0:51:51

     ... and that which we think may be feasible-

210. 0:51:53

     I appreciate that

211. 0:51:54

     ... given those restrictions. But thank you so much for all of your efforts on this. You were ... This has been a yeoman's task for you, I know. And I, I appreciate that so much.

212. 0:52:03

     You're kind. Thank you.

213. 0:52:03

     And thank you for your patience with me this morning. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

214. 0:52:07

     Thank you. And just, uh, just to kind of take a, a moment for a point of clarification, uh, where this amendment, this Section 1.1 is applied in code, uh, i- is it not true that we currently operate under two different levels of certification in our elections process? There's county level certification-

215. 0:52:28

     There's-

216. 0:52:29

     ... and then there's a statutory Secretary of State certification. The timeframe-

217. 0:52:33

     That's correct

218. 0:52:34

     ... is it not true county r- uh, certification is required by 5:00 PM Monday following the election, uh-

219. 0:52:41

     That's correct

220. 0:52:41

     ... which is roughly six days.

221. 0:52:43

     Right.

222. 0:52:43

     And then the Secretary, uh, certification for statewide results is required 17 days after the date of the election, 11 days after county certification. Uh, it, does the ... W- which certification are we talking about in this, this amendment?

223. 0:53:03

     I would suggest that the, the, that this legislation is silent, and, and in that case I would say that current code would prevail. So local elections would be certified, I believe as you pointed out, by the close of business on the Monday following the Tuesday election. Is that correct?

224. 0:53:20

     That's, that's-

225. 0:53:21

     All right. And then-

226. 0:53:21

     Well, that, that's, that's counties

227. 0:53:23

     ... that's counties.

228. 0:53:23

     That's, that's every election.

229. 0:53:24

     Yes.

230. 0:53:24

     But it's, that's the county deadline.

231. 0:53:26

     That's the county deadline.

232. 0:53:26

     Yes.

233. 0:53:27

     I would say that would remain the same, again, unless the will of the committee changes that. That this legislation does not adjust certification dates at the local level or at the state level.

234. 0:53:39

     Okay. But does it place this hand count provision prior to local certification or state certification?

235. 0:53:47

     Again, I think the, uh, uh, the legislation's silent, but if the Secretary of State is gonna rely on local certifications to make the final statewide certification decision, then I would hope that we could have all, uh, required processes for validating that prior to local certification.

236. 0:54:09

     Okay. Thank you.

237. 0:54:13

     Representative Roberts.

238. 0:54:15

     Thank you, Mr. Chair I know, we're going back to 1.1. Um-

239. 0:54:19

     Yeah, it's a, it's a sticky wicket.

240. 0:54:22

     So I got some information since I asked you the question last. Um, Fulton County has done an analysis of what it's going to cost and how many days it's going to take. Um, it's $100,000 per day. They'll have two different shifts running round the clock. You're gonna have to have 125 on the Democratic side and 125 on the Republican side, not including security officers, custodians, material handlers, data entry, all of those folks, right? That's for shift one.

241. 0:54:52

     Then you gotta do shift two 'cause we already said the attention span is short, so you can't have them working 24 hours around the clock, right? So per election, they're estimating $500,000 per election. You got two. That's a million dollars. Now, you said that there was money appropriated in the amended fiscal 2026 budget. There's nothing that requires the Secretary of State to spend that money in this legislation on that cost, number one, and number two, I...

242. 0:55:27

     If one county is a million dollars, $15 million doesn't sound like it's gonna cut it. And so a fiscal note should be required based on these numbers, and according to state law, code section 28-5-49, the Senate, in a bill that's starts in the Senate, has to be waived in the Senate, a fiscal note, if it's required. This is going to be more than an aggreta- aggregate of 5 million across our local governments.

243. 0:55:59

     Code, state law requires y'all to do this. We are not even authorized to take a vote on this bill today without a fiscal note.

244. 0:56:07

     I, I appreciate your input.

245. 0:56:11

     I, I don't have the detailed information you have from Fulton County. I would point out Fulton is one of our largest counties.

246. 0:56:17

     Yeah. Oh, yeah.

247. 0:56:18

     There are about five or so counties that fall into that category. Is it seven?

248. 0:56:23

     I would say at least seven, yeah.

249. 0:56:24

     Uh, I don't think we have seven with over a million people, or near or at a million people, but you may be correct. My, my point is, in 159 counties, the impact is ex- exorbitantly more demanding in about a dozen of those. About a dozen. 10 to 12. And at the end of the day, we can develop processes and procedures that can effectively count manually two races in a timely manner.

250. 0:57:01

     I would suggest that while it was appropriated, Secretary of State's discretion there, it was appropriated to cover costs associated with, um, any election proc- processes and procedures in 2026, and that's what this would do.

251. 0:57:23

     Okay. So I still don't think we've answered the question of state law, because it's in aggregate, it's over f- $5 million-

252. 0:57:30

     Your, your point-

253. 0:57:30

     ... and I think of this-

254. 0:57:31

     ... is well taken

255. 0:57:32

     ... okay. Then my other question is, I think you've told me in the past you're not a lawyer. Is that correct?

256. 0:57:36

     I, I believe I've said that. I believe you are. Is that correct?

257. 0:57:39

     I am.

258. 0:57:39

     Oh, screw it. That, that, that means-

259. 0:57:42

     I, I-

260. 0:57:42

     ... you are so much smarter than I am-

261. 0:57:44

     I am, and I got a-

262. 0:57:45

     ... and, and much more attractive and younger and all those wonderful things

263. 0:57:47

     Oh, thank you so much. You're so generous.

264. 0:57:49

     All right.

265. 0:57:49

     You like my passion too.

266. 0:57:50

     Yeah, I do.

267. 0:57:50

     I think you've told me that before.

268. 0:57:52

     I love the passion.

269. 0:57:52

     Yeah.

270. 0:57:52

     We've, we've had conversations before.

271. 0:57:53

     Uh, y- we have. Yes, Senator. Um, so I guess my other question is, you read this language so eloquently-

272. 0:58:03

     Mm

273. 0:58:03

     ... uh, that, that it, the, the correction of the recount, you keep calling it a hand count. It's a recount. Shall be corrected accordingly.

274. 0:58:14

     Yep.

275. 0:58:14

     It doesn't say according to what.

276. 0:58:16

     That's right.

277. 0:58:17

     Any good lawyer would tell you that you don't draft legislation or a contract that doesn't clearly define what according to what. Also, you've said that it's silent as to whether it's gonna be pre-certification by the counties or pre-certification by the, uh, Secretary of State. Any good lawyer would advise you that you don't leave key terms out of legislation or a contract.

278. 0:58:45

     I, I-

279. 0:58:45

     Would you agree that that might be true?

280. 0:58:47

     I, I would, I would suggest to you that you know the law much better than I.

281. 0:58:50

     Thank you.

282. 0:58:51

     And then I would also suggest that good lawyers crafted this legislation. And I-

283. 0:58:56

     Well, that's open to debate.

284. 0:58:57

     And I accept... I, I'm a, I'm a, I'm a very, very capable, uh, consumer of advice from experts, and so I accept the attorney's recommendations for this language.

285. 0:59:09

     Okay. We have, uh, just a few more comments and then we're gonna get on to public testimony. Uh, Representative Williams.

286. 0:59:17

     Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Well, one of my questions was, are, are we gonna take testimony? And we are gonna take testimony.

287. 0:59:22

     Yes.

288. 0:59:23

     Okay. Well, um, I, I wanted to, um, to comment that I, I have heard from the director of Cobb Board of Elections, and she, um, is unable to be here because they are in the midst of some of these, I think, pre-certification. But, um, and, uh, and Tuesday is certification for them, so they're super busy. Otherwise, I think she would be here. But she wanted me to have the numbers to share with, um, the, the bill sponsor.

289. 0:59:54

     Um, in 2022, the Senate, the number of votes in the Senate race were 310,652 and the governor was 312,215, and in the 2020 presidential race it was 393,746. So, and if, if there, if you had to hand count these, if you had to, um, count- These votes in this one county before 5:00 o'clock on Monday, I, I don't know how you would do that.

290. 1:00:24

     And my only other question was I don't, I don't think it's been clarified. We have talked about money in the budget for, uh, perhaps replacement of machines, but I don't think there has ever been discussed, unless I'm mistaken, any money to compensate the local boards of education for these costs associated with these hand counts. Am I wrong, or is, is there money that has been set aside to help local boards of edu- uh, excuse me, local boards-

291. 1:00:54

     I-

292. 1:00:54

     ... of election with these, uh, enormous tasks?

293. 1:00:59

     The, the funding was allocated through the Secretary of State's office, and so the Secretary of State and the Elections Division would make that, that, uh, allocation.

294. 1:01:07

     We, we, we did allocate in the, uh, the fiscal year 26 amended budget $15 million, uh, specifically for assisting counties in the implementation of, uh, resolving this issue in this election cycle. So that is in the budget. It's in the Secretary of State's, uh, budget.

295. 1:01:24

     But wh- for, for, to go to the locals?

296. 1:01:26

     That is correct. It was specifically stated to, to assist counties.

297. 1:01:30

     Okay.

298. 1:01:30

     Correct.

299. 1:01:30

     Thank you.

300. 1:01:31

     Thank you.

301. 1:01:32

     Chairman Momtahan.

302. 1:01:35

     Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have a couple questions. I'm trying to understand as we work our way through the kind of in, in an ultimate fashion, so we're trying to figure out where we're gonna be. So let's presume that you have an error that's found under Section 1.1.

303. 1:01:53

     Mm.

304. 1:01:54

     You have done a hand count of that ballot, of those ballots to verify. And then let's presume that you do find a large delta. Now, only those two races are given the latitude to have such a recount. So then you've got these lower races, let's say it's a state rep race or a local commission race, who now ask questions. And then does that not open up some ...

305. 1:02:24

     And I have two questions. So this is the first one. Does that not open up some, you know, liability for these folks who then right ... Does that create an opening for people making post-certification litigation?

306. 1:02:39

     I-

307. 1:02:39

     And I think, I think that's ... You know, I can tell you that if there was a large delta, you know, in any number of races, I could see that those folks down ballot would have deep concerns about not having the latitude to do so.

308. 1:02:54

     I would e- I would ... Thank you for the, for the input and the observation. I, I would acknowledge the fact that if there was a large differential, a delta, a large delta, then the top two races are corrected, and then, then I think the Secretary of State and local offic- election officials would step in and validate down ballot races. I would point out this bill also expands the utilization of risk-limiting audits, which is designed to detect any other types of, of, of, of inaccuracy.

309. 1:03:25

     So, uh, at the end of the day, if we find that there are substantial discrepancies by identifying a hand count versus a machine count on the top two races, that the Secretary of State would step in, the local election officials would step in and validate every race that was in question.

310. 1:03:44

     Senator, I would say that the RLA's given the language of Section 1.1 are evidence that there's no, there's a lack of confidence in those RLAs.

311. 1:03:57

     Mm-mm.

312. 1:03:57

     Or we wouldn't have Section 1.1 for the top two races. So I, I would challenge that assumption. As we move forward, I would just say we need to be thoughtful about all races down ballot if those discrepancies are found, uh, because I think there's going to be concerns, and I think you may set yourself up for some post-certification litigation. The second question, if I may, if you'll indulge me, Mr. Chairman. I know that post-certification ballots are made available through open request today.

313. 1:04:27

     That is correct.

314. 1:04:27

     And I'm trying to remember, you know, at what year we passed that down here so that the public could have some transparency about getting those ballots- ... and verifying those counts themselves.

315. 1:04:39

     The, uh, current law, I believe, if I'm correct, and, and, uh, certainly open up to, uh, a correction. The current law requires that all ballots be made, images of those ballots be made public, and that any race and every race is available to the electorate so that they can physically go in and, and for themselves validate a post, i- in a post-certification environment the accuracy of the race. So if I'm a local county commissioner and I choose to, to look at all ballots cast in my district, I can see every ballot cast.

316. 1:05:14

     I cannot see who cast that ballot.

317. 1:05:17

     Yes, sir.

318. 1:05:17

     But I can say, I can count how many votes my opponent received, how many votes I might have received, and whether or not the outcome was accurate.

319. 1:05:25

     No doubt. And thank you, Senator. I would say that, you know, a secret ballot is a cornerstone-

320. 1:05:30

     Yes

321. 1:05:30

     ... of our republic. I, I would just say does that not change the foundation on which we have these ballots? And should these ballots be made available pre-certification in the cases where you have a challenge? And I think it's important for the folks who are demanding, you know, ballot transparency. Of course, we don't want to know who cast that ballot, but don't you think we should make those available?

322. 1:06:02

     I, I hear your concern. I would, uh, suggest that this legislation does not address that particular, uh, option. I believe that we currently have, um, timely ballot access by the electorate, and that they can go in and verify every race in Georgia.

323. 1:06:22

     Thank you, Senator.

324. 1:06:23

     Thank you.

325. 1:06:24

     Okay. Chairman Gullett.

326. 1:06:26

     I feel like my friend to the right's reading my notes and asking my questions, but I do have a que- a couple questions. That was a good question, Martin.

327. 1:06:31

     If you would share them with me, I'd be great.

328. 1:06:33

     You need to watch the school board. I believe it. I believe I'm gonna start putting a divider up over here. Um- So, uh, I have, I have two questions as well. So the down-ballot race related to that, today, if we don't do anything, the two... Say, there's a disrep- discrepancy in the top two, 'cause there's gonna be, just the reality of it. Um, what happens today with the down-ballot races if we don't do anything with the structure of your bill? So the structure, this bill passes state house race. Is it waiting on the two top ones to be certified for the entire certification, or is it those, the rest are certified based on the machine count, the top two are waiting for the hand count?

329. 1:07:12

     The, the, I think your s- your, the second comment is accurate. I believe that this, this bill addresses the top two races. All down-ballot races would be subject to risk-limiting audits per this bill, section one of this bill. I guess section two of this bill deals with risk-limiting audits. And then all other races would be certified using current law and current processes and rules.

330. 1:07:38

     Okay. And so if they're not a Senate and a governor, the, the list of top races, and there are other races, who chooses those? I saw that the others need to be chosen.

331. 1:07:48

     Uh-

332. 1:07:48

     Who chooses those?

333. 1:07:48

     It, it's, it's spelled out if you look, uh, at section two.

334. 1:07:53

     Sure. So who chooses it?

335. 1:07:55

     Uh, section two, you're... It's not chosen. Uh, the, the law spells out that risk-limiting audits in, in, uh, line 70, "If they are on the ballot, each of the following races, president, United States senator, United States representative," realize there are 14 of those, "governor, lieutenant governor, secretary of state, and attorney general, shall be subject to a risk-limiting audit." Then in addition to that, there are additional races on the ballot that one contest would be chosen by the secretary of state, uh, to do a risk-limiting audit of state school superintendent, commissioner of insurance, commissioner of agriculture-

336. 1:08:37

     So where does it say, is it, where does it say by the secretary of state? I guess that's what my question was.

337. 1:08:41

     I, I guess that's a good point.

338. 1:08:43

     Uh, let, let, let me, let me-

339. 1:08:44

     One contest-

340. 1:08:44

     ... let me allow the senator-

341. 1:08:45

     ... of the following races be selected.

342. 1:08:47

     Yeah. There, there is a, uh, a section related to this that's not in this bill-

343. 1:08:52

     Sure. Okay

344. 1:08:52

     ... that defines who that commi-

345. 1:08:53

     I think so. I think that-

346. 1:08:53

     ... that selection committee is. It's the governor, the lieutenant governor, the secretary of state-

347. 1:08:56

     Okay

348. 1:08:56

     ... the speaker of the house.

349. 1:08:58

     Gotcha.

350. 1:08:58

     There's a, there's a defined, statutorily conv- defined committee that makes that selection.

351. 1:09:01

     That rings a bell. One last question, then I'll wrap it up. I know we have lots of testimony to hear. If a county is working in good faith to complete, um, the recount, and it takes longer than the seven days that's provided by law today-

352. 1:09:16

     Correct

353. 1:09:17

     ... what happens? Is there a remedy for that?

354. 1:09:21

     There could be.

355. 1:09:21

     Are they breaking the law if it takes them longer than seven days, if they're working in good faith?

356. 1:09:25

     That, again, is not addressed in this bill. I would, I would anticipate that our local election officials, if this bill becomes law-

357. 1:09:33

     Mm-hmm

358. 1:09:34

     ... would take appropriate means and steps to ensure that they meet a deadline. We have had experiences in the past where, uh, counties have been late in their certification process. And, and as you pointed out, if they are working in good faith-

359. 1:09:51

     Mm-hmm

360. 1:09:52

     ... I believe that we have accepted their results when they were provided.

361. 1:09:57

     Okay. Thank you. I know you worked hard on this bill. I know it was, uh, a challenge. Uh, when you have an amendment to a, a bill on the floor, it's typically engrossed, so we're happy to work through that challenge here, and thanks for your time.

362. 1:10:07

     Thank you.

363. 1:10:08

     Okay. Thank you. That's all the questions the committee has. I do have one final question, if I may, Senator.

364. 1:10:12

     Sure.

365. 1:10:12

     Just, uh, for clarification, uh, is it not true that, uh, a lot of the discussion we've had today, uh, revolve around the November general election? However, uh, should this bill be enacted as it's written, the, uh, ha- the hand count provision would also apply to the special election to fill the Congressional District 13 seat, which election day is July 28th.

366. 1:10:36

     July. Exactly.

367. 1:10:37

     So-

368. 1:10:37

     So this would be an immediate need in that one election.

369. 1:10:42

     Gotcha. Okay. Thank you, sir.

370. 1:10:44

     Thank you.

371. 1:10:45

     Uh, now we're gonna move on to public testimony. We have, uh, I think 20, 20 people signed up, and we do have a, uh, for, for other, uh, commitments, we do have a little bit of a cutoff at 12:00-ish. So we're gonna, uh, go with two minutes per, if we can keep it to that. And I apologize for, for that. Uh, uh, we'll, we'll, uh... Any, anything that goes beyond that can be submitted to, uh, my office or to Molly in the Budget and Research Office, and we will ensure that every committee member gets any, any, uh, written testimony or emails submitted.

372. 1:11:22

     So let's start here. Okay. First signed up on the list, and we're gonna turn on the microphone, uh, at the podium here, is Scott Turner. If, uh, if you will, as you come up, if you'll identify yourself and who you represent, uh, and if it's yourself, uh, uh, you are, where you're from, and, uh, proceed, and we'll start your timer when you get to the podium, sir.

373. 1:11:48

     Good morning. Scott Turner, Eternal Vigilance Action. And I just want to start by saying how wild is it that the same people who believed in 2020 that there were suitcases full of ballots in Fulton County now want a hand count in Fulton County? Um, I just think that's absolutely wild. But I also want to point out to you, I've given you guys a, a report that we've produced at our C3 branch, Eternal Vigilance Institute. It talks about the Georgia election vulnerabilities and mitigations. There is no perfect election system. The hand count is not perfect either.

374. 1:12:19

     Any type of election system needs to have risks mitigated. In this particular case, that this proposal came as a floor amendment and therefore we did not properly vet hand counting and the rid- mitigations that we'd have to put in place. There are a couple things that we identified as continued v- vulnerabilities that should be addressed, and they can be addressed actually by SEB rules, surprisingly, coming from me. But, uh, the wording in the, in the legislation is that this hand count is pre-certification, meaning that it is the official tally, it is what we will go by, and that means that we will have delayed results.

375. 1:12:54

     No more election wins on election nights for those top two races. There is a study from Yale University that was done in October 2024 by Mackenzie Lockhart, who said that every delay causes a six and a half percent drop in voter confidence in the results. This will certainly delay results as we wait for the certified official count for those two races. So I w- I'll put this in front of you. The-- I have been preaching for years to this committee about continuous improvement and having that attitude, and you guys have done a great job of adopting that.

376. 1:13:29

     There's another one that's not an original idea by me, but it's called evidence-based policymaking. It-- Elections are only as good as whether or not people believe in the outcomes, and the longer you wait, the evidence shows us, the less confidence they have in those results. So, um, I would ask that we continue to look at the mitigations i- that we would need to put in place, whether it's rules or laws, but we don't have time to do this.

377. 1:13:59

     There's an election happening right now in the thirteenth Congressional District, and we have good mitigations in place for the system that we're using. It's not perfect. I've never been an advocate for what we have today, but I also know the speed of government and how responsible government works. I want to commend Senator Burns, Chairman Anderson, for their initial work on the bill-

378. 1:14:19

     Thank you

379. 1:14:19

     ... and ask that the amendment be struck.

380. 1:14:21

     Thank you. All right. Thank you very much. Uh, now I'm gonna take a little privilege. We're gonna jump down the list a little bit. I'm gonna call one of my colleagues who has asked to be put on the, uh, agenda. Representative Noelle Kahaian, please, if you'll come to the podium.

381. 1:14:40

     Good morning. Thank you, Committee. My name is Representative Noelle Kahaian. I represent the hardworking district of Henry County, District 81. Uh, thank you for these deliberations. Very important for the confidence in our, uh, elections and also for efficiency, which is very important. Coming from Henry County, I've been a poll watcher, a poll worker, assistant poll manager. I handled, um, the ballots, the actual paper ballots before we had watermarked, which I'm so appreciative that we actually passed hand, uh, watermarked ballots. I was involved in all the recounts and also the, um, ballot review panel, where the ballots, any questionab- questionab- questionable ballots would come to, to me and another colleague, and we would determine, uh, who was the best person that the voter, um, uh, selected.

382. 1:15:26

     So we had many volunteers, and we didn't have to spend, um, as much money as other counties because so many people volunteered. And CD13 will have, uh, many volunteers, uh, also. Uh, so what's important about these hand recounts is that we actually have a recent case where a commissioner lost her race, and the hand recount actually showed that she actually came in first, and that certification was delayed, which is very important in a recent case. I don't remember the specifics. I think there was a programming issue with the BMDs, but that's a- actually a recent case that we had an issue with.

383. 1:16:01

     So that recount helped a lot, uh, to give confidence to our voters that they know that the actual results, um, for their choices are actually being, um, counted. Um, also, uh, they, they did extend that certification and that race, even though the, um, the difference was less than a trigger for a recount. So all those things should be considered. And I would also like to say, even though this isn't part of it, um, here's an absentee ballot. I have heard from many of my constituents that the primary ballots actually say Republican or Democrat on them.

384. 1:16:35

     And to rep Momtahan's point, that's not a secret ballot. Does it say exactly who you vote for? No, but it says Republican or Democrat in the, uh, in the, um, acronym, so that's really important. I will be voting on a absentee ballot because I will not vote on the QR-coded ballots. Hopefully, we can get that in there somewhere, too. Thank you.

385. 1:17:10

     Okay. Next, uh, Joseph Kirk.

386. 1:17:16

     I know. I don't have anything to help

387. 1:17:22

     with this. Thank you very much. My name is Joseph Kirk. I'm the election supervisor in Bartow County, as well as the president of the Assoc- Georgia Association of Voter Registration and Election Officials. Um, here today to speak in opposition to strictly the amendment on the bill. Um, and I appreciate Chairman Burns' confidence in my colleagues. We have always risen to the challenge, but there's that old story about a straw and a camel and breaking the back. And there'll be-- there will come a time that we can't rise to the challenge. I'm not sure if this is the time, but I sure hope it's not. Um, so it's very important we verify tabulated results, and that's what RLAs do.

388. 1:17:58

     And they're the gold standard that balances our resources against the need to verify that, that, that tabulation. Um, recount procedures are just different than auditing procedures. We have to verify that we're, we're getting the count exactly right as we go, where in audits, we expect a small error rate. But we can't accept a small error rate when we're talking about people's votes when that's the final outcome. So we can expect re- manual recounts to take longer We expect them to be, um, more questions about that process.

389. 1:18:29

     And have-- never having done that, I'm not sure how long that's gonna take. I know that, um, with those extra steps, doing it prior to certification will be very, very difficult. We spend the week after the election getting ready for certification, doing all the things we have to do to balance the numbers, investigate the scr-- a- any kind of scripts here, incidents. Everything leading to a, a, a certification meeting on Monday or Tuesday, depending on a holiday, um, when all the ballots haven't even been received or w- we haven't said we're gonna count provisional ballots until that Friday or Monday, and the recount couldn't start till we had everything in.

390. 1:19:03

     So the state certifies in 17 days. Um, there's a lot that has to happen between the time we certify and the state certifies, including the ROAs. The expanded ROAs that are in this, this bill, that, that we-- w- we, we do not oppose the expanding those processes, um, but we do think that it's redundant to hand-count a race and then ROA the same race, um, which is what the bill requires right now. And, um, anything else, I'll submit in writing. I appreciate it. But one final point. In line six two six three of the bill, it talks about before the coun-- superintendent certifies, and that would be talking about the county certification, not the state certification.

391. 1:19:41

     Okay. Thank you. Rebecca Anglin.

392. 1:19:55

     Good morning. Thank you for the opportunity to speak. My name is Rebecca Anglin, and I'm the election director in Greene County. Um, today, I'm speaking not only on behalf of the GaVRIO membership, but also as someone who personally agrees with the position that we are taking. I want to address several concerns and explain why there are aspects of this proposal that election officials simply cannot support. A hand count of two races before certification would drastically alter the timelines that are currently in place. It would also affect runoff elections, voter registration processing, list maintenance, and many other critical election functions in every county across the state of Georgia.

393. 1:20:34

     Based on our experience, this process would take upwards of two weeks to complete. In Greene County, I currently conduct 100% hand recount of every ballot each election. In November of 2024, it took three teams two full days to hand-count 12,000 ballots. That was one contest. Now, imagine a county such as Fulton County, where nearly half a million ballots will be cast this November. Consider the amount of time required to hand-count one race.

394. 1:21:05

     Multiply that by two. It's not feasible for our metros to accomplish this feat in five days. This is election regression. If the proposal is to delay certification and then certify the hand count instead of the tabulated results, we must ask an important question: How can we claim a hand count is more accurate when we know human error is inevitable? We would be trusting a manual count for the top two races while continuing to rely on re- tabulated results for every contest further down the ballot.

395. 1:21:38

     That inconsistency simply does not align with common sense. If the goal is to ensure accuracy, and I believe it is, there are proven ways that we can accomplish this. We can implement processes that verify the tabulated results accurately reflect the voter selections. Those processes already exist through risk-limiting audits, provide a meaningful way to strengthen confidence while maintaining efficiency and accuracy.

396. 1:22:04

     Thank you.

397. 1:22:04

     I'll skip the rest 'cause I know I'm done. But I certainly appreciate your time here today.

398. 1:22:08

     Thank you very much. All right. And, uh, again, I'm gonna give a little privilege to s- another one of my colleagues. I invite, uh, Representative Saira Draper to come up and address. And then following Saira will be, uh, Mr. Todd Edwards.

399. 1:22:22

     Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Um, so Saira Draper. Um, I appreciate the deliberation, uh, that was used to come up with the first version of this bill. I think that when we don't do things deliberately and thoughtfully, uh, there can be unintended consequences. And certainly from the presentation today, uh, there's many unintended consequences from this bill, um, from not being able to figure out whether it's certification of the state or certification of the county, um, to, to being unclear on whether it's top two, uh... It says top two races need to be hand-counted, but in primary runoffs, there's actually four sets of top two races, right?

400. 1:22:56

     We just had it in this last primary runoff. In the GOP side, it was the governor's race and the, uh, um... Well, anyways, it was four races, not two. But here's my point. I just wanna make one point, uh, to my GOP friends. In 2020, we had two Senate runoffs. The Senate runoffs occurred in January of 2021. That was nine weeks after the 2020 election. Do you know what happened between the presidential election and the runoff election for Senate?

401. 1:23:25

     No.

402. 1:23:25

     Huge numbers of people in Georgia registered to vote for the first time so that they could participate in that runoff election. What we did in SB 202 is we moved the runoffs back. We closed it. Instead of being nine weeks after the presidential election, we made it four weeks after the presidential election. And in doing that, we closed the federal registration period. Because we moved those races, those runoffs back, now no one can register in between the November presidential election and the runoffs now in December.

403. 1:23:59

     Why do I bring this up? I think one of the unintended consequences of this bill is if that you, uh, call for hand recounts of two races, our counties are telling you they cannot do that by the certification deadline. That is going to push all the deadlines back. That is gonna push the runoffs back. And if the runoffs get pushed back any more than what they are right now, you are gonna allow more people to register for those runoffs. So I don't know if that's something you want

404. 1:24:30

     But I would submit to you that's probably an unintended consequence of this bill that you should consider when considering this amendment. Thank you.

405. 1:24:36

     Thank you. Todd Edwards, and then Ms. Cindi Battles.

406. 1:24:40

     Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of the committee. I'm Todd Edwards. I'm the director of governmental affairs with the Association of County Commissioners. Um, I can't state any more, uh, concerns that, uh, that have not already been expressed, uh, by our election officials. First of all, I wanna thank the Senate, the House for considering, uh, the original SB3X, uh, moving the dead- deadline, uh, off from, uh, till two- 2028 for the QR codes. That's very much appreciative. However, we do have concerns with the amendment that was offered to Section 1.1, that's on the manual recount, the hand count, and we respectfully ask y'all's consideration in removing that from the bill.

407. 1:25:16

     Uh, pointed out, and Saira pointed out, excuse me, Representative Draper, that there are actually before in primary races top two on each one of the ballots. And over the years, ACCG has only come before you to comment on election bills when it impacted the cost counties, local taxpayers' cost, and administration of elections. And we feel that this amendment, uh, definitely impacts both of them, as stated, uh, I believe, through the questions and through our election officials. Um, again, touch on a couple of the issues that have been covered.

408. 1:25:47

     Uh, there was money in the, I guess, the FY26 amended budget, five million to hand count, 15 million, uh, to election officials. My understanding is the secretary of state has not, uh, for lack of a better word, earmarked, sent that money out yet. The other concern is that's a one-time funding appropriation. Will that continue into the future? Is this something that we should be asking for each year? Is this something the legislature has an appetite for in the, in the, in the era of cutting budgets? Um, second, uh, the, the timeline is too short.

409. 1:26:18

     It's gonna impact the certification of election. There was a lot of discussion up here about discrepancies, the time to resolve. That's gonna eat away at the time ticking going toward that timeline. So with that, I'm always short, sweet, to the point, Mr. Chairman. We respectfully ask, we're not commenting on any other aspects of the bill other than the manual recounts, and we ask that, uh, please be removed.

410. 1:26:38

     Thank you. Cindi Battles, and then Brittany Burns.

411. 1:26:46

     Good morning, afternoon, committee. My name is Cindi Battles. I am the policy director for the People's Agenda. And y'all, I trusted the sponsor of the bill and the Senate Ethics Committee when they said that any change to this bill would impede the passage of the bill, and I went camping this weekend.

412. 1:27:07

     Imagine my surprise when my phone blew up and I found out what was going on. Um, election supervisors were calling me panicked because they cannot make this work. Um, voters are panicked because it feels like it's going to, um, be detrimental to the integrity of our elections. We had the bill. I rolled my eyes a little bit at the RLA expansion because the more you remove random chance from RLAs, the more you remove them from, like, being the gold standard of audits, but it's fine. I have died on that hill. I am no longer willing to fight it. But this amendment has to come off this bill.

413. 1:27:39

     It just has to. We're talking about money. We're talking about the inability for election supervisors to, to do their job. We're talking about the certification of our elections. Like, this... It, it's... No offense to anyone, it is poorly written. There are too many things about this that, uh, that, that ask too many questions, and we are running out of time to get this done during the special session. So everything else I can live with. I... But, uh, this part- I, I am just asking whatever substitute that y'all are working on, this part comes out.

414. 1:28:13

     Thank you.

415. 1:28:15

     Thank you. Brittany Burns, and then Martha O'Brien.

416. 1:28:21

     Good morning, committee. My name is Brittany Burns, and I am born and raised and living here in Atlanta, Georgia. I'm here to address SB3X. Mandating a hand count for each and every county is expensive, difficult, and prone to human error. This will impact rural counties with limited infrastructure as well as large counties with hundreds of thousands of ballots to count. Hand counts should not nullify machine results. Hand counts do not make elections more accurate or more transparent.

417. 1:28:53

     Hand counting is actually significantly more error-prone and more costly than machine counting. It's also slower, delaying the delivery of election results and risking certification problems. Senator Burns said that it would provide confidence. I am putting it on record as a Georgia voter that this does not make me feel confident. He's gotta get it together, and hopefully wisdom will rain down on him because we are all too old to be here this morning having to deal with a last-minute amendment while also having to deal with a special session.

418. 1:29:25

     And in the past Georgia State Election Board's meetings, it has been testified multiple times that if the hand counts cannot add up to the same amount, they will use the machine for accuracy. So what really is the point of this? Is this a petty attempt of making election poll workers' jobs harder? Is this because we're mad that something's nit now? Is this also because leaders are being hungry and power hungry and trying to make more decisions that instead cause more, um, voter unfairness and lack accessibility?

419. 1:30:00

     This special session was called by Governor Brian Kemp to address logistical and funding issues caused by SB 189's July 1st, 2026 deadline. The components of the bill, aside from retif- retif- retifying the QR code issue, falls outside the constitutional scope of the governor's special session proclamation. Please answer that more clear next time, because doing all those examples when you can say yes or no, we are sick and tired of it We're sick and tired of it.

420. 1:30:32

     And a lot of y'all on this committee show today that you're sick and tired of it. Senator Burns, do better. You know how to.

421. 1:30:39

     Okay. Thank you. Thank you.

422. 1:30:40

     Thank you.

423. 1:30:42

     Uh, Martha O'Brien, and then Kristin Nabors.

424. 1:30:46

     Hi. Thank you for letting me speak, and thank you for your service. I appreciate it. I live in Roswell, Georgia. I've lived in Georgia for 37 years. I came here from a primitive state, and I'm not gonna say the name of the state 'cause I don't wanna shame relatives that I have from that state. But all my life I wanted to get to a place where it was in the South and there was, there were people discussing things and trying to get it right, and things were moving forward. And when I moved here in '89, I found it, and I'm just really proud to be a Georgian.

425. 1:31:21

     And so with all this election stuff, I, I'm a CPA, okay? And I've worked in technology. With all of this, I'm like, "Wait, wait, stop," you know? 'Cause I've got a background with audits and numbers, and I'm like, "What's going on?" Well, I appreciate the senator, you know, speaking to us and giving us his time, and he missed Father's Day and that. There are a couple things that really jump for me. One is ensuring Georgians have elections they can believe in, right? Well, I'm a CPA. I'm educated partially in Georgia.

426. 1:31:51

     I've worked in Georgia. I work with numbers, and I've worked with technology. And so primitive is not what I believe in, and counting by hand is primitive. And so just the word hand count, I'm like, "Wait, stop." I was working as a CPA earlier in my career, literally with an 18-column spreadsheet.

427. 1:32:14

     Hey.

428. 1:32:14

     Literally with a pencil, before mechanical pencils.

429. 1:32:18

     Yeah.

430. 1:32:18

     That's not true. That can't be true. Anyway, I did this five days a week, eight hours a day. I made mistakes. I had a calculator right here. I could do it in my sleep. I made mistakes. I was paid to get it right. I did it every day. What are these people gonna do who are used to having a phone in front of their face all the time? How are these people gonna focus on that and get it right? I just can't see that. To me, we're going back to primitive. I took a minute last night to see what's Georgia's history.

431. 1:32:50

     Why do I feel good about this election thing? OMG, we've been through this. We beat this thing to death. We were the first state to get it right. We've done it. KSU put together a research project breaking it all down. We know how to do it. I'm a proud Georgian. Let's keep that.

432. 1:33:13

     Thank you, Ms. O'Brien.

433. 1:33:14

     Please.

434. 1:33:14

     Thank you. Next, Kristin Nabors, then Elizabeth Hendrickson.

435. 1:33:20

     Uh, good morning, committee. Uh, Kristin Nabors with All Voting Is Local action. I've heard people say, you know, "Hand counts are so simple. What's hard about counting pieces of paper?" If you've never done it, you don't realize how long it takes, and it's so repetitive, and people make so many errors. I know we've talked about Nevada, where they had a 25% error rate in their hand count attempt. Rice University in Texas did a study where their participants, uh, had to count just 120 ballots with two races. They got the tabulation right 58% of the time. Uh, nationwide, very few jurisdictions with more than 1,000 voters conduct full hand counts.

436. 1:33:53

     And I've watched multiple hand counts right here in Georgia. Um, people miscount. They say one number when they mean a different one, and they make mistakes. I watched a Spalding County election worker read out a long string of totals while another person punched the numbers into the calculator. They tried it twice, and both totals were significantly off, one by as much as 10%. I knew the numbers added up because I'd been tracking the totals in a spreadsheet. They added up, but this was a simple mistake made by people who were tired, and it threw the whole count off. It took a third try after a weekend where everybody got some rest for them to make the numbers add up correctly.

437. 1:34:27

     We already do hand counts. We do small hand counts as part of our risk-limiting audits. Election experts recognize our RLAs as the gold standard. Ours have consistently shown that Georgia's machine tabulators count every vote quickly, securely, and accurately. So I know we've talked about bank accounts. So imagine, and if people said, you know, "I count my money at the bank." I do, too, but imagine all the money in your account, all of it, is in $1 bills, and it's spread all across the state, and thousands of teams are counting $1 bills. And then the total they come up with is what goes back in your account.

438. 1:34:57

     Mm-hmm.

439. 1:34:58

     By making the hand count supersede the machine count, that's what we're doing with our ballots. In a close election, the wrong person could be declared the winner. It can mean expensive and drawn-out court cases. It can mean angry people protesting all over the state. It can lead to dangerous disinformation that puts our election workers in danger. Voters can lose confidence in our elections. They won't know if the right person was elected or if their votes were accurately counted. Please do not subject Georgia to this. Please strip the hand-counting provision from this bill. Thank you so much.

440. 1:35:24

     Thank you. Elizabeth Hendrickson, and then Betsy Shackleford.

441. 1:35:30

     Hi. My name is Elizabeth Hendrickson, and I'm from Cobb County. SB 3 EX began as a responsible way to handle the current situation regarding election systems in Georgia. Moving the deadline for QR code removal from ballots to January 1st, 2028 gives time for the committee established in the bill to thoughtfully create its report, time for the legislature to carefully consider any recommendations and appropriate funds, and time for the secretary of state's office to test and source equipment that best meets the needs of Georgians. This rational, deliberate approach will be well-received by the majority of voters who already have confidence in our system.

442. 1:36:07

     To keep this voter confidence, some changes need to be made. It is fundamentally unfair to have a committee such as that established in Section 1 completely selected by one party to make all the decisions surrounding the selection of a voting system. Such a one-sided situation will only decrease voter trust. Please consider an amendment adding requirements for democratic representation on the committee, or at a minimum, change the word establish in line 19 to recommend. Section 1.1, adding hand counts to the process, and section 2 of the bill, adding audits to the pre-certification process, are potentially unconstitutional since both may be outside the purview of the proclamation.

443. 1:36:46

     Likely court challenges could risk having the whole bill thrown out, or at least delaying its taking effect, throwing elections back into uncertainty and causing erosion of voter confidence. Both sections are also impractical and add unnecessary burdens on county elections departments, as you have heard, and with little benefit. Please remove sections 1.1 and section 2 of this bill, add some assurances of bipartisan representation on the committee established by this bill, and support moving the deadline for QR code removal. Thank you very much.

444. 1:37:18

     Thank you. Uh, Betsy Shackleford, and then Rachel, is it Solar?

445. 1:37:24

     Raynel Solar.

446. 1:37:26

     Oh, sorry. Very... Thank you.

447. 1:37:28

     Betsy Shackleford, DeKalb County. Greg Dolezal forced an amendment on what was a reasonable bill that both sides could live with. As we've heard, hand-counting ballots is beyond fu- beyond foolish, and to slap such a requirement on county offices before certification, as many have told you, is just, really, in my opinion, just an effort to disrupt elections and prevent certification. It appears that Dolezal is just looking for a way to get votes from MAGA extremists.

448. 1:38:00

     He and other MAGA extremists think if th- that if they create chaos, which this would do, they can somehow use the Georgia General Assembly to determine election outcomes. I am so sad that this foolishness has happened. The stage was set for a bill both parties could get onbo- board with. Now Dolezal has squandered that to pursue MAGA extremism for his own political gain. Please, use your common sense and stop this disastrous amendment.

449. 1:38:36

     Okay. Raynel Solar, and then, uh, Karina, and I'm gonna let you tell us your last name when you get up there.

450. 1:38:44

     Hi, my name is Raynel Solar, and I've been a poll worker in DeKalb County for over six years now. Um, many of us have heard already that hand-counting of ballots is more expensive, increases errors, and takes more time. I will try and keep this short. There's an MIT study that shows an error rate of 8% for hand count, machine count of 0.5%. Let's keep the machines and the computers. Um, one of the things I wanna add, um, because the, this bill seems to be encouraged by helping voter confidence.

451. 1:39:22

     I will say, honestly, I have confidence in the current system, but for those who don't, they, for some reason, believe in hand counts. What I would like to encourage people to do is to educate those voters. We have a good, strong system. It's been proven over and over, lawsuit after lawsuit. Let's educate voters on how the system works, how a risk-limiting audit works, and maybe they can feel better about their vote being counted, because we all, as part of our democracy-

452. 1:39:59

     Yeah

453. 1:40:00

     ... want to make sure our vote counts, and everyone deserves to feel like that vote counts. Thank you.

454. 1:40:07

     Yeah. Thank you. And Karina... I'm gonna try this. Ramachandran. Close?

455. 1:40:12

     That was excellent.

456. 1:40:13

     Okay.

457. 1:40:14

     Thank you so much.

458. 1:40:16

     A- and following you will be, uh, Dr. Conrad Hayashi.

459. 1:40:20

     So my first name is Karuna Ramachandran. Um, thank you for the opportunity to speak. Um, I'm with Pro Georgia, our state civic engagement table. We also believe that, um, voter education and engagement is critical for all voters across the state, and we've heard today that the amendment to this bill, bill brings so many questions from this committee. It follows that voters will be confused and concerned about this change to the way that elections are tabulated.

460. 1:40:50

     Um, I'll be brief because I wish to echo many of the comments you have already heard. We are concerned, of course, about this amendment. Um, mandating hand count for each and every county is next to impossible, as we've heard from experts already. It is, it seems, unfunded, or that part seems to be very unclear. Um, we've already heard that the timing for this is nearly impossible to do, uh, from election supervisors, as well that hand counts are less reliable than machine counts, and they should not nullify machine results, if that's even what the bill is saying.

461. 1:41:28

     Um, that part seems to be unclear from conversations earlier. Um, we believe, as many others have commented, that establishing a hand count would undermine voters' confidence in our election systems, and we ask that you remove that amendment. Thank you.

462. 1:41:45

     Okay. Thank you, uh, Dr. Hayashi, and then Don Hackney.

463. 1:41:50

     Good morning, gentlemen, ladies. Uh, I am Conrad Hayashi from, uh, Decatur, and, uh, had a chance to also be a 30-year Navy veteran, uh, served, and opportunities in Haiti, Iraq, uh, Kuwait, uh, and then in Peru, actually during some of their elections. And I am empathic, uh, to Chairman Burns's concerns regarding, uh, having election integrity. Uh, however, I think that the, uh, amendment is-

464. 1:42:25

     The amendment is, is simply not ready for primetime. Uh, I am not a lawyer, uh, even though I have stayed at a Motel 6 now and then. Um, uh, and but I think that these-- some of these legal issues need to be reviewed before this would even come before, uh, the group. Uh, I've been involved with medical studies at different times, and when you do hand entries, we-- when you have to do double data entry, you have to validate those things, uh, when it's just very difficult and very slow, and it's costly.

465. 1:43:03

     Uh, I will analogize. When I was a ship's physician, I actually had to do individual blood counts on slides. Compare that with the accuracy of doing automated analysis, and you can get much more accuracy every time. When you do things and you ask individuals to even review slide sets or, uh, go through data and written materials on a s- one-by-one person basis, even for the individuals who did it the first time, there is an error rate that's very common.

466. 1:43:41

     So you are looking at implementing a mechanism to decrease confidence by having this amendment. I would ask that you have a more bipartisan organization and that you also, uh, make sure that you do not try and do hand counting. Thank you.

467. 1:44:01

     Thank you. Don Hackney, then Charice Johnson.

468. 1:44:11

     I'm Don Hackney, a retired Atlanta attorney. Section 2 of this bill regarding pre-certification audits and the hand count amendment are both unconstitutional. This is not a close call or a gray area. The Georgia Constitution governs special sessions. Article 5, Section 2, Paragraph 7 provides that, quote, "No laws shall be enacted at any such special session except those which relate to the purposes listed, stated in the proclamation." You can look at Governor Kemp's proclamation all day long, and you will not find these provisions listed as legitimate subjects for laws during this session.

469. 1:44:53

     And Governor, excuse me, and Governor Kemp's proclamation itself correctly prohibits the legislature from acting on purposes not listed in this proclamation. In my view, there's no persuasive argument that either of these two provisions is listed in or covered by the QR code purpose specified by the governor. The QR code purpose only allows two things: one, that the, uh, a law that deals with the QR code deadline, and a law that moves forward towards removing the codes.

470. 1:45:27

     Neither the audit provision nor the recount provision addresses this required subject matter in any way. As further evidence, neither of the current statutes governing pre-certification audits or recounts makes any mention of QR codes. Similarly, the statute that establishes our electronic voting system, which uses QR codes, doesn't mention audits or recalls at all. The solution is simple. Address these issues in an orderly fashion just six months from now in the next session.

471. 1:46:01

     There's no emergency here. Lastly, does this committee have a written legal opinion from an unbiased constitutional attorney or an attorney general opinion? Are you really willing to gamble, throw the dice, that when a court rules these provisions to be unconstitutional, it won't invalidate the entire QR code law, causing our November election to be void?

472. 1:46:25

     Thank you.

473. 1:46:25

     Please do. Thank you very much.

474. 1:46:27

     All right. Charice Johnson, and then I believe Jonathan Mann.

475. 1:46:36

     Good morning, uh, Chairman Anderson and the members of the committee. I'm Charice Johnson with the League of Women Voters of, of Georgia Advocacy and Policy Committee. We are nonpartisan. We support no candidate and no party, and we have worked over a century to protect accurate and secure elections. We share the goal of SB 3EX, but we urge you to reject Section 1.1 in its entirety, the amendment that would force every county to hand count, hand recount the top two races on every ballot before certifi- certifying.

476. 1:47:16

     Here's why. It makes the least accurate method the f- the official one. Study after study shows hand counts are more error-prone than the scanners Georgia uses, one and one half to two times the error rate. The most recent real-world attempt in Nye County, Nevada, was off by 25%. This amendment would have let that hand count override that, the machine count. It cannot be done in the time of the law allows. Consider Cherokee County, represented on this committee by Vice Chair Thomas.

477. 1:47:50

     In 2024, hand counting just the top two races there would mean about 192,000 ballots, roughly 2,800 man-hours, dozens of temporary counters the county does not have. In Fulton County, it is nearly 700 ballots, about 10,000 man-hours, 200 counters working 10-hour days for five days straight. And every county must finish before the mandatory certification deadline, the Monday after election, while also curing ballots and running the audit.

478. 1:48:27

     In 2020, Georgia hand-counted one race, and it took nearly eight days. This asks for two races every election in six. It is unfund- it is an unfounded mandate, and it falls hardest on our rural counties, offices run by two to three people with no budget to hire and train and county teams for every, uh, election. Finally, this is unnes- unnecessary. It already expands, III-X already expands risk-limiting audits which verify the machine's count against the paper ballots accurately and efficiently.

479. 1:49:01

     That is the right tool, and it's already in the bill.

480. 1:49:04

     Thank you.

481. 1:49:04

     Keep the-- Thank you. I do have handouts if you all are interested and love that

482. 1:49:08

     If- if you'll provide us to this afterwards, we'll make sure they get to the committee.

483. 1:49:11

     Thank you.

484. 1:49:12

     Uh, Jonathan Mann, and then I believe it's Karen Mc- McCown.

485. 1:49:18

     I think she left.

486. 1:49:19

     Okay.

487. 1:49:20

     Good morning, ladies and gentlemen of the committee. My name is Jonathan Mann. Good morning, ladies and gentlemen of the committee. My name is Jonathan Mann. I'm here to speak today to the recount amendment. I'm here to speak today to the recount amendment. Spoken language serves us well in most circumstances, and we make our ideas plain.

488. 1:49:53

     Spoken language serves us well in most circumstances, and we make our ideas plain. Misunderstandings are always possible, we all know that, but they're rare among native speakers of the same language. Misunderstandings are possible, but they're rare among speakers of the same language. So we don't repeat ourselves endlessly. We just communicate.

489. 1:50:26

     So we don't repeat ourselves endlessly. We just communicate. Recounting badly and inaccurately a count that has done itself well and accurately is bad and odd. Recounting badly a count that has been done properly is odd. And as it's been pointed out, sometimes the recount is different and less accurate.

490. 1:50:58

     And as has been pointed out accurately, sometimes recount is. What you're proposing is what I am doing now. What you're proposing is doing now I. You're proposing a bad system to verify slowly at a time when time is precious and the public's eyes are open something that was done well the first time.

491. 1:51:30

     And guess what? As we've all heard, you time run out of. Thank you.

492. 1:51:39

     Thank you. Next, uh, Jane Branscum, and then followed by Garland Favorito.

493. 1:51:54

     Hard act to follow. I'm Jane Branscum. I'm in, I live in Atlanta, and I'm here representing myself. Thank you for hearing me. I, um, don't have a whole lot to add. Uh, so much has been said well. Um, the recount that I, as I envision it, the, um, the question about, uh, interpretation of the word accordingly, the, the count will be corrected accordingly. So when I do a count of a pile of cash or a pile of anything, um, if I come up with a number that's different than what I expected, I'm gonna count again, right?

494. 1:52:32

     So if there's a first count and it's off by any amount from what the machine count said, then surely there's gonna-- the question's gonna be, "So we need to count again in each method to see what, which one is correct." And, um, so I just think that the, um, the likelihood of getting, uh, any more, um, accuracy through this process is really, really low. And then I'm imagining being a, um, a citizen who decides to go to my polling place, um, after the polls close to look at the poll tape, and I see a poll tape where the top number is scratched out and a handwritten number replaces it, and I'm thinking, "Am I gonna feel confident in that number?" Thank you.

495. 1:53:21

     Thank you. Uh, Garland Favorito, and then followed by Tamara Favorito.

496. 1:53:27

     Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I wanted to try to address some of the questions that have been asked today. First of all, the reason that we're here is because our votes are hidden in a QR code that we cannot verify, and that is Republican, Democrat, and Independent, such as myself. In the case that, uh, Representative Kahaian mentioned in DeKalb County, which I know several of y'all are aware of, the system declared the wrong winners and shorted the candidate 75% of her votes.

497. 1:54:00

     This is real. This is not in another state. This is in DeKalb County 20- in 2022. And the only reason she found out, because she got no votes in the precinct where she and her husband and family lived. A hand count, uh, proved that that system counted wrong. This is reality. And the system shorted her 75% of the votes. There has never been a hand count in American history that had a 75% error rate as our current machines have right now today.

498. 1:54:36

     And that is why we are here, and that is the one, one of the things on the recounts. Now, I wanna just go to the issue of will, will an RLA satisfy for a recount? No. I wanna quote you three experts who have all testified in court cases. Dr. Stark says that a risk-limiting audit, he is the inventor of the process, is meaningless on a BMD system. That was all the way back in the letter that some of y'all received back in 2018.

499. 1:55:08

     Also, the state's own expert says that an RLA can never audit what a BMD showed to a voter. That is, uh, Juan Gilbert. Again, just in, in the last two years. And then finally, I wanna mention to you Dr. Alex Halderman's security analysis in the same report says that no practical method of pre-election or parallel testing can rule out malware-based fraud. That is why we're here.

500. 1:55:35

     Thank you. Tamara Favorito.

501. 1:55:40

     Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Tamara Favorito with Voter GA. Um, I just wanna concentrate on the amendment for the hand recount. Uh, as Garland said, we do support that amendment. And I just wanted to remind everybody that the 2020 presidential statewide hand recount revealed some very important inconsistencies, major ballot discrepancies in Fulton, a major counting error in Coffee, and a vote flip in Ware County.

502. 1:56:13

     Now, since then, some of our counties have done hand recounts, and Representative Gullett, I believe Paulding County does a hand recount 100% of the races after every election. We have dif- seen different methods used. We've seen tests for them. We have the statistics, and there are checks in each of these, um, methods. So it's not a matter of one person counting and it not being caught.

503. 1:56:45

     Uh, and you only pass the ballot one time, so whether you count one or two, you're only increasing, by each race, two to three seconds per ballot per race. So it's not redoing everything for every race. Also wanted to point out, uh, just a couple of, based on comments that were made today, um, Senator Burns and Representative Blackmon worked very hard to get ballots made public record.

504. 1:57:22

     It was finally passed in SB 189. But I'm here to tell you the counties have made it so expensive that those ballots are not available to the public. Um, there's been mention of the, there being no fiscal note. And I remind you, there was no fiscal note when we spent $107 million on the current system. Thank you.

505. 1:57:49

     Okay. Thank you. That is everyone we had signed up to speak today. I wanna thank the committee for being here. Senator Burns, thank you for being with us today, and, uh, hanging with us through all this discussion, allowing these good comments to be heard. Uh, did you... I'd like to recognize, uh, Representative Oliver.

506. 1:58:07

     Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for allowing this testimony. I think it's very valuable. I am very concerned, based on the Senate's habit of adjourning early, which they have done multiple times, and particularly recently, their failure to pass a correction of the QR code on April 2nd. I'm very concerned about the timing of our action. If we don't meet until tomorrow morning on a substitute, how are we going to get a bill passed before they decide to adjourn, perhaps by noon tomorrow? I just wanna raise that concern.

507. 1:58:37

     Th- thank you for the concern. We are cognizant of that situation, and, uh, unfortunately, we can't control what the other chamber does. Uh, they have their own agenda they're working under and, and schedule. So we're, we're working as promptly and as expeditiously as possible to do this the, the way the House does business. So thank you. With that, we are adjourned.