PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Research and Technology.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 9, 2019
Safeguarding Election Infrastructure Act of 2019
This bill addresses the security of federal elections, including by requiring paper ballots, requiring audits of election results, and providing support for voting system security improvements.
Voting systems must use individual, durable, voter-verified, paper ballots beginning one year after enactment of this bill. The ballots must be marked and made available for inspection and verification by the voter before the vote is cast and counted.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
The bill prohibits states or other jurisdictions from acquiring electronic voting systems for use in a federal election that do not produce a voter-verified paper record.
States must audit election results in competitive races beginning in November 2022. Audits must consist of random hand counts of paper ballots. The Election Assistance Commission (EAC) must pay states to cover the costs of audits.
The EAC must award grants to states to improve voting system security by updating or testing voting equipment, keeping offline backups of voter registration lists, providing a secure platform for disseminating vote totals, or taking other specified actions.
If the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) determines that the security of a state's voting system or voter registration database was breached or is investigating whether a breach occurred, then DHS must report on the determination or investigation to specified congressional committees and the state election office. At the request of a state, DHS must collaborate with the state election office to help prevent and respond to threats to the security of the state's voting systems and voter registration databases.
People & committees
Rep. Dingell, Debbie [D-MI-12] · D–MI
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Research and Technology.
Referred to the Committee on House Administration, and in addition to the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on House Administration, and in addition to the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Jan 3, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.378 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.378 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.378 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.378 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.