Senate State Affairs met on July 11 to consider pending business on SB 1. A recording of the hearing can be found here.
This report is intended to give you an overview and highlight of the discussions on the various topics taken up. It is not a verbatim transcript of the discussions but is based upon what was audible or understandable to the observer and the desire to get details out as quickly as possible with few errors or omissions.
Opening Comments
- Hughes – Intent is to vote on committee amendments presented in the July 10 hearing
- Hughes – The ones that are adopted will be rolled into a committee substitute so we will not require a vote on the floor for each amendment
SB 1Â (Hughes et al.) Relating to election integrity and security, including by preventing fraud in the conduct of elections in this state; increasing criminal penalties; creating criminal offenses; providing civil penalties
- Birdwell – Is one additional amendment that was not presented on July 10, Committee Amendment 10 (Hughes)
Committee Amendment 1 (Hughes) – Raising the class of penalty for refusing to accept a watcher
- Hughes – Two separate offences at issue; unlawful obstruction is current law and
- is a Class A misdemeanor
- Hughes – Creating a new offense for refusing to accept a watcher; in filed bill it is Class B, but amendment would raise to Class A misdemeanor
- Zaffirini – Cites differences between Class B and Class A; you would say that this should be a Class A?
- Yes, aligning with obstruction of a poll watcher
- Lucio – Explain what the process will be if an election official is charged with refusal of a watcher
- Poll watchers are appointed and must be let in by election official; watcher would report and the courts would make the decision
- Lucio – Severity of the punishment is what public is concerned about
- Amendment adopted (6-3)
Committee Amendment 2 (Hughes) – Repeal of the penalty for assistant compensation
- Amendment adopted (9-0)
Committee Amendment 3 (Hughes) – Regarding pre-filled eligibility on registration forms
- Amendment adopted (9-0)
Committee Amendment 4 (Hughes) – Regarding the reason someone is excused for jury service
- Amendment adopted (6-3)
Committee Amendment 5 (Hughes) – Regarding the Office of Court Administration forms for promulgation
- Amendment adopted (9-0)
Committee Amendment 6 (Hughes) – Regarding candidates sending ballot by mail applications
- Amendment adopted (9-0)
Committee Amendment 7 (Hughes) – Regarding open records exceptions
- Amendment adopted (9-0)
Committee Amendment 8 (Hall) – Regarding tally tapes
- Amendment adopted (9-0)
Committee Amendment 9 (Hall) – Not voted on
- Lucio – Are we skipping amendment 9?
- Birdwell – Correct, was pulled down by Sen. Hall; will not be adopting or voting on this today
- Hughes asks Birdwell to give Hall time to discuss what is going on with this amendment
- Hall – Have discussed this with Hughes and there is reservation for all the code that would have to be addressed
- Hall – Expect some language from the SOS on the code; specifically concerning what it says about early voting and election day
- Hall – Seems universal support of this amendment from the Democratic chair and another county judge
- Hall – Does not need to be a break between early voting and election day; would save money and reduce complexity
- Lucio – Amendment would eliminate the three-day gap between the two; is no telling what issues could be caused with that
- Lucio – A time period would be important to consider; considered a study first last session, need to look at how much time
- Hall – SOS already started on the study, hoping to have those results tomorrow
- Lucio – Some of us were not apprised/a part of the study; would not support that at this time
- Schwertner – Voting would start on a Thursday, not a Monday
- Hall – Yes, but does not change the total amount of voting days
- Schwertner – Would be an issue of implementation; would be more comfortable if we got written assurance from the SOS they could implement before the next election
- Hall – Should get that from them by tomorrow
- Birdwell – In my county, most early voting is consolidated and then the machines are disbursed; concerned about the fiscal impact, SOS should provide us with that information
- Hall – Talked to election officers in all size counties; would not require additional machines, but just doing it a little differently
- Hall – Could be a cost savings
- Hall – 21 other states do this election period already
- Birdwell – Asked if fiscal impact could be in the SOS’s letter Schwertner mentioned
- Schwertner – Are 21 states who do this, is there any information on who this effects turnout on election day? We want turnout to still be good on election day
- Hall – Will get that information to you
- Lucio – Could members get the SOS’s study before it is on the floor?
- Hall – This may not be going to the floor until Tuesday; will get it to you on Monday
Committee Amendment 10 (Hughes)
- Hughes – About checking the citizenship on voter rolls; concerned about the timing of naturalized citizens
- Amendment codifies the 2019 SOS settlement
- If a person registers to vote saying they are a citizen, but then tells DPS they are not a citizen, that would be flagged for investigation
- Is based upon testimony yesterday from the SOS’s attorney and the attorney who is familiar with the 2019 settlement
- In comparing the information, SOS shall consider information in the database of the DPS that was derived from documents presented by the voter to the department after the person’s current voter registration became effective
- SOS shall not consider information in documents presented before the person’s current voter registration became effective
- Amendment adopted (9-0)
Amendments are rolled into a committee substitute for SB 1
- Committee Substitute is adopted as substituted
- Bill voted out of committee (6-3)
Closing Statements
- Hughes – SB 31 (Perry) has been subsumed in SB 1, so the bill will be left pending
- Hughes – Will meet on Monday at 1 PM for SB 5 and SB 24, concerning social media censorship