You should know that Texas ranks at the bottom of all states for the most restrictive electoral climate. Since 1996, researchers have looked at state election laws and the factors for "ease of voting". In 2020, Texas Fell to Last Place.
Here is a summary of the key provisions of the elections bill, SB1, signed into law by Governor Greg Abbott, on Tuesday, September 7, 2021. Summary by Cinde Weatherby, Voting Rights and Election Laws Issue Chair, Austin Area League
-
Threatens election officials with criminal prosecution for enacting procedures to meet local
community needs and increase voter freedom;
-
Threatens advocacy groups and individuals with felony prosecution for providing needed
assistance to voters at polling locations and with mail ballots;
-
Limits the ability of election judges to remove disruptive or intimidating partisan poll
watchers;
-
Allows partisan poll watchers to take election officials to court over perceived obstruction;
-
Requires voters using mail ballots to include the ID number contained in their registration
records when applying for or returning mail ballots;
-
Requires audits disproportionately targeting more populous counties that are duplicative
of audits required by legislation passed during the regular session.
-
Prohibits outdoor voting, even in situations involving natural disasters and prohibit
drive-through voting locations and mail ballot drop boxes;
-
Requires new procedures for purging lists of registered voters and threaten local officials
with loss of employment and civil penalties for failing to maintain voter lists to the
satisfaction of the Secretary of State;
- One good thing was included...
Provides voters an opportunity to electronically cure certain minor errors on mail ballots using the new electronic ballot tracking platform approved in the regular session.
Votes on SB1 and other Bills Legislators Introduced on Voting Rights - See What Your Elected Officials Did in the 2021 Sessions! We will be adding bill information for the 88th Session.
LWVD Legislative Research
By Louise Weber
February 19, 2022
In a report posted September 29, 2021, the Voting Rights Lab* (VRL) followed legislation which threatens the democratic process. VRL identified three critical issues listed below, as well as the relevant legislation introduced in Texas.
ISSUE 1: Increased Partisanship in Election Administration
Legislatures interfering with nonpartisan local election administration and consolidating power to administer and determine election result themselves.
ISSUE 2: Partisan Election Reviews
Lawmakers proposing or initiating costly, highly partisan election reviews that undermine election security and erode trust in our election system.
ISSUE 3: Criminalization of Election Officials and Civil Causes of Action
Legislatures accelerating the mass exodus of experienced election officials by imposing chilling criminal penalties, and parroting disinformation that results in serious safety threats.
Note: (87-2) and (87-3) refer to second and third special sessions of the legislature respectively.
LEGISLATION ENACTED
SB 1 / HB 3 (87-2) – ties to Issues 1 and 3
An act relating to election integrity and security, including by preventing fraud in the conduct of elections in this state; increasing criminal penalties; creating criminal offenses.
Voting Rights Lab Analysis: This bill prohibits local officials from modifying election procedures to better serve voters. It also increases the likelihood of partisan poll watchers disrupting polling places and ballot verification and counting locations. It threatens local officials with criminal (sometimes felony) prosecution for distributing mail ballot applications or ballots to voters who do not first request them. Local officials will also face greater oversight of registered voter list maintenance that includes the possibility of termination of their employment and civil penalties.
The bill increased the ability of poll watchers to move freely throughout an election location, including areas containing voters waiting in line, checking in, or casting their ballots. Election judges may not remove disruptive poll watchers from election locations unless the judge first witnesses the poll watcher commit a violation of law, warns the poll watcher, and the poll watcher then commits a subsequent offense. Voters’ reports of harassment or intimidation by poll watchers, if not witnessed by election judges, will not be sufficient to remove poll watchers. Election judges who remove disruptive poll watchers contrary to new, specific requirements in SB 1 can also be subject to prosecution for a Class A misdemeanor.
Author: Hughes
Co-authors: Bettencourt, Birdwell, Buckingham, Campbell, Creighton, HALL, Huffman, Kolkhorst, Nelson, Nichols, PAXTON, Perry, Schwertner, Springer, Taylor
Sponsors: Murr, Lozano, Clardy, White, Jetton
Co-sponsors: Allison, Anderson, Ashby, Bailes, Bell (Cecil), Bell (Keith), Biedermann, Bonnen, Buckley, Burns, Burrows, Cain, Capriglione, Cason, Cook, Darby, Dean, Goldman, Harless, Harris, Hefner, Holland, Huberty, Kacal, King (Phil), Klick, Kuempel, Leach, Leman, Metcalf, MEYER, Middleton, Morrison, Murphy, Noble, Oliverson, Paddie, Parker, Patterson, Paul, Price, Raney, Rogers, Sanford, Shaheen, Shine, Slaton, Slawson, Spiller, Stucky, Swanson, Thompson (Ed), Tinderholt, Toth, VanDeaver, Vasut, Wilson
Conference report adopted: 8/31/2021 by Senate and House
Signed by Governor and effective 12/2/2021
|
District
|
Name
Senate
House
|
Yea
|
Nay
|
NV
|
Absent
|
1
|
2
|
Bob Hall
|
X
|
|
|
|
2
|
8
|
Angela Paxton
|
X
|
|
|
|
3
|
9
|
Kelly Hancock
|
X
|
|
|
|
4
|
16
|
Nathan Johnson
|
|
X
|
|
|
5
|
23
|
Royce West
|
|
X
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
100
|
Jasmine Crockett
|
|
|
|
X
|
2
|
102
|
Ana Marie Ramos
|
|
|
|
X
|
3
|
103
|
Rafael Anchía
|
|
X
|
|
|
4
|
104
|
Jessica González
|
|
|
|
X
|
5
|
105
|
Thresa Meza
|
|
|
|
X
|
6
|
107
|
Victoria Neave
|
|
X
|
|
|
7
|
108
|
Morgan Meyer
|
X
|
|
|
|
8
|
109
|
Carl Sherman Sr
|
|
|
|
X
|
9
|
110
|
Toni Rose
|
|
XX
|
|
|
10
|
111
|
Yvonne Davis
|
|
|
|
|
11
|
112
|
Angie Chen Button
|
X
|
|
|
|
12
|
113
|
Rhetta Bowers
|
|
X
|
|
|
13
|
114
|
John Turner
|
|
X
|
|
|
14
|
115
|
Julie Johnson
|
|
X
|
|
|
PASSED SENATE CHAMBER; NO PROGRESS IN HOUSE
SB 47 (87-3) [SB 97 (87-2)] – ties to Issue 2
An act relating to processes to address election irregularities; providing a civil penalty.
Voting Rights Lab Analysis: Would allow a county or state party chair to require one or more counties to review the results of the November 2020 election. It would also authorize losing candidates and partisan officials to initiate reviews in future elections based on an unsubstantiated allegation of any deviation in election procedures or discrepancy in precinct results.
Author: Bettencourt
Co-authors: Buckingham, Creighton, HALL, Huffman, Hughes, Perry, Schwertner, Springer
Recorded vote for 3rd reading 10/5/2021 below
Received in House 10/6/2021
|
District
|
Name
Senate
House
|
Yea
|
Nay
|
NV
|
Absent
|
1
|
2
|
Bob Hall
|
X
|
|
|
|
2
|
8
|
Angela Paxton
|
X
|
|
|
|
3
|
9
|
Kelly Hancock
|
X
|
|
|
|
4
|
16
|
Nathan Johnson
|
|
X
|
|
|
5
|
23
|
Royce West
|
|
X
|
|
|
HB 16 (87-3) [HB 244 (87-2)] – ties to Issue 2
Similar to SB 47 above
Author: Toth, Wilson, Anderson, Cain
Co-authors: Bell, Keith, Harris, Hefner, King, Phil, Patterson, Paul, Slawson, Swanson, Vasut, White
Filed: 9/8/2021
Status: Did not progress
BILLS FILED IN SENATE AND HOUSE CHAMBERS
HB 17 (87-3) [HB 26 (87-2)] – ties to Issue 2
An act relating to a forensic audit of 2020 election results in certain counties.
Voting Rights Lab Analysis: Requires state officials to appoint an independent third party to conduct a review of 2020 election results in all counties with a population of at least 415,000.
Authors: Toth, Wilson, Cain
Co-authors: Anderson, Bell, Keith, Bonnen, Harris, Hefner, King (Phil), Metcalf, Middleton, Patterson, Paul, Slawson, Spiller, Swanson, Thompson (Ed), Tinderholt, Vasut, White
Introduced: 9/8/2021
Status: Did not progress
SB 20 (87-3) [SB 88 (87-2)] – ties to Issue 2
An act relating to a forensic audit of 2020 election results in certain counties
Voting Rights Lab Analysis: Requires the Secretary of State and the Attorney General to review every precinct in every county where there is a discrepancy between total number of votes counted and the number of voters counted as having voted.
Primary author: HALL
Joint authors: Springer
Introduced: 9/8/2021
Status: Did not progress
HB 95 (87-2) – ties to Issue 2
An act relating to improvements to election integrity, including through a partial count of auditable voting system ballots; creating a criminal offense.
Voting Rights Lab Analysis: Requires a recount of 10% of the ballots cast in each county. County party chairs, rather than neutral election officials, would select the precincts that would be subject to recount.
Primary author: Jetton
Introduced: 8/7/2021
To committee: 8/23/2021 House Constitutional Rights and Remedies
Status: Did not progress
Not re-filed in 87-3
*The Voting Rights Lab is a nonpartisan organization that brings state advocacy, policy, and legislative expertise to the fight for voting rights.