Bipartisan House committee members agree on cyber threats to elections, if not how to address it

Bipartisan House committee members agree on cyber threats to elections, if not how to address it
© Getty

Members of two House Science subcommittees drilled experts about the security of voting machines during a hearing Tuesday afternoon, putting the spotlight on election security as congressional Democrats continue to push for action on the issue. 

House members were given the chance to discuss the vulnerabilities of voting systems during a hearing held by the House Science subcommittees on investigations and oversight and on research and technology. While there was disagreement over specific Democrat-backed election security bills, subcommittee members seemed to come together over the need to address cybersecurity risks to voting machines.

ADVERTISEMENT

“When it comes to cybersecurity, the threat is constantly changing,” investigations subcommittee Chairwoman Mikie SherrillRebecca (Mikie) Michelle SherrillBiden rolls out over a dozen congressional endorsements after latest primary wins Elbow bumps, Spock salutes: How Congress is dealing with coronavirus Overnight Health Care — Presented by Philip Morris International — Trump, Congress struggle for economic deal amid coronavirus threat | Pelosi rejects calls to shutter Capitol | Coronavirus emerges as 2020 flashpoint MORE (D-N.J.) said. “It is our responsibility in Congress to help states arm themselves with advanced, adaptive strategies to prevent, detect, and recover from intrusions.”

Investigations subcommittee Ranking Member Ralph NormanRalph Warren NormanTop conservatives pen letter to Trump with concerns on fourth coronavirus relief bill Republicans push for reducing regulatory costs to tackle affordable housing crisis Lawmakers paint different pictures of Trump's 'opportunity zone' program MORE (R-S.C.) said that the security of election systems is of “great importance,” while research and technology subcommittee Chairwoman Haley StevensHaley Maria StevensThe Hill's 12:30 Report: House to vote on .2T stimulus after mad dash to Washington Democrat refuses to yield House floor, underscoring tensions on coronavirus vote Sanders looks to regain momentum in must-win Michigan MORE (D-Mich.) said that “security must be a priority at every step of our cherished democratic process.”

Research and technology subcommittee Ranking Member Jim BairdJames BairdHonoring service before self News outlets choose their darlings, ignore others' voices Hillicon Valley: White House to host social media summit amid Trump attacks | Pelosi says Congress to get election security briefing in July | Senate GOP blocks election security bill | Pro-Trump forum 'quarantined' by Reddit | Democrats press Zuckerberg MORE (R-Ind.) referred to Russian interference in 2016, specifically its targeting of 21 states’ voting systems, in noting “there is no doubt there is a need for improved security of our elections.”

However, this bipartisan spirit broke down somewhat during times that members discussed the Securing America’s Federal Elections (SAFE) Act, which the House is scheduled to vote on this week. The bill was approved along party lines by the House Administration Committee last week and fast tracked to the House floor for a vote. It would authorize millions in funding for states to address election security issues, and establish cybersecurity standards for voting machines. 

Norman described the Democrat-backed SAFE Act on Tuesday as being sent to the floor “in order to satisfy far-left progressives with yet another messaging bill that thankfully has no chance of ever being considered by the Senate.”

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnellAddison (Mitch) Mitchell McConnellPelosi eyes end of April to bring a fourth coronavirus relief bill to the floor Progressive group knocks McConnell for talking judicial picks during coronavirus Overnight Health Care: CDC recommends face coverings in public | Resistance to social distancing sparks new worries | Controversy over change of national stockpile definition | McConnell signals fourth coronavirus bill MORE (R-Ky.) has consistently refused to allow a vote on a variety of Democrat-backed election security measures in recent weeks, despite constant Democratic pressure on him to move forward on this issue.

Rep. Michael WaltzMichael WaltzAfghan Women: Essential for Peace Trump takes track to open Daytona 500 Overnight Defense: US deploys low-yield nukes on submarines | Watchdog warns Iraq withdrawal 'likely' means ISIS resurgence | What to watch in Trump's State of the Union MORE (R-) added that “I would have hoped we could have worked toward some bipartisan solutions” prior to the SAFE Act being voted on by the House. He noted that he and Rep. Stephanie MurphyStephanie MurphyPelosi scrambles to secure quick passage of coronavirus aid Sunday shows preview: State governors and top medical officials prepare for next week of COVID-19 response Members of House GOP leadership self-quarantining after first lawmakers test positive MORE (D-Fla.) are working to put together legislation creating an “alerts framework” that would ensure that election officials and congressional members are notified if election infrastructure is targeted by a foreign government.

Despite pushback on this legislation, witnesses at the hearing, who included individuals from academia, government agencies, and state election groups, were united in the need to secure systems against cyber attacks.

One way this being done is by federal agencies themselves. 

Charles Romine, the director of the information technology laboratory at the Commerce Department’s National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), announced that NIST plans to issue an “election profile” of its framework of cybersecurity standards, widely voluntarily used by organizations across various sectors to ensure security.

Romine described this profile as being a “one-stop cybersecurity playbook” that can be used by state and local election officials to prioritize areas of elections where cybersecurity could be improved.

In addition to the election profile, NIST has been working with the Election Assistance Commission to put together version 2.0 of the Voluntary Voting System Guidelines (VVSG). These guidelines are a set of requirements against which voting machines can be tested to ensure they meet basic security, functionality, and accessibility.

John Benaloh, the senior cryptographer for research at Microsoft, testified that Microsoft supports the ability for the VVSG 2.0 to support the auditability of elections, and he hoped they would lead to “more current” and updated technology being used.

Benaloh also argued that Congress should create incentives for states to update election infrastructure to secure voting machines, noting that “this would greatly help us in moving forward towards a more secure ecosystem.”