 This is Senate government operations. It is Tuesday, May 11th, and we're just a tiny bit late getting started because we are talking about baby cradles. Sorry about that. Anyway, so I'm gonna give a couple introductory remarks here before we get started. I will say just for everybody who's watching and who is with us, we don't use Zoom in this because we consider Zoom as a side conversation. Don't use chat. You mean chat. Chat. Oh, yeah, that's what I meant. Zoom because we're all on Zoom. We're all on Zoom. We don't use Zoom. We don't use chat. Sorry about that. Because we consider chat a side conversation. If we were in the committee room, we would ask people to go out in the hall and have their conversation. So the only way we use chat is if somebody refers to a document or something, then Gail will post it there so that everybody can see it. But other than that, we don't use chat. Let's see. I believe we're moving to the changes with S15. Is that what I asked? Yes. Okay. Would you like to, because it was on the floor today and we would like some a review of what the house actually did. Have they finished? I mean, do we know that they're, are they done with it now? The floor action or are they still on the floor? They are done for the day. They're not finished that earlier. Go into third reading though, Senator Clarkson. Thanks. So Will or Amron, who wants to let us know here what they did? I can start and Will, if you want to add on that. I'll follow. I asked Gail to post at least three documents for this. The report of house government operations with which they did a strike all to make some changes throughout the bill. And then there were three proposals of amendment that were heard on the floor this morning. Two of them were approved, one from the house appropriations committee and then one from Representative McCarthy from government operations. So I will start with the house government operations report strike all version. And I think I will just sort of hit where there was a change. Oh yeah. Yeah, we don't need to go. Okay. You just tell him. All right. I think I just got kicked off. I can't. No, you're still with us. Oh, I don't get this at all. It's telling me to join a meeting. Well, we don't have a meeting till four. No. I was trying to go to the, nevermind. I was trying to go to our page and it keeps, okay. Yeah, I'm not sure I'm finding it on our page but the house proposal amendment is the number, it's a long bill, right? Not just the two pages. Their amendment is just two pages. So is that what we're gonna look at? No, that, hold on. I actually have not checked to see what's posted. Let me check. Yeah. Cause there are three things posted as you said. The HGO amendment, the McCarthy amendment and the house appropriates amendment. And I thought you suggested we go to the HGO amendment. Oh. That is actually the appropriations amendment. Gail, did I send you the wrong document? I might have switched the labels. I know I was posting and reposting. So I can double check everything here. It looks like we have the house appropriations amendment posted twice. Yeah, it is. Correct. Let me. So the HGO amendment is what we need. Cause we have a house appropriates amendment, clearly Mark. Okay, Gail. Yeah. So correct link is in my email. So you should have it and be able to post it. I'll forward that email to everybody on the, everybody in the room. Can you also post it? Yeah, I will post it. Okay. We will refresh. But first I'll send it to you so that you have it in your inbox. Okay, thank you. I don't think I've ever heard this committee be so silent. Could have taken a pop. I might stand up. It's under sorry to bother you. Should be in your inbox now. Okay. And let us know when it's posted. Cause I'm going to do it that way. I see it, it has pages and lines. And when you. I got it. As opposed to an email. It's 37 pages long. If I'm looking at the right one. Yes. You should be looking at one that's 37 pages. I am not. Is it on our website? It's a link in your email. There's three different amendments. I know, but is it also posted? It's working on it. Oh, okay. Okay. She's getting there. Senator White, if I may, while we, while you all are waiting. Yep. I'm just curious that roll call vote on the house floor this morning to go to third reading was one 19 to 30. Okay. Good. Yeah. That's a pretty strong vote. Good. And I can preface Amarine's walkthrough, but by saying there weren't a whole lot of substantive changes. And the substantive changes that were made. We, my office supported, but it'll be important for you guys to check them out and understand what they did. Sometimes there's a little bit of a lag posting, but you can refresh and try now. Well, it, it made it a responsive thing. So. Oh, well, I'll just go to my email. Yeah. Cause it doesn't seem to like my refresh. Okay. Let's, I guess we, we've all got it some way or other. So can we start? Certainly. And Amarine, if you just walk us through where they made changes, that would be great. Okay. All right. Now let me find where I left my version. So the first substantive change is on page. Let me make sure I have the right page here. Is on page 12. And this is in the section on, say this is section eight, title 17, section two, five, three, nine delivery of early voter absentee ballots. And we are specifically looking at the circumstances where Wait a minute. Where are you on page 12? So I'm going to kind of walk you down to where the changes. So you'll see in subdivision three a on page 11. The circumstances that we're looking at is if a voter transfers his or her registration from another town or city in the state following the mailing of ballots to all active voters by the secretary of state's office. So then if you scroll down onto page 12. Now we're looking in subdivision B beginning on line 13. Looking at if a voter registers to vote for the first time in Vermont following the time when the secretary of state's office generated the address file to be used for the mailing of ballots to all active registered voters by the secretary of state's office. This now reads the clerk shall either issue a ballot to the voter in person at the time of registration or mail a ballot to the voter within three business days. Provided the voter's registration does not occur within five days of the election. If the clerk does not have ballots available at the time of registration, the clerk shall mail a ballot to the voter within three business days after obtaining ballots. So previously. This said that if a voter registers to vote for the first time, then the. I know I've lost my. Previously, you want me to help that thought, Cameron, I had to remind myself and I went back and looked at your version. Yeah. This changes previously. They had to make a request. Sorry. That's all right. They had to make a request and then the ballot would be issued to that voter pursuant to subdivision. One of this subsection a. So it's, it's not too dissimilar. It's just being clear that it does not need to be on request. And then it puts these limited, these day limits that if they're going to mail it, it has to be within three business days. And that they're not going to mail it within five days of the election. And if the clerk and then addressing the circumstance, if the clerk doesn't have ballots available at the time, the person registered. And was there any controversy about this? I don't remember any. This is, as Amarin said, she distinguished. If you look at three A above. Three A is voters transferring among towns in Vermont. And we talked a lot about that. And that got left the way it is. Which is that if somebody transfers in Vermont after the time, the ballots have been mailed, the file has been pulled. The clerk checks out whether a ballot's been returned for that person in action. Three B, this section just refers to people registering for the first time in Vermont. And if it's after the time that files pulled, they won't have been mailed a ballot. And some heat, some. I think of, I think some of the advocates. Just noted this, that it seemed like. The whole intent of the bill would be that a first time registering in that situation would not be the first time registering for the first time in Vermont. So the whole intent of the bill would be that a first time registering in that situation would get an automatic. Yeah, ballot mailed to them. And then the extra language accounts for us because it's, since it references the time when we pull the mailing file. The clerks may, that may be so early that the clerks don't actually have the ballots. And that's why the language was added that if they don't have the ballots, they mail it as soon as they get them, which will be 45 days before the election. Yeah. But. Madam chair. Just a question on that. Yep. So, Will, if they don't have the ballots, maybe it's before the ballots have even been printed. So wouldn't you just automatically let them be included in the statewide mail out? I mean, wouldn't they just. If it's so early that the clerks doesn't have ballots yet. Maybe they'll just get mailed the ballot by the, your office. Yeah, that's a good question, Senator Clarkson. We talked about that ability for my office to potentially. Update that mailing file over time. Between sort of the first iteration of we send it. And when the ballots start rolling out the door. Yeah. And I honestly, I just didn't, I couldn't commit to being able to do that, not knowing enough about how it's going to work with that vendor, whether it's a one time. File transmission or if it can be updated. It can be done over the course of time. If we figure out that that's a possibility. Then we can work with this provision and let the clerks to say. These voters have been added to the mailing file list. I could potentially update them on a daily basis and say your new registrants have been added to the mailing file list. So they wouldn't be duplicating any effort. Yeah. I think that's a good question. I think that's a good question. I think that's a good question. I think that's about the detail of that process with whoever the vendor is going to be to commit to being able to supplement it like that. I hope so. Okay. Any other concerns about that? Okay. All right. The next change is on page 16. And right now we're in the section about return of ballots. This adds a new subsection F, which says no individual may return more than 25 ballots to the town clerk or to a secure ballot drop box, unless the individual is a justice of the peace performing his or her official duties pursuant to section 2538 of this title. And that would also that renumbered the previous subsection F into the G that you see before you. And also specifies that the clerk or other local election official accepting the return of ballot shall not be required to enforce the provisions of subsection. This used to say subsection just E. Now it says subsections E and F of this section, but shall report any suspected violation to the secretary of state's office who shall refer them to the attorney general's office for investigation. And then online 15, this previously said candidates violating this now says individuals violating the section may be subject to penalties. There was significant. Committee discussion on this. Oh, this is very, this is very interesting and a little bit bizarre. I think that so. Grandma Jones is. Delivers for the people in her neighborhood and she picks up six of them and takes them to the town hall on Wednesday. And then on. Thursday, she runs into seven neighbors and picks them up and drops them off. Is the town clerk going to be keep a running number of everybody that brings in a ballot so that they know when, when she runs into her friends at the grocery store who say, or if you're running right by the town clerk's office right now, can you just drop these off? Yeah. Is the town clerk going to keep a record running. Like a bar tab. Yeah, particularly with a drop box, which is how would you even know? It says or to a secure ballot. I mean, you're going to have no idea who's dropped box ballots there. I don't. Somebody want to explain this. I think all of what you said is true. I mean, I think we have the provision in there that the clerk wasn't responsible for enforcement so that they didn't have to be keeping this running bar tab, as you said, and monitoring the drop box. I think the idea is that having that on the, on the books, at least sends a message to people who know that that's the outside limit of ballots that you should be returning for somebody else. I mean, it was the same concern about. Ballot harvesting that we've heard. So if I'm, I'm a friendly neighbor here, I have to keep track for myself of how many. Ballots I'm picking up or I can be charged. Because somebody else is watching me. Yep. Bring those ballots back and I bring. 12 of them to the town clerk. And then I put another 10 in the drop box. And then I want to do four more. And I'm in violation, right? Yeah. Yeah. Oh my God. Okay. I think this is searching for a prop. Anyway, I think we should discuss this further at some point. Anyway, okay. Do you want to go on? Sure. Sorry. So the next. Change is all the way down on page 20. Right now we are in the. Section that talks about if a ballot is deemed defective. Subdivision be beginning on line seven. And the changes are in. Roman at three beginning on line 13. So this actually. I will just read this for now. Not later than the next. This is, excuse me. This is the clerk. If a ballot is deemed defective, the clerk shall. Not later than the next business day, transmit a notice with information required by the secretary of state's office. This previously said. Mail a postcard. Rather than transmit a notice. To the voter informing the voter that the voters ballot was deemed defective. If the ballot was deemed defective, if the voter was rejected, the reason it was deemed defective and the voter's opportunity to cure. Excuse me to correct the error. And then this next section. Is new. If the ballot. Was deemed defective because the voter failed to sign the return certificate. To place the voted ballot in the certificate envelope. Or did not return their unvoted primary ballots in the certificate envelope. The clerk shall include a returnable affidavit. Designed and provided by the secretary of state's office. With the notice. So the voter may cure the deficiency in accordance with subdivision to five four seven D one C of this chapter. So that means that the. If the ballot was defective, the town clerk. Now, first of all, they have to notify. Somebody by whatever means possible. Right. They have to notify the person. They have to send them a postcard. They have to. Decide how they're going to notify the person. And then if they. Then they have to send them. An affidavit. First, they have to notify them. And then do they include the affidavit with their notification? It must be. Notification. If their notification was by phone or email. Then they have to notify the person. The affidavit. I, this says that. The affidavit. Shall include a returnable affidavit with the notice. So I read this as required. It would need to be in a form where you can. Include the affidavit with the notice. It would not be something that you could accomplish by phone. And still comply with this section. So if they notify them by phone. Then do they have to send out an affidavit or not? If the defect is one of those three that are listed. Then they need to send a notice with an affidavit. I suppose that does not prevent them from also providing notice. By means of telephone or some other way that where they could not include the affidavit, but. If the defect is one of those three types of deficiency, then they would need to send the affidavit with the notice. That is how this is, is drafted. Is this the, this, I believe it's the section that had a lot of town clerks worked up because it puts. When we, we did a simple. I might be wrong here, but we did a simple postcard. And that's how they notified them. It was very clear. That was a simple postcard end of story. Now the town clerks have the responsibility for figuring out how they're going to notify the person. And people will get all worked up because they notified them in the wrong way. It didn't tell them how to notify. So while you called my phone and I never answered my phone, you should have sent me an email. And then we have to send them an affidavit. If we send them a written notice, but if we call them on the phone and tell them. That their ballot was defective. If that's the means that we choose, then we don't have to send them an affidavit. I think it puts a lot of responsibility on the clerks. Senator Clarkson. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Senator. Was first. So I will see my time first to Brian. Okay. I appreciate that. Thank you, Senator Clarkson. So I'm not clear. And I agree with everything the chairs already said. I'm not clear whether transmit a notice. Means that you actually have to have made contact with the voter. Or if I just call and no one's home. Oh, well, I transmitted a notice. I'm not clear. I'm not clear. I'm not clear. I'm not clear with the voter. So is the town clerk. Responsible for finding every way to contact the voter until that voter is contacted. Or. I'm unclear as to. You know, the, the degree of. Work that the town clerk's going to have to do here. Yeah. The answer. Yeah. Yeah. May I tag onto that? I mean, I think this is unnecessarily complicates a situation that we made very simple. I mean, this is just. This is like jumping through 88 hoops. We, if there's a problem, let the person know there's a problem. Let him come in and fix it. It's really. This is way over, over the top in my humble opinion. Well, did you. I hope, I think I can help a little bit. Although they're legitimate concerns and I did try and convey sort of everything that we had talked about on the Senate side. I think we're talking about this particular issue. And this is the biggest change from what you guys did. But to send them, send it or call them or as questions. I don't see it as. Putting any further responsibility on the clerks and hear me out. You still have for the first 25 days. They still have the option that you guys had as the only option, but it's still an option for them. They don't have to do anything else. Besides have a stack of postcards from my office on their desk. That they send to anybody they deem defective. They're going to have a mailing address for everybody that they're doing this for, because they just mailed them a ballot. That was then successfully returned from that person, despite the errors. So just as a baseline. This will be my guidance and my training. Hey, clerks, if you want to make it easy, you can just have the stack of postcards on your desk and do postcard notification to anybody. If you want. You can instead notify them by email or by phone. During that 25 day period. If you want to make it easy for them to do that. Then it, we, we haven't really gotten there yet, or I can't remember if Amber and just went through it, but then during the five days. There's the next provision during the five days proceeding the election that they really shouldn't mail. It says they're not required to mail anymore. It actually still allows them to do that as their notice means during that time, which I think is important. Then it says they have to. Go to other contact information that they have on file in order to make it easy for them to do that. And then they have to go to other contact information that they have on file. They have to hire and concern over on the house side from clerk seeing that that, okay. So during the last five days. Am I going to have to be scrambling to find any contact information I have on file anywhere in the office for these people. And so we made an amendment that was part of rep. McCarthy's amendment today. That specifically said during that five day period. They only have to use any contact information that they have on file in order to make it easy for any other contact information. But so again, the posture is they, I think the thought on the house side was just that you give them, you give them those additional options for notice during the 25 days. They still can just use the postcard and do mailing. And I understand the concerns with the other forms of notice. We talked about it, right? But my best answer to that is that clerk isn't responsible for ensuring anything other than the transmission. And I think you guys heard it too, that similarly you don't know whether somebody received the postcard or not. It might get thrown away with the other postcards in their mail or not make it through the USPS in time. So in all of those modes of transmission, the clerk is only responsible for the first push out the doors hitting send on the email, leaving the voicemail or putting the postcard in the mail. And so they're white. Honestly, your question about the phone. I think it's a good one. I think it's a good one. I think it's a good one. I think it's a good one. Paired with the notice did not come up. That's a good one. As a practical matter, if you guys are okay with this, I can tell you what it would be is that the clerks would call them. And the affidavit is going to be available on our website and probably on the clerk's website. Where the person could then go and get it and send it back. Or potentially the clerk would have to follow up your right and send it back to the clerk. And so I think it's a good one. I think the affidavit would just be discouraging them in the first place from doing it by phone. And, and just as you said, we, what we would intend is I wanted to get to this too, is to incorporate the affidavit language on the postcard. And so it's just going to be something where, you know, yes, that was my ballot that you received, even though I failed to sign it. Or even though I didn't put it in the envelope or even though I didn't return the two primary ballots. That will also be. I'm going to go back to that. I'm going to go back to that. I'm going to go back to that. I'm going to go back to that. I'm going to go back to the programers already. And we will be able to set it up where as soon as the clerk marks the ballot defective in the system for that voter, you're in on that voter and you're saying. Return defective. Boom, you'll get a little pop up that says send email notice. One click. They can hit it. And if there's an email on file, you'll send an email notice with that same affidavit ability to respond. And last thing we thought I should be able to put that affidavit. I'm going to go back to that. I'm going to go back to that. I'm going to go back to that. I'm going to go back to that. So that you log into the my voter page in the same way you can do an address update through that page. You could, and you can respond to a challenge letter through that page. You could send a note to the clerk that says, that's my ballot. I'd like to cure it. So they're not actually including a returnable affidavit. What they're including is a link to. An affidavit that they can return. To the postcard. That's my ballot. That's my ballot. That's my ballot. That's my ballot. You're going to be able to return a portion of the postcard. Okay. Saying that's my ballot. With the email, I envisions you'll be able to check it off electronically and send it back. Okay. But you're right. You can't transmit that affidavit by phone. And that did not come up. So the postcard will have like a little tear off or something. Yes. Okay. Okay. I want you to understand the intent of it too. Cause I actually really like that affidavit provision. It's not going to be helpful in a lot of cases. To have to mail a whole new set. Of ballots back out to somebody who's out of state or across the state. And it would be much easier to be able to have them just affirm that that first set is their ballot. It's cost effective. It's saves time. It really makes sense to have this option. It's not going to be helpful in a lot of cases. But it's not going to be helpful in a lot of cases. Other questions. I was, I was just curious when, when this amendment came up. Was this a committee amendment. That. Or was it on the floor? No. It was one of the first early committee amendments we talk about. Okay. And Michael Carthage took care of the second. But that was a committee amendment offered by him. Yes. Yeah. And the second amendment is just the flip side of it. In the voter section where it's talking about defective ballots. Amarine's about to get there, but that's where it proactively gives the voter this right to respond by affidavit. Okay. Okay. So. Following this section. In subsection B on page 21 beginning at line three. This is the section that was amended on the floor this morning. Do you want me to switch over to that language or come back to it after we've gotten through. The remainder. No, that would be perfect if we switched, I think, so we can follow in line. Yeah. Okay. So. I'm now looking at the. Oops. It's not it. The amendment by representative. McCarthy specifically the second instance of amendment. Which would. It strikes this subsection be out entirely, but really the only portion that's changed is the sentence. Beginning with in these cases, the clerk shall make a reasonable effort to provide news to the voter as soon as possible. Using any contact information for the voter and then is inserted other than the mailing address that is contained. In the voter checklist. So that was the change in this language so that it's. It's clear that rather than just using any. Contact information for the voter. It has to be any contact information, the voter other than the mailing address that is contained in the voter checklist. And I don't know, Will, if you want to add any context on that more than you have. Yeah. I've never said before. I worked with rat payaya pretty closely to. Come up with that language. Who is the town clerk in London. Dairy. Okay, great. Thanks. Okay. So that is subsection B. Now I'm moving on to the next. Change, which is. All the way down on. Page 30. So there were a couple of changes. There's a change in subdivision B. By, so the language as it read before was requesting a new ballot to be mailed to them by the clerk along with materials for submission of the new ballot. Provided the new ballot is received. And this previous previously said. By the town clerk. Or the. Did we say presiding officer? I think it said by the town clerk or prior to the closing of polls. And so. The change was to remove the town clerk part and say it received by the presiding officer or other sworn election official. Prior to the closing of the polls. Understanding that the ballot. To clear up any confusion that someone might think they can bring their ballot to the town clerk's office at six 58 on election day and think that it will make it to the presiding officer or other sworn election official by the closing of polls. So subdivision C. Is new. And this is to add in the concept of curing a defective ballot by the town clerk's office. And this is on what the clerk's obligations are. Now this is on what the voter needs to do. So subdivision C for a voter who failed to sign the certificate envelope. Failed to place the voted ballot in the certificate envelope. Or did not return their unvoted primary ballots in the unvoted ballot envelope. Returning the signed affidavit included in the notice under subdivision two, five, four, six, eight, two, B, one, B, four, B, five, four, A, five, five, four, B, five, four. That was the reason why the affidavit included, or electronically provided the affidavit is received by the presiding officer or other sworn election official prior to the closing of the polls. So. Does that mean that the presiding officer has to have constant email. Availability. On election day. I'm talking. polling places. Well, then how can they be responsible for receiving it electronically? Yeah, it does sound like they would have to have, because if I were a voter and I sent it, it says I can send it prior to the close. I don't know if they have internet capability at the polling place or not. That's not my problem. That's theirs. No. That issue was not raised, Senator Collin, where I think thinking about it right now, off the top of my head, I would have them, that would be an instance where they would have to adjust their official results after election night. So they get back to the office the next morning and see that they'd been, they'd received an email about one of their defective ballots. They could so go pull that defective ballot from the envelope. I just, wow. I don't think that we will be seeing a large volume of ballots being cured by email on election day, but it's fair to think about. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. Okay. I think, I think that's something for us to discuss further. I think you could address it by if you entered, if you had a provision that electronic return of the affidavit had to be there by the day before the election. Exactly. Yeah. I mean, I think we, I think we should look at, I mean, we're just hearing this for the first time. So I'm, I'm hoping we're marking things that we want to address. This would be one. Yep. All right. So moving down to page 35, you'll see section 21 has been deleted. This was the section that created the assistant director of elections position at the Secretary of State's office and provided funding. This is now in the budget. So it has been removed from this bill. Any questions on that? And the next change was in section 21a following that. The title of this section used to be voting access semi colon report. It now is voting access and verification report. And in this section, there is now a new subdivision three that was added on to this report requirement. This is a report required of the secretary of state's office on or before January 30th, 2023 to the government operations committees with recommendations and any, excuse me, with findings and any recommendations for legislative action on now subdivision three, implementing a voter verification system in Vermont that will not disenfranchise voters and that will verify that ballots have been voted by registered voters, including a report back on the time training and cost involved in implementing the system or systems. I have no idea what that phrase means. Implementing a voter verification system that will not disenfranchise voters means voter suppression at language. No, I think it I think I actually think it means that is there some kind of a system out there where you could require voter verification that doesn't disenfranchise people. I mean, it's like trying to have your cake and eat it too. Right. I don't verify it, but we don't want it to be disenfranchising. Yeah, I would if I were writing that I would have written whether or not we should have a system. But I'm not going to argue about that because the secretary of state will do what they're going to do in a report. But I think we should market for further discussion. I don't think it needs to leave. If we're going to do if we're going to make other changes, then we might want to say whether or not we should implement. We've identified at least three things for further discussion. Yeah. Senator, if I may, Senator White, really quickly, to Senator Collomar's question, I do think it's mainly referring to and you're right, it may not be as heartfully worded as it might have been, but it's referring to the return of absentee ballots. So voter verification is being able to verify that it was the voter themselves who returned the ballot. It's the signature verification issue and whether if that's not appropriate for Vermont, could we find out something different that would be? You said that much more heartfully than that sentence. And that is in no way a comment on Amherst drafting because I didn't mean it that way for control. Yeah. I have a feeling it was suggested by somebody else. I think you're right. I've had no problems with Amherst's ability to parse the English language. So committee, how do you want to do this? Did they do third reading today? No. No, they just did finished second reading, it sounds like. So they're going to do third tomorrow. We'll get it Friday. We'll get it Friday. Okay, between now and Friday, we can have this discussion on these three, at least three issues. One, I don't remember what it was, it was page 16F. Right. I wrote it down. And one was the electronically. That's the number of ballots that can be returned by one. Oh yeah. And then the other one was the report. And the defective ballots. And the curing issue, if we want to look at that. I mean, all those endless provisions. Well, if the town clerks are happy with that now, I am. Are they? Are they? That's my understanding they are. Yeah. I know that Kelly was one of the people like, I heard we'll say that. Just to focus so that you don't have to look at all of those curing provisions, really what you were talking about was electronic return of the affidavit on election day. Right. Yeah. I think that Senator Clarkson was referring to the part that gave town clerks many options for instead of just giving them the. Got it. But if the town clerks are okay with having those options, I'm okay with it. The affidavit is an additional effort, which is, I mean, I know Will says he supports it, but that's an additional effort too. Well, not if it's on the. Yeah, keep in mind we're incorporating it into the notice. And what it's really doing is preventing the additional effort of them having to send another package of ballots out to all of these folks. Right. In order for the cure. You have a postcard that is two parts and one of them says it's defective and you can return this little affidavit on the bottom, just tear it off and send it back in and says, and then you say, yes, I swear that that was my ballot. I returned it and here's my intent. And the same with the email. It's part of the notice itself. It isn't an extra step. And it does remove the extra step then of having to send out the new ballots. True, but if you had a postcard that just said your ballot is defective come in and he already said that there would be a tear off part to it that you would send back. Because if you just send a postcard and says your ballot is defective, you can change it. You can. And then the person calls and says, well, will you send me a new ballot? Well, no, then you can ask them just to come in and fix it. There's a lot. A lot of these people are out of state or too far away to come in and fix it. Oh, part of your previous version said they could do that. Come to the clerk's office and fix it or be mailed a new set of ballots. And this substitutes that. And Senator Carson, I think that's right, though, because it's important to remember the whole context. I think a lot of these people will be local and we'll just swing by the office and fix it. And those are the kind of people you could call. People you know are right down the street. Hey, Mary, your ballots defective, you should swing by and fix it. And that flexibility then I have to send Mary a postcard when I can do that. But OK. So continue. Oh, I thought that was. I thought we were done. There's a little more. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. OK. Oh, we were only at page 36. Yes. They're only 37 pages. Yeah, that's why we jumped to the conclusion we were. So there is a new section now, section 22 on page 36 regarding the maintenance of the voter checklist. So the new provision you'll see is on page 37. This adds a subdivision six that says that the secretary of state shall make reasonable efforts on an ongoing basis to compare the information on the checklist with data or information contained in any state agency's database, a database administered by the federal government or any database of another state or consortium of states where possible in an effort to maintain the accuracy and currency of the checklist. That sounds very big brotherish to me. It does. It says what if I use what if I use one email with the tax department and I use another email for my checklist or I use my phone, my cell phone for one and my landline for another. I mean, really? Do we? I don't know. Somebody put it on here. I think this sounds very much like we're going to make sure that your information is the same everywhere you give it. Damn it. Right. And it may not be. Anyway, let's add it to our list for review. Will, do you want to comment on that real quickly? I hadn't. Sorry. I hadn't scrolled down to the language, but that is not how I read it, Senator White. It's that's telling us to make an effort at data comparison of the whole list to other databases. For instance, the Department of Health records that we already do for purposes of trying to figure out whether somebody's moved, not because the data has to match perfectly between those two systems at all times. Then the intent of this, at least as I understand it, was to essentially codify what my office already does and is committed to do, like being members of Eric and using the available databases we have so that we can ensure that future administrations continue to do that. And I think it was meant to send a message that we're serious about checklist maintenance because we'd heard so many concerns about the current status of the voter checklist and what do you do to keep it up? So I think it was trying to put on the books that we have to, on an ongoing basis, make these efforts. I don't, I still don't understand what the effort mean, what it means. Senator Colomar. Yeah. Thank you, Madam Chair. And I think I'm understanding what Will's referencing. If somebody moves to another state, but they're still on our checklist, this is a way to at least say, wait a minute, they're registered in two different states. Let's compare them and see where this person really should be voting kind of thing. Or they got a driver's license in that state. That's what I took it to me. I didn't feel a big brotherish aspect to it. I just felt it was prudent to use all the resources the Secretary of State's office has to make sure that what we have for our voter checklist is as accurate as we can get it. Yeah, I agree. I, the one, the, the phrase that bothered me was in any state agency's database. So the, what does that mean when you compare your checklist to the health database or to the driver's license database or the tax department or the unemployment? I don't know. What does it mean to compare your list to their lists? Just that. See where the more current record is. Or in the health department's case, it's just to take the people who have died and remove them from our list. That I can see if you're using it for that purpose, but the health department has other databases, like who's been vaccinated and who hasn't done who, I mean, it just seems, I don't know why you would compare because they don't have, anyway, I'm okay with it. I guess if everybody else is it just makes me a little nervous. Well, I was okay with how it's worded. It talks about us making a reasonable effort and leaves pretty broadly the sources of information we could use. Can you give an example of do you try to do that now? Are you blocked in some way from doing that now? Where would you go most frequently? No, is the real answer. We're not inhibited from doing that in almost any way right now. And that's why I described it as sort of trying to codify our current practice and just make sure that it continues into the future. And the best example is our membership in the Steric group that I've referred to you guys to a few times now, that is really a nationwide effort to do exactly what that paragraph describes. That I can see because that is Senator Collamore's example there, somebody moves. That I can see entirely. I don't get at all. Just give me an example of a state agency other than people dying that you would look at that you would compare the databases and for what purpose and what would you do with it? Can I get back to you? Sure. I think if somebody moves from Brattleboro to Burlington, you're going to have two separate addresses in different databases. The Secretary of State probably would want to have the most recent address on file so that they know where they're voting. But some people, you know, if they're a student, for example, might be making the decision. I still want to vote in Brattleboro, even if I'm in Burlington right now. So it just seems like you're kind of choosing to make a decision for somebody. There's nothing in that provision about changing any voter record or doing anything to any voter record. But it still says you might just streamline the information, which I think still could make a decision on someone else's behalf that they didn't want made. So maybe what we'll do is ask Will to come back with a couple examples of other than address changes for voting purposes and people dying. Why would you compare that my name to a database for people who have phishing licenses? Okay. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Amarine, did we jump ahead? Are you done now? Not quite done. So one thing I had suggested that the bill title be amended at the bottom is an act relating to mailing out ballots, correcting defective ballots, and miscellaneous changes to state election laws. This is long, but it describes what this is doing for the most part. So that's something to think about. And then also, Madam Chair, I could very quickly walk through the House Appropriations Amendment that was approved this morning on the floor. Good. And that is also posted on the website for today. This would add a new section, Section 22A, entitled Appropriations Fiscal Year 2022 Funding Source. So this would appropriate $800,000 to the Secretary of State's office for one time elections related expenses in fiscal year 2022. And it lays out how the appropriation will be funded, which is first the amount of $400,000 in general funds is appropriated to the Secretary of State's office. Two, the remaining $400,000 appropriation shall be funded by the Secretary of State Service Fund, or by Help America Vote Act, also known as HAVA funds, to the extent those funds are available to absorb the costs, or from other federal funds made available to the Secretary of State's office. Then in subdivision three, to the extent the costs cannot be funded or absorbed as outlined in subdivisions one and two, the Secretary of State's office shall include any remaining costs in its fiscal year 2022 budget adjustment proposal. And now I'm done. And did they have that in their budget? I don't remember. Did the House have it in their budget also? Yes, as far as I know. That's what I, okay, great. The money stuff is not my expertise. Sorry. No, it's mine. That's my committee knows. All right. Committee, I'm going to suggest that we have, I'm going to suggest that we take, oh my goodness, it's 340. Yeah. And we have a four o'clock. Oh, Larry, Larry, Larry, or Larry, I have to say, we need to probably we'll have cake for you the next time you come, Larry. Oh, in Zuland. I'm not sure that's a fair promise. Well, we can each be eating a piece of cake and pretend like we're giving him cake. Oh, that won't work. That's the let them eat cake. That would be a very bad reflection. I apologize. Both, both the topics that we had this morning or this afternoon took longer than I thought. That's my bad planning. And so we can just briefly talk about, let's let's jump here to ethics right now and say that tomorrow we'll come back and and look at these issues from the elections bill. Is that fair? So give us some time to think about it and to figure out where we want to go. And in the meantime, I will try to talk to the chair of House of Ops to to figure out if we made changes, what that would mean, and then do a serious that shouldn't take us more than what half an hour, do you think? And then and then do a serious look at the code of ethics. And in the meantime, maybe we can just have have a little conversation with Larry for a while and then take a five or 10 minute break before we go to the chairs meetings. Sounds good. I do apologize. This week has last week and this week have challenged my I need that agenda fairy godmother. Well, you still have the fairy godmother. We just don't have the same time to do them. Yeah. All right. Thank you, Will Amron. That was thank you. And we will look at those three or possibly four areas. Chair White, what you're missing is your wand. That's true. I'm missing both my wand and my gavel. And poor Amron doesn't even know about the wand. I have a wand. It's one of those that has the little sprinkly colored sprinkles inside of it, you know, and you tip it up and down and it goes like this and they float down and then they float down. And when we come to issues that simply can't be resolved, I wave my wand and they resolve, but it's in my committee room. And actually, Amron, if she's ever in the state house, she can go access it. And she can go get the wand. Yes, Amron. I really do apologize. I realized I did not cover the other portion of Representative McCarthy's floor amendment this morning. I got sidetracked. So if you look at his amendment, it's the first instance of amendment. Luckily, this is not a complicated change, but it is a change. This has to do with ballots being when ballots may be returned using those secure drop boxes presently or previously in your version and in the first house government operations recommended version. It's it still had the language that ballots may be deposited in the drop boxes until the close of business on the day before election. This would allow in subdivision to a board of civil authority to vote to allow ballots to be deposited in the drop boxes on the day of election up until at some point up until the closing of the polls on election day. So that was a flexibility that was requested and so that went into a floor amendment for this. So you can you can look at the language a little more closely in the amendment and compare that to what's currently in the bill. And I don't know if you want to add that to your discussion topics, but I just wanted to make sure that I highlighted that that was approved this morning. I don't know that I have any problems with that. If the BCA does it, then they're going to have to figure out how to get the ballots. Okay, I don't have any problem with that as long as it's situated at the polling place. Or if the BCA decides that they can they're going to have somebody sitting beside the drop box and at seven o'clock they're going to rush them to the polling place. They have been received, but that's their decision. Yeah, they can do what they want. Okay.