NC Senate passes election bills shortening early voting, adding audits
The North Carolina Senate passed a pair of rewritten election bills that would shorten early voting for primary elections and require the state auditor to review election procedures across all 100 counties.
House Bill 958, Election Law Changes, passed 28-13 on a party-line vote. House Bill 834, SBOE Administrative Changes, passed 42-0.
Because senators revised much of the language previously approved by the House, representatives must vote to concur with the changes before either bill can go to Democratic Gov. Josh Stein. The House is scheduled to return next week.
Among the most significant changes awaiting House approval is a provision in HB 958 that would reduce early voting from 17 days to 10 days for primaries, second primaries, and runoff elections.
Andy Jackson, director of the John Locke Foundation’s Civitas Center for Public Integrity, argues that shortening the early-voting period would reduce the financial and administrative burden on county election boards.
“Early voting is not free,” Jackson said. “County election boards must stretch their budgets to cover personnel, equipment, and, in some cases, short-term facility rentals. Each additional day of voting requires them to stretch them much further. A reasonable compromise would be to reduce the early-voting period from 17 days to 10.”
Sen. Warren Daniel, R-Burke, made a similar argument, saying the reduction would ease the administrative burden on county election boards and candidates in elections that typically produce lower turnout.
Democrats unsuccessfully sought to preserve the 17-day period through an amendment during the floor debate. Sen. Mujtaba Mohammed, D-Mecklenburg, argued that primary elections are increasingly decisive because many legislative and congressional districts strongly favor one party.
“Our primaries are critical in deciding who runs this legislature, and our primaries have become critical in who runs the United States Congress,” Mohammed said. “So let people come out and vote. Don’t shorten that period.”
Republicans tabled Mohammed’s amendment to retain the 17-day period on a 28-13 vote.
HB 958 would also direct the state auditor to conduct post-election performance audits of election systems and procedures in randomly selected counties. Every county board of elections would have to undergo an audit at least once every six years.
The reviews could examine voter list maintenance, voting equipment testing, ballot records, chain-of-custody documentation, and the handling of absentee and provisional ballots.
Sen. Val Applewhite, D-Cumberland, argued that the arrangement would create a conflict because the state auditor already makes appointments to the State Board of Elections, which oversees the county boards that would be audited.
“He audits his own people. He grades his own homework,” Applewhite said. “How does anyone perform oversight on themselves?”
Daniel said the provision is not intended to give State Auditor Dave Boliek the authority to overturn election results. He pointed to language specifying that the audits would occur after results are certified and could not be used to contest an election’s outcome.
“No findings in audits under this section shall be used as grounds to challenge the final result of an election,” Daniel said, quoting the bill.
Jackson said during the committee meeting that the provisions would make North Carolina elections “better-run and more secure,” adding that the performance-audit provision was “especially welcome.”
“To be clear, performance audits are not about influencing election outcomes,” Jackson said. “As noted in the bill, performance audits are conducted after the certification of general elections… These audits are designed to identify and correct systemic problems in how our elections are conducted.”
The House passed an earlier version of HB 958 by a 66-47 vote after weeks of Republican concerns, Democratic opposition, and repeated revisions.
That version included provisions addressing military and overseas voters, foreign money in referendum campaigns, absentee-ballot processing, and deadlines for resolving problems with absentee and provisional ballots.
The Senate removed many of those provisions while retaining the performance audits, voter-list maintenance changes, and longer party-affiliation requirement. Senators also added the reduction in primary early voting.
Some of the absentee and provisional ballot provisions resurfaced in HB 834.
Senators removed that bill’s original language and replaced it with a package governing ballot processing, absentee-ballot delivery, and judicial review of State Board of Elections decisions.
Sen. Brad Overcash, R-Gaston, described the rewritten bill as making “targeted changes to help the Board of Elections properly administer elections in this state.”
HB 834 would extend several post-election deadlines from three business days to five. Voters would receive additional time to correct missing information on registration forms, provide required identification, and fix certain problems with absentee or provisional ballots.
The bill would also prevent an absentee or early ballot from being counted if the voter died after casting it but before 11:59pm on the day before the election.
Most of the major provisions in both bills would take effect Jan. 1, 2027. Those changes, therefore, would not apply to North Carolina’s November 2026 general election.
The House must now decide whether to accept both Senate rewrites or seek additional changes before the bills advance to Stein’s desk.
“NC Senate passes election bills shortening early voting, adding audits” was originally published on www.carolinajournal.com.
