NC House sends election security bills to Stein, veto forthcoming
The North Carolina House gave final approval Tuesday to 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, sending the measures to Democratic Gov. Josh Stein.
Representatives voted to concur with the substantial changes senators made to both bills last week. House Bill 958, Election Law Changes, passed 62-47. House Bill 834, SBOE Administrative Changes, passed 74-35.
Among the most significant changes in HB 958 is a provision reducing early voting from 17 days to 10 days for primaries, second primaries, and runoff elections.
The bill would also direct the state auditor to conduct post-election performance audits of election systems and procedures in randomly selected counties, with every county board reviewed at least once every six years.
“The bill has a host of features that will improve elections in North Carolina,” said Andy Jackson, director of the Civitas Center for Public Integrity at the John Locke Foundation. “They include requiring officials to stop the registration process when they discover that a prospective voter is not a US citizen, a ban on foreign money in referendum campaigns, and more time for election officials to deal with absentee and provisional ballots.”
Jackson said the bill’s election performance audit provision is especially important.
“An especially welcome feature is the addition of election performance audits, which will help find problems with how elections are conducted and give local officials a chance to correct them,” Jackson said.
House Election Law Committee Chairman Hugh Blackwell, R-Burke, similarly framed the bills as practical steps toward increasing public confidence in elections.
“North Carolinians want elections they can trust, and House Republicans have consistently advanced practical reforms to improve election integrity,” Blackwell said in a statement. “These bills build on that work by making our elections even more secure and giving voters even more confidence when they head to the polls.”
Stein criticized the legislation before the House votes, arguing that it would continue shifting election authority away from Democratic officeholders and toward Republicans.
“Your vote is how you make sure that your government actually works for you and your family,” Stein said in a post on social media. “I will always defend your right to vote. I will veto House Bill 958 because it makes it harder for you to vote, introduces unnecessary chaos into our elections, and invites sore losers to try to overturn an election they lost.”
The governor also addressed the legislation in a separate social-media post.
Stein’s opposition comes days after he accused Republicans of trying to make it easier to reject ballots along partisan lines.
Speaking Saturday at the North Carolina Democratic Party’s Unity Dinner, Stein criticized the 2024 law that transferred authority to appoint state and county election board members from the governor to State Auditor Dave Boliek.
Stein also pointed to disputes over Sunday voting, early-voting sites on college campuses, and a new State Board of Elections rule governing challenges to photo-identification exception forms.
“But you want to know how they cannot steal an election? When we turn out in droves and kick their tails,” Stein said.
The remarks were directed at the broader transfer of election-board authority and recent decisions by Republican-controlled election boards, rather than specifically at HB 958 or HB 834. However, they came as lawmakers prepared to vote on HB 958’s provision placing responsibility for auditing election administration with the state auditor.
Boliek responded to the governor’s concerns on social media, accusing Stein of choosing partisan posturing over constructive dialogue.
Early voting and election audits
HB 958 would reduce early voting for primaries, second primaries, and runoff elections from 17 days to 10. The change would not apply to general elections.
Supporters argue that shortening the period would reduce the financial and administrative burden on county election boards during elections that typically produce lower turnout.
Democrats unsuccessfully sought to preserve the 17-day period during the House debate. They argued that primary elections increasingly determine who will hold office because many legislative and congressional districts strongly favor one party.
The bill would also direct the state auditor to conduct performance audits of election systems and procedures after each general election. Counties would be selected randomly, but 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.
Democrats have questioned whether the arrangement presents a conflict because the state auditor now appoints members of the State Board of Elections, which oversees the county boards that would be audited.
Republicans argue that the provision is intended to identify administrative problems rather than challenge election outcomes. The audits would occur after election results are certified, and the bill states that findings could not be used as grounds to contest the final election result.
HB 834 extends post-election deadlines
Some of the absentee and provisional ballot provisions removed from HB 958 resurfaced in HB 834.
Senators removed HB 834’s original language and replaced it with a package governing ballot processing, absentee-ballot delivery, and judicial review of State Board of Elections decisions.
The bill 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 resolve certain problems with absentee or provisional ballots.
HB 834 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 major provisions in HB 958 would take effect Jan. 1, 2027, and would not apply to the November general election. HB 834 would take effect upon becoming law and could affect this year’s election administration.
Both bills reach Stein’s desk after a months-long path through the General Assembly that included Republican concerns, Democratic opposition, and repeated revisions aimed at shoring up support.
The House first approved a broader version of the bill in June. That measure addressed military and overseas voters, foreign money in referendum campaigns, absentee-ballot processing, deadlines for correcting problems with absentee and provisional ballots, voter-list maintenance, and audits of election administration.
Senators ultimately removed many of the House provisions while retaining the post-election performance audits, changes to voter-list maintenance, and a requirement that candidates be affiliated with a political party for at least 365 days before seeking its nomination. The Senate also added the reduction in early voting for primaries, second primaries, and runoff elections.
Stein has indicated he may veto HB 958, arguing that it would make voting more difficult, create unnecessary confusion, and encourage losing candidates to challenge election results.
“The bill passed with only Republican votes,” Stein said. “Thank you to every single Democratic and Unaffiliated house member for standing against this bad bill. Now, I ask you to call your legislators and urge them to uphold the veto.”
A veto would return the bill to the General Assembly for a possible override. Lawmakers are not expected to return until after the November election, leaving the issue unresolved in the meantime.
“NC House sends election security bills to Stein, veto forthcoming” was originally published on www.carolinajournal.com.
