Introduction
Since 2022, legislatures nationwide have been passing legislation to secure election processes. In 2023, eleven states passed voting laws that make voting more restrictive to ensure the integrity of the election process. One of these laws is Texas’s Senate Bill 1933. The 2023 bill allows the Secretary of State to control an election within counties with a population of over four million contingent on someone filing a complaint against the election processes. However, Harris County is the only county in Texas with a population of over 4 million. Thus, it is the only county that qualifies under this bill. Although Harris County had notable issues in the 2022 election cycle, which caused it to be singled out, there are arguments that the legislation is politically targeted.
Arguments in Favor
In an audit conducted by Texas’s Secretary of State, Harris County was found to have issues with ballot distributions, equipment issues, incomplete paperwork, and insufficient training, among other problems. With over ten thousand election irregularities in the primary and general elections 2022, the legislature saw cause for concern. By creating a process for intervention, proponents of the bill claim that the election process will be more secure, restoring voter confidence in the election process. Proponents also point out that there are requirements for the Secretary of State to be able to take control of the election. There must be a “good cause” with a pattern of issues in the election process. In the event of malfunctioning equipment, uncounted votes, or voting registration issues, the Secretary of State will notify the county election authority to conduct an intervention. If this intervention proceeds, the Secretary of State will eventually take charge of the election process.
Additionally, the law should deter partisan advantages. Some people think the election rules in 2020, like accommodations for mail-in ballots, were changed to benefit Democrats rather than to protect against the spread of COVID-19. In case of a claim like this, the SB 1933 will allow the Secretary of State of Texas to investigate and prevent such an occurrence. Much opposition to SB 1933 comes from the fact that, when put into practice, it could increase barriers to voting, such as ID restrictions and the prevention of mail-in voting. However, in analyzing election legislation across states that impose barriers to voting, Politico summarized that restrictions and expansions of voting laws do not create exaggerated impacts; instead, the turnout for voting, both Republican and Democrat, remains largely the same, eliminating any partisan advantage. This finding maintains that SB 1933’s impact would not lower voter turnout to the extent that the opposition claims.
Arguments Against
Arguments against SB 1933 lie in the demographics of Harris County. 44.6% of Harris County is Hispanic, and 20.6% is African American, making it one of the most diverse counties in the state. Furthermore, Harris County is one of the largest democratic strongholds in Texas. Because the bill was passed by a Republican majority legislature, in conjecture, these demographic trends raise questions about the partisan bias in the bill. In the event of a takeover by the Secretary of State – a Republican – could make it harder for voting to take place, preventing largely Democratic votes from being counted. Opponents of the bill believe that if the Secretary of State could take over the election process, they would take subsequent steps to suppress democratic voters – who in Harris County are citizens in minority groups.
Moreover, because the threshold for intervention in the “good cause” claim is vague, opponents argue it can be easily abused. If the Secretary of State finds a reason to take over the election, the oversight can last up to two years until the problems are resolved. If election control is maintained by the state, especially for long periods of time, there is a question of whether the election process would remain nonpartisan. Since someone from the Republican party generally holds the Secretary of State position, their oversight of elections in a largely Democratic county means they could change policy to make it less favorable to a specific demographic of voters. This possible policy change could manifest with restrictions on early voting, mail-in ballots, and absentee voting – all impacting democratic voter turnout.
Future Developments
Laws aimed at securing the election process, such as SB 1933, are going through various state legislatures. However, in analyzing these policies, answering whether the laws truly secure the election process or if they disenfranchise a group of voters is essential. SB 1933 has much debate on both sides; however, one thing is known: the next election in Harris County will be markedly different than the prior ones.