New Jersey Assembly Bill A2431

New Jersey 2024-2025 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/9/24
• Refer: 1/9/24

Caption

Requires electronic voting system vendors disclose financial ties prior to electronic voting system approval by Secretary of State.

Impact

The introduction of A2431 serves to enhance the integrity of elections in New Jersey by ensuring that the individuals and companies behind voting systems are subjected to scrutiny regarding their financial affiliations. This amendment would amend existing laws under P.L.1973, c.82, enhancing the current system by adding layers of checks and accountability. The requirement for ongoing reporting of significant changes in ownership or shareholder status further strengthens the regulatory framework, helping to mitigate risks associated with undisclosed financial interests from potentially affective parties in elections.

Summary

Assembly Bill A2431 proposes a significant amendment to the current regulations surrounding electronic voting systems in New Jersey. The bill mandates that electronic voting system vendors disclose any financial ties, specifically requiring them to reveal any owners or shareholders who have a five percent or greater interest in the company, its subsidiaries, or its parent company. This requirement aims to reinforce the framework of election security by providing greater transparency about the entities involved in the provision of voting systems. It reflects growing concerns regarding the influence of foreign or unsavory stakeholders in the electoral process.

Contention

Despite its intended purpose, A2431 may face contention among stakeholders. Critics may argue that increased disclosure requirements could dissuade companies from entering the New Jersey election technology market due to privacy concerns or the fear of exposing sensitive business information. Supporters, on the other hand, will argue that the bill's provisions are a necessary step towards ensuring that election systems are not only functional but also free from external influences that could undermine public confidence in the democratic process. Ultimately, the debate will likely center around balancing transparency with the need to foster a competitive marketplace for voting technologies.