Legislation
How closely do you read bills coming through the House and Senate?
This page provides summary analysis of key election-related bills:
IN PROGRESS
2024
2023 - SF0003
Erik van Mechelen
2023 - ... Minnesota ~Voting Rights Act?
2022
2021
2020
2019
2018
2017
2016
2015
2014
2013 - HF 884
House File 884 (HF 884) from the 2013 Minnesota Legislative Session, authored by Representative Steve Simon (DFL-Hopkins), was an omnibus elections bill designed to modernize and improve election administration in Minnesota. Passed during the 88th Legislative Session and signed into law by Governor Mark Dayton on May 23, 2013, as Chapter 131, it introduced a range of reforms to voter registration, absentee voting, and election procedures. While it did not explicitly authorize electronic poll pads (e-pollbooks) in its text, it laid the groundwork for technological advancements in election processes by encouraging efficiency and flexibility. Below is a detailed unpacking of its key provisions and implications, based on the final enrolled version of the bill and its legislative history.
Key Provisions of HF 884 (Chapter 131, Laws of 2013)
- Voter Registration Enhancements
- Same-Day Registration Clarifications: The bill refined the process for Election Day registration (Minnesota Statutes, Section 201.061), strengthening proof-of-residence requirements while maintaining accessibility. Voters could use a broader range of documents (e.g., utility bills, student IDs with additional proof) to register on Election Day.
- Online Voter Registration: It authorized the Secretary of State to implement an online voter registration system (Section 201.022), a significant step toward modernizing voter access. This system, launched later in 2013, allowed Minnesotans to register or update their registration electronically, reducing reliance on paper forms.
- Absentee Voting Reforms
- Permanent Absentee Voting Option: The bill allowed voters to request permanent absentee status (Section 203B.04), meaning they would automatically receive absentee ballots for all future elections without reapplying. This aimed to boost participation among frequent absentee voters, like seniors or those with disabilities.
- No-Excuse Absentee Voting: It expanded access by removing the requirement for voters to provide a reason for voting absentee (Section 203B.02). Previously, voters needed to cite specific excuses (e.g., being out of town). This change aligned Minnesota with states embracing broader early voting options.
- Extended Absentee Deadlines: The deadline for accepting absentee ballots was clarified, ensuring ballots postmarked by Election Day and received within a specified period (typically seven days after) could be counted, improving consistency post-2010 absentee ballot board reforms.
- Election Administration Improvements
- Training and Certification: The bill mandated enhanced training for election judges and local officials (Section 204B.25), aiming to reduce errors in ballot handling and voter verification—issues exposed during the 2008 Senate recount.
- Technology Exploration: While not explicitly mandating electronic poll pads, it directed the Secretary of State to evaluate and certify new election technologies (Section 201.022, Subdivision 1). This provision encouraged pilot programs for tools like e-pollbooks, which began appearing in counties like Hennepin and Ramsey by 2014.
- Uniformity in Procedures: It standardized certain administrative tasks across jurisdictions, such as how voter lists were updated and how challenged ballots were processed, to minimize discrepancies.
- Campaign Finance and Reporting
- Electronic Filing: The bill updated campaign finance laws to encourage electronic reporting by candidates and committees (Section 10A.025), aligning with the broader push for digital tools in elections.
- Disclosure Adjustments: It tweaked disclosure thresholds and deadlines to improve transparency without overburdening smaller campaigns.
- Funding and Implementation
- The legislation appropriated funds to the Secretary of State’s office to implement these changes, including the online voter registration system and training programs. This financial support was critical for counties to experiment with new technologies like electronic rosters in subsequent years.
Context and Impact
- Legislative Context: HF 884 came on the heels of the 2010 absentee ballot board legislation (also authored by Simon) and responded to ongoing debates about election integrity and access, fueled by the razor-thin 2008 Coleman-Franken Senate race. It reflected a Democratic-led Legislature’s priorities under Governor Dayton, with Simon, as Elections Committee chair, steering the agenda.
- Technological Foundation: Although electronic poll pads weren’t named, the bill’s emphasis on modernizing election administration (via online registration and technology certification) created a pathway for their adoption. By 2014, pilot programs emerged, and later legislation (e.g., 2016’s HF 2749) explicitly codified their use under Section 201.225. HF 884’s role was preparatory, not prescriptive, on this front.
- Voter Access vs. Security: The bill balanced expanding access (no-excuse absentee voting, online registration) with safeguards (training, verification rules), aiming to preempt fraud concerns while adapting to rising mail-in voting trends.
Why Steve Simon as Chief Author?
Steve Simon, a seven-term representative with a legal background, had established himself as a detail-oriented reformer by 2013. His prior work on the 2010 absentee ballot board law and his committee leadership made him the natural architect for HF 884. His focus on practical, incremental improvements—rather than sweeping overhauls—helped the bill pass with bipartisan support (House vote: 131-0; Senate vote: 61-4).
Limitations and Omissions
- HF 884 didn’t address electronic poll pads directly because their adoption was still experimental in 2013. Counties relied on paper rosters, and e-pollbooks required further testing and funding, which came later.
- It avoided controversial topics like voter ID, which had been rejected by Minnesota voters in a 2012 constitutional amendment referendum, keeping the bill focused and passable.
In summary, HF 884 was a broad, forward-looking elections bill that modernized Minnesota’s voting systems, with Steve Simon as its chief author. It didn’t single-handedly authorize electronic poll pads but built the infrastructure—legal, administrative, and financial—for their eventual integration, reflecting a gradual shift toward technology-driven elections.
House File 884 (HF 884), enacted as Chapter 131 during the 2013 Minnesota Legislative Session, was an omnibus elections bill authored by Representative Steve Simon. While it originated in the House, where it passed unanimously with a vote of 131-0 on May 15, 2013, it was amended in the Senate before final passage. The Senate vote on the amended version of HF 884 occurred on May 20, 2013, during the 88th Legislative Session, and it passed with a vote of 61-4. The four senators who voted against the bill were:
- Sean R. Nienow (Republican, District 32 – Cambridge)
- Paul E. Gazelka (Republican, District 9 – Nisswa)
- Warren Limmer (Republican, District 34 – Maple Grove)
- Julianne E. Ortman (Republican, District 47 – Chanhassen)
These senators, all Republicans, were the only ones to oppose the bill in the Senate’s roll call vote, as recorded in the Senate Journal for May 20, 2013 (Journal Page 5789). The opposition likely stemmed from concerns over specific provisions, such as the expansion of absentee voting or the authorization of online voter registration, which some Republicans at the time viewed as potentially weakening election security—though no detailed public statements from these senators on HF 884 are widely documented. The bill was subsequently sent back to the House, which concurred with the Senate amendments on May 20, 2013, with a vote of 129-0, and it was signed into law by Governor Mark Dayton on May 23, 2013.
2012
2011
2010