I was disappointed that SB270 was carried over to 2025 (on the motion from Delegate Sickles) - and that no one on this subcommittee moved to report this bill to the full P&E Committee for further discussion and consideration. I would be pleased if SB270 was discussed further and open to a motion to report. There were some misstatements made on February 19th. A citizen, Mr. Jones, who testified remotely, referred to a "test election I think in Alexandria". He stated that it was a "fiasco, so much so that the governing body decided to never use it again." Let's get the facts straight. RCV was used in the County Board primary election in June 2023 in Arlington County. Arlington Elections office surveyed its officers after the election - over 90% of them reported that "most voters were aware of RCV" and that voters had "little to no questions" after they were instructed how to mark their ballots. One informal survey by ArlNow found less than 10% of respondents were confused about how to mark their ballots. The Arlington County Board conducted a survey of voters in June-July 2023. Results show that 57% of the (2,400) respondents rated their RCV experience as "exceptional" or "positive". 47% wanted to see RCV used in every election, with another 7% favoring its use in primary elections only. Mr. Jones was also incorrect in stating that the County Board decided never again to use RCV. In fact, in December 2023, they voted unanimously to use RCV in all future County Board primary elections. (Mr. Jones was also incorrect in suggesting that the winner of the June and November elections supported that vote "and it's back" -- they were not seated on the Board until January 2024). This weekend, the County Board is considering an ordinance to expand the use of RCV to the County Board General elections. Arlington County is ready to use RCV. Although Delegate Bloxom stated that using RCV was "not allowed in the Republican rules", may I point out that the Republican Party of Virginia used RCV in the 2021 gubernatorial primary - their winning slate garnered strong support from their voters and their ticket won all 3 statewide races. The Republican party also used RCV in two Congressional primary elections. Delegate Srinivasan similarly asked about Democratic Party rules about using RCV - the Democrats in various jurisdictions have, indeed, used RCV in some caucuses to select/endorse candidates. RCV is good for voters - it's good for candidates. Let's move this forward - with knowledge based on facts.

I support SB270 because having 45 days of early voting practically ensures some presidential candidates will drop out while the primary is in progress. Ranked choice would allow me to mark all the candidates with whom I would be satisfied. I wouldn't have to guess who would still be in the race 44 days later. Ranked choice would also benefit the party and the candidate by assuring them of majority, not just plurality, support. Some folks say a ranked choice ballot is too complicated but I've yet to meet anyone who had trouble with the various sample ballots ranking pizza toppings or candy. I hope you will report SB270.

As a member of a good governance group, BigMoneyOutVA, I support SB 270. Rank choice voting has been introduced in states and jurisdications around the country and has been effective in allowing citizens not to "waste" their vote. It is easy to understand and implement and it allows citizens to feel that a candidate wins with a plurarity of the votes. Also, as someone who worked overseas, this process of voting keeps my vote "in the game" even though candidates may have dropped out by the time my vote was counted. Please pass this bill.

HB1003 is a no brainer; I can't believe this notice of polling place changes isn't standard procedure already. Support HB1045 looks great as well, would be a huge step towards making elections more about who has the most popular ideas rather than who can raise the most money. Support HB375 is the main reason I'm commenting; the electoral college is outdated and provides voters in some states with much more power than others. Until the electoral college can be abolished by constitutional amendment, this compact is a great way of ensuring that ALL the people of this country choose its president, not just those in a few swing states. It saddens me to see how many people in the comments on this bill are against this common sense change. Major support SB270 is another no brainer; allowing voters to express their preferences beyond a winner take all system would be a huge win for democracy in the state of Virginia. Support

Dear Committee Members: Reference SB270: I have worked as an election officer, assistant chief, and chief for the past 5 years. I oppose Rank Choice Voting due to the following: 1) The possibility of many candidates to choose from which each voter must rank. For example, if there are 6 candidates, the voter must rank each candidate 1 – 6 by selecting the appropriate oval. The attached file shows an example of the instructions for Rank Choice voting ballot that took place at the Alaska’s Secretary of State election. 2) Will cause confusion for the voters which may lead to high percentage of spoiling ballots especially if they mistakenly selected two candidates as first choices even though the instructions are presented. 3) Forces the voters to rank a candidate they don’t support. 4) If the voter does not rank all candidates, most likely their ballot will not move forward to the next round which causes the voter’s ballot to be discarded which is not the American democratic way and their voices are silenced. 5) The results can be skewed by rigging counting software each time it runs multiple cycles. 6) Particularly damaging to vulnerable voters (military, seniors, mail voters) who are unable to immediately correct mistakes. 7) Hinders recounts and audits. 8) Expect longer lines. As a chief election officer, it is great to see voters come out to exercise their right to vote. Let us not discourage the voters by complicating the election process. Thank you for your time, Carmen Torres-Nisbet, a concern citizen

As a citizen of the United States of America and, more specifically, the Commonwealth of Virginia, I am appalled at the condition of our politics today. We have degraded to a point that the average citizen feels unmoved to vote because the choices we have are nasty and nastier. In this country we need to return to politics that are more about governance for the majority than sound bites to stir up negativity about our fellow Americans. Rank Choice Voting, or Instant Run-off Voting, will give us more options than only two parties, and will provide incentive for candidates to talk more about substance than vitriol. Voters will have more incentive to vote because their vote will have more weight. Please vote for bringing this issue to the full House for consideration. Sharon Barnes

I am writing in support of Ranked Choice Voting in Virginia Primaries. I love my country and served in the air force following my graduation from the Air Force Academy in 1970. It wounds me and grieves me to see America being ripped in half by extreme partisan politics. The two major political parties seem no longer able to work together for the good of the people they purport to represent. There are many reasons for this but some stand out. Gerrymandered districts find candidates competing to be the most extreme in order to represent their party in districts likely to be non-competitive in the general election. So legislatures wind up with too few moderates to bridge a wide chasm between their members, unable to cooperate with each other because to do so risks alienating their loudest (angriest?) constituents and risks as well their personal future political prospects (having consorted with the "enemy"). The end result is that CITIZENS' NEEDS ARE NOT MET as government dysfunction prevents reasonable compromise solutions. One step towards meeting the real everyday needs of Virginians is RANKED CHOICE VOTING. RCV is not a silver bullet, but it is a step toward restoring government functionality. RCV would help at every level but can be especially helpful in statewide elections where winning candidates are expected to serve a large and diverse population spread over a sizable area. As representatives currently serving your local district as well as feeling some patriotism for America and for Virginia, I am asking you please to give RCV your most serious consideration. You don't need me or anyone else to explain to you how RCV can move political discourse away from the non-productive edges and toward the result-oriented middle. You don't need me to explain the cost savings of counting election day voter preferences versus holding a run-off election. So I'll spare anyone reading this a long recitation of what is already well known. This year's primaries offer a great laboratory to conduct this experiment in rescuing our democracy, course correcting off the road to ruin which is now so dangerously in play. Even if the races are not expected to be close, we have an opportunity to begin to educate voters on the many reasons to adopt and practice RCV. No longer will a citizen who prefers a candidate with low poll numbers have to decide whether or not to vote for them, because they can do so with no fear of having "thrown away" their vote. (This may not hold if apportioning delegates just counts votes and does not require a majority to win in some states. But still there is NO DOWNSIDE to implementing RCV in any case.) Whether it's moving political discourse towards the middle (where things get done) or increasing the civility in our legislative bodies, or potentially saving effort & money by embedding run-off votes into an initial election, or encouraging voting because no vote is wasted, RCV is an idea whose time has come. PLEASE give Ranked Choice Voting a chance to place Virginia among the state leaders in 21st century elections. Do it now. There is nothing to be gained by waiting and everything to gain if this works the way it ought to. THANK YOU for your service in government, regardless of your political party, and THANK YOU for being a leader and voting to implement Ranked Choice Voting without delay! Respectfully,

The League of Women Voters of Virginia supports the expansion of ranked choice voting to Presidential Primaries, as described in SB270. We believe that ranked choice voting, or RCV, would make our elections more accessible, would promote nominees with broad support, and would ensure that every voter’s voice is heard. RCV often results in a more diverse slate of candidates who can run for office without the fear of being a “spoiler” or splitting the vote. RCV allows voters to express their choice of candidates fully, without worrying about “wasting their vote” if a preferred candidate drops out before election day, and without worrying about voting for the likely winner, rather than the candidate that most closely represents their personal views. RCV ensures that the winning candidate has the broad support of the majority of voters, rather than just a 22% or 34% plurality of voters. Additionally, our overseas and military families especially will benefit when RCV ballots are used. These voters are required to mail their ballots well ahead of election day and are impacted particularly by candidates dropping out of races before Election Day. We also appreciate all the work that this bill has received. The bill requires the Department of Election to confirm that all localities have the ability to conduct an RCV election. Additionally, the bill provides detailed processes, providing guidance to localities and the Department of Elections, on how to conduct an RCV election for a Presidential Primary. The League of Women Voters of Virginia asks this Subcommittee to report out SB270 to the full House P&E Committee.

As a resident of Rosslyn in Arlington County, Virginia, I am writing to express my strong support for Virginia Senate Bill (SB) 270, which advocates for the adoption of Ranked Choice Voting (RCV) in presidential primaries. This legislative move is particularly impactful for individuals like myself, who value the democratic process and recognize the benefits RCV offers to both military personnel overseas and civilians alike. The introduction of RCV is a significant advancement for those of us concerned with the logistical hurdles and disenfranchisement often experienced during absentee voting. For veterans and active duty members stationed abroad, RCV ensures that our vote remains influential even if our first-choice candidate becomes non-viable. This aspect of RCV is critical in primaries crowded with contenders, offering a solution to the common problem where a preferred candidate withdraws from the race, potentially rendering traditional votes ineffective. Furthermore, RCV streamlines the voting process for service members by eliminating the need for participation in potentially multiple rounds of primaries through absentee ballots. This consolidation into a single, decisive vote respects the unique time and logistical challenges faced by military voters, facilitating a more inclusive and participatory electoral process. SB 270 represents a forward-thinking approach to voting that not only enhances the voting experience for those of us serving overseas but also strengthens the democratic process by ensuring every vote counts and contributes to electing candidates who truly represent the majority's preference. By supporting this bill, Virginia acknowledges the sacrifices and challenges of its service members, affirming the state's commitment to upholding and enhancing democratic participation for all its residents.

Please allow elected representatives to implement Ranked Choice Voting in any municipality where the citizen-voters prefer it. The matter is simple and a validation of representative democracy in action. Thank You.

Rank choice voting (RCV) provides voters with the opportunity to vote for the candidate they believe is best to represent their individual interests. Currently a voter feels forced to vote for one of the two major parties to make any difference. For me, this is especially important today because the two major parties are the same on those issues I care about most, namely endless war and a total disregard for the explicit directives of the US Constitution. I think that over time RCV will provide the medium income voter some ability to influence legislation. Based on the so called Princeton study, it has been demonstrated that the medium income voter has zero influence on the policies that will become laws in the US Congress.

Dear Ma'am or Sir: I strongly support Ranked Choice Voting and request you do the same by supporting this bill. Ranked Choice Voting is the fairest way to ensure a candidate wins with a majority of voter support. It prevents a large minority from controlling the majority. This forces candidates to appeal to a majority of voters and not just a minority base. This changes the incentives for campaigning. Ranked Choice Voting also eliminates the spoiler affect. This mean candidates with a lower chance of winning an election are not discouraged from running for office. This increases the choice for voters, which is a good thing in a democracy. Please support Ranked Choice Voting and expand its use within Virginia.

I urge you to vote YES for SB270. The bill offers a transformative solution to the issue of polarized candidates in Virginia. By introducing a ranked-choice voting system, SB270 empowers voters to support candidates who truly align with their values, rather than feeling constrained by a "winner takes all" mentality. The evidence is clear: ranked-choice voting has been shown to reduce polarization, foster more civil campaigns, and ultimately lead to the election of candidates who better represent the majority of voters. As a result of RCV, we can expect more inclusive and diverse representation in government. I urge you to support SB270 and embrace a more equitable and representative electoral process for the benefit of all Virginians.

The attachment includes brief informational testimony on SB270.

P/E Subcommittee, BOTTOM LINE UP FRONT: SB270 POSITIVELY ACHIEVES GETTING MORE ACTIVE DUTY MILITARY BALLOTS COUNTED. On behalf of Veterans for All Voters, we explicitly and vociferously ask that you continue your support of Ranked Choice Voting through SB270. We steadfastly believe that the use of Ranked Choice Voting may be the most important and most necessary structural improvement to our electoral system right now! It brings more power to voters, promotes issue-based campaigning, brings consensus and balanced sanity back to our political discourse, AND IT ASSURES MORE ACTIVE DUTY MILITARY VOTERS GET COUNTED. It's not a Red thing or a Blue thing, it re-incentivizes consensus, and absolutely is the most elegant solution for our military voters. Veterans for All Voters asks that you PLEASE support SB270!!!

Thank you for providing the opportunity to express my support for SB270. As a former Soldier with close to 16 years of active service, I believe this bill will help decrease disenfranchisement amongst veteran voters by ensuring their votes are not lost or discarded due to the inadequacies and limits associated with overseas voting. Ranked Choice Voting (RCV) ensure all votes are counted, even if candidates suddenly drop from the race and the veteran has already mailed his or her ballot.

As a veteran based in Charlottesville, Virginia, who has experienced the challenges of voting through overseas ballots, I strongly support Virginia Senate Bill (SB) 270, especially due to its implications for Ranked Choice Voting (RCV). This bill, which allows political parties to use RCV in presidential primaries, is a game changer for former service members like me, who have been stationed far from home. RCV is crucial for veterans and active duty personnel overseas. Traditionally, voting while deployed presents logistical challenges, often leading to a feeling of disenfranchisement. With RCV, we can rank candidates in order of preference, mitigating the risk of our vote being wasted if our top choice is not viable. This is especially important in primaries where multiple candidates vie for nomination, and our preferred candidate may drop out before our ballot is even counted. Moreover, RCV simplifies the process of voting in primaries for overseas military personnel. Instead of navigating the complexities of absentee voting for multiple rounds of a primary, service members can make their voices heard in a single, comprehensive vote. This not only ensures greater participation but also respects the constraints of military duty, where time and resources for voting are limited. As sailors and soldiers stationed overseas, our ability to participate in the democratic process is often hindered by logistical and time constraints. SB 270, by implementing RCV, directly addresses these challenges, ensuring that our votes count and our voices are heard, regardless of where duty takes us. It's a step towards acknowledging and respecting the unique circumstances of military voters, reinforcing the democratic values we serve to protect.

Please vote NO on SB 270. Ranked choice voting should be opposed because it involves a method of tabulation that suppresses the popular vote. Under ranked choice voting, if the candidate with the most votes receives less than 50 percent of the votes, that candidate does not win, but must go on to another round of voting. Same with the second and third rounds, etc. Any method of tabulation that negates the popular vote, such as with a plurality win, suppresses the will of the voters and is undemocratic.

Dear committee members, I'm writing in support of SB270 which would give political parties the option to use ranked choice voting (RCV) in future presidential primaries. I am the Director of Research and Policy at FairVote, an organization that researches electoral reforms. We support RCV for presidential primaries because it lets primary voters navigate a crowded field, ensures every voter’s voice is heard even if their first-choice candidate withdraws just before the primary, and incentivizes presidential candidates to speak to issues important to Virginia voters in order to build the broadest coalition of support. Five state Democratic parties used RCV for presidential primaries in 2020, including Kansas, Alaska, Wyoming, and Hawaii for all voters and Nevada for early voters only. These states found that RCV preserves key benefits of caucuses, like allowing voters to “realign” with a second choice if their top choice candidate does not earn enough support to remain in the delegate race, while also modernizing the process with a primary that allows for greater participation. Voters in these states took advantage of the opportunity to rank multiple candidates, made very few ballot errors, and turned out in large numbers. In a year when nearly 3 million early voters in states without RCV cast ballots for presidential candidates who had already withdrawn by the time ballots were counted, RCV made more votes count. (See the report I authored on RCV in presidential primaries in 2020 at: https://fairvote.org/report/ranked_choice_voting_in_2020_presidential_primary_elections/) For Virginia, a state that votes on "Super Tuesday," RCV will be even more important next time either party has a highly competitive primary race. Candidates often drop out after early state primaries, sometimes just days before "Super Tuesday." In 2020, over 30,000 Democratic primary voters in Virginia cast their ballots for candidates who had already dropped out of the race. Similarly, 11,000 Republican primary voters did so in 2016. Looking ahead to 2028, it's likely at least one of the major parties will have a highly competitive primary field, and possibly both. RCV will help parties coalesce behind the nominee with broadest support, ensuring Virginia awards its delegates to the candidate with the most appeal in the Commonwealth. Additionally, RCV will benefit Virginia voters by giving them more choice on the ballot and protecting them from "wasted votes." I and my colleagues at FairVote would be happy to answer any questions. You can reach me at dotis@fairvote.org. Sincerely, Deb Otis Director of Research and Policy, FairVote dotis@fairvote.org

“I / We steadfastly believe that the use of Ranked Choice Voting may be the most important and most necessary structural improvement to our electoral system right now! It brings more power to voters, promotes issue-based campaigning, and brings consensus and balanced sanity back to our political discourse. Moreover, military voters have a better chance to get their vote counted! Please support SB270 as it moves back to the House... Respectfully, Mr. Charles E. Benz

I encourage you to support the use of Ranked Choice Voting (RCV) in presidential primaries. RCV rewards substantive campaigns and considerably reduces the typical fear mongering ads of today's polarizing political campaigns. R(RCV) ensures winners with a majority support which encourages our representatives to serve all constituents, not just a minority of voters.

I strongly support Ranked Choice Voting in all elections where there are more tan 2 candidates. This system of voting will ensure that winning candidate receives the support of more than 50% of the voters. In the last election for City Council in Virginia Beach 4 out of 7 district Council seats were decided by less than 50%. In my district it was about 37%. I am sure in many primary elections where there are often more than 2 candidates the winners often receive less than 50% of the vote. If ranked Choice Voting is used in an election, candidate's would have to appeal to a broader electorate and result in a more centrist winner. Haven't we had enough of the negativity in our elections? I served 31 years in the US Navy flying off of aircraft carriers and leading sailors in defense of this Nation. In fact my last duty station was on the USS Eisenhower now engaged in defending the interests of this Nation. I took an oath to defend the Constitution of United States. I think we are at a crossroads that demands elected officials stand up and do the same to preserve our democracy. Ranked Choice Voting will put us back on that path. Respectfully, Captain D. Stubbs, USN retired

SB 270 is a commonsense bill that gives political parties the option of using Ranked Choice Voting in publicly funded Presidential Primary elections. Using Ranked Choice Voting in primary elections will ensure nominees of political parties will have the support of the majority of the primary election voters. Using Ranked Choice Voting is especially important for early voters, voters who use mail-in ballots, and military members and their dependents who mail their ballots from overseas locations. By ranking candidates, voters’ preferences will “count” even if their #1 choice drops out of the primary election race after they vote early or mail their mail-in ballot. Please vote YES on SB 270.

Hello, my name is LaTwyla Mathias, and I am the Executive Director of Progress Virginia. We support SB270 and ranked choice voting because it gives voters more of a choice in the Democratic process. Ranked choice voting has been shown to increase voter turnout by 10%. Ranked choice voting also ensures that the candidate with the broadest support wins, and has even been shown to reduce negative campaigning. We hope you will pass SB270 to allow ranked choice voting in presidential primaries so that the candidate with the broadest level of support wins and that voters have more choice when it comes to our elections.

Virginia has a proud history of providing parties wide latitude in how they select their nominees for office. They can choose from a wide variety of options from closed conventions to open public primaries. This measure simply provides one additional option for parties to nominate their strongest candidate. Please vote yes and allow parties the OPTION of using ranked choice voting for Presidential primaries. Thank you for your service to our state. Cordially, Bo Harmon Leesburg, VA 20175

I write in support of SB270 to use Ranked Choice Voting (RCV) in Presidential primary elections beginning in 2028. Voters will be able to vote for the candidate(s) that most closely align with the voter's beliefs and values. Voters will not see their votes thrown in the trash because their selected candidate(s) drops out of the race the day before election day. This is especially important for overseas voters, including our military voters. Please vote YES on SB270 and send this bill to the full Committee.

The League of Women Voters of Virginia supports SB301 and the need for providing clear rules for appealing penalties relating to candidates’ filings, through the State Board of Elections.

The League supports SB 315 because it will help ensure that voters who are already registered to vote in Virginia are registered in the correct precinct. Many people forget to update their voter registration addresses but remember to update their addresses for their driver’s licenses. While it is true that eligible citizens can opt out of automatic voter registration, once they are registered, this proposal would make it easier for them to keep their registration current and accurate. Not only would the bill help voters, but it would also assist in maintaining clean voter rolls.

Please vote NO on SB 315. This bill requires the automatic updating of a voter’s address on the voter rolls with whatever address is most recently provided to DMV. It removes the ability of a voter to opt out, even in instances where an address provided to DMV is a business or second home, or farm address, a place that is not the voter’s primary place of residence. This bill would create unnecessary confusion on the part of Elect and the voter. Why remove the opt out provision already in place? The bill would unilaterally provide a new address for a voter, likely changing a voter’s precinct. To change a voter’s voter registration address to someplace other than the primary address, without the consent of the voter would amount to voter disenfranchisement. In addition, simply interacting with the DMV cannot change a voter’s status from inactive to active for the purpose of federal elections. There are federal laws in place that govern this. A visit to DMV has nothing to do with whether someone is active or not on the voter rolls.

(Additional Comments for LWV-VA) The League of Women Voters urges you to report SB 364. The bill offers much-needed protections to all the people who run Virginia’s elections, not just the officers of election on election day. The bill protects both current and former election officials against crimes, including doxxing and swatting, committed against them for simply serving the Commonwealth and its voters. It also extends the right to civil action for injuries from doing this essential work In other states, election officials have been subjected to lasting traumas for simply doing their jobs. Nationwide, nearly one in three has been harassed, abused, or threatened. One in five is worried about being physically assaulted on the job. Many experienced professionals have abandoned the field, putting effective election administration in jeopardy. Protecting our election officials is the least we can do for those who serve the Commonwealth and its citizens.

That. Virginia Electoral Board Association supports this and thanks the patron for including electoral board members in this bill.

On behalf of our 16,859 members and activists in The Commonwealth of Virginia, Public Citizen encourages the House Privileges and Elections Committee to advance SB 364 which provides protections for clerks, election officials, and election workers from harassment, threats, abuse, and assault in the performance of their official duties. These are necessary protections to protect the individuals at the heart of ensuring our democracy is alive and well.

I support SB364. Without trust in our elections, we can have no legitimate government. Elections require a lot of workers to ensure that every eligible voter's ballot counts. The last few years have not been good for the ranks of election workers. We need to assure everyone who is willing to be an election worker that they are safe.

Thank you for bringing this very important legislation back that did not survive Crossover last year. As a former election worker, I am very concerned that good fair and sane people fear, and not without cause, doing this important job for free or low pay for often more than a 12-hour work day. According to a Brennan Center survey of election workers from all Parties, one in six election workers have received threats due to their jobs, these include both inside and outside their polling places. Some 77% believe these threats have increased in recent years (“Poll of Local Election Officials Finds Safety Fears for Colleagues — and Themselves | Brennan Center for Justice,” March 10, 2022). Not all are as severe as the threats against the Georgia election workers Ruby Freeman and her daughter, who had to seek justice in the courts. But others have had to hire security or have quit long-held job. The new DoJ task force on election intimidation received 1000 threat reports in it’s first year, of which it found that five instances that went beyond being verbally abusive and racist to involve credible threats of violence. This harassment has resulted in increased turnover in election officials; 30% of the officials know of one or more election workers who have left at least in part because of fear for their safety, increased threats, or intimidation. High turnover rates make it harder to run fair elections. Shortages of election workers could cause long lines at the polls or the closure and consolidation of polling locations, making it harder to vote. Eleven states now have taken actions to protect their election workers as of the end of 2023. According to a National Conference of State Legislatures’ report: “With threats against election officials on the rise, a number of states enacted protections for them in 2023. ‘This year, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico and Oklahoma joined six states that had already made such enactments to provide protections in 2022,’” reported Wendy Underhill, NCSL’s director of elections and redistricting. She noted that the increase in threats has helped create a labor shortage. “Poll workers have always been a little tricky to find. There aren’t always people who are willing to serve that function, increasing the pay is one thing states can do to encourage people to participate, and Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana and Maryland all did that this year.” The 2024 election cycle does not bode well for a reduction in threats and rancor. The discord caused by false election claims impact those on the frontline who should be praised not threatened. We don’t need close calls like last year almost not have a working registrar and staff in Buckingham County. Move this bill on and implement it before the November elections.

The League of Women urges you to report SB 364. The bill offers much-needed protections to the people who run Virginia’s elections, before, during and after the elections. The bill extends the right to civil action as well as protection against crimes, including doxxing and swatting, to current and former officials alike. In other states, election officials have been subjected to lasting traumas for simply doing their jobs. Nationwide, nearly one in three has been harassed, abused, or threatened. One in five is worried about being physically assaulted on the job. Many experienced professionals have abandoned the field, putting effective election administration in jeopardy. Protecting our election officials is the least we can do for those who serve the Commonwealth and its citizens.

Please vote NO on SB 364. To expand the category of voters who may list a post office address instead of a street address on their registration will result in even more opaque voter rolls. The bill would allow all current or former election officers, or employees of election officials (presumably staffers who work at county election offices or electoral boards, whether or not they are election officers and regardless whether their names or titles are even publicly known as election workers) to opt out of using their home address on voter rolls. A home address is one of the most valuable and reliable tools by which to identify a voter and confirm someone is who they say they are. When a voter checks in to a polling place, his name and street address are the two identifiers used to confirm identity. With voter identification (photo or otherwise) no longer required in Virginia, a street address provided on an absentee ballot application or in person at a polling station is one of the few remaining ways to assure proper identification. With approximately nine million residents in Virginia, there are tens of thousands of current and former election officers and employees of election offices. It is highly improbable that a former election officer or election officer staffer necessitates inclusion in a protected class. No statistics have been provided showing that election officers and staffers are subject to threats or violence at a rate higher than that of the general population, warranting special protections. To expand the “protected class” to include one-time election officers and rotating staff workers (many are seasonal workers who work only during election season), would also be expensive and impractical. Valuable Elect staff time would be spent confirming an individual’s status as a current or former election officer or seasonal staff worker, etc. To expand the category of those who may use a post office address in this fashion would amount to an exception swallowing the rule. The protected class would continually increase, be difficult to maintain, and would be to the detriment of complete and accurate voter rolls.

I oppose SB 364 for several reasons: 1) The language in SB364 amending 24.2-418, Section A is unclear as to the new affirmation on the voter registration application, which states in SB364 ONLY that " The form shall contain a statement that whoever votes more than once in any election in the same or different jurisdictions is guilty of a Class 6 felony. " Does this language REPLACE the language in the existing affirmation on the voter registration application (https://www.elections.virginia.gov/media/formswarehouse/veris-voter-registration/applications/VA-NVRA-1-Voter-Registration-Application-rev-4-2023.-(3).pdf ) which states "AFFIRMATION: I swear/affirm, under felony penalty for making willfully false material statements or entries, that the information provided on this form is true." Does the amended language replace the instructions on the existing Registration Application which state: "WARNING: INTENTIONALLY VOTING MORE THAN ONCE IN AN ELECTION OR MAKING A MATERIALLY FALSE STATEMENT ON THIS FORM CONSTITUTES THE CRIME OF ELECTION FRAUD, WHICH IS PUNISHABLE UNDER VIRGINIA LAW AS A FELONY. VIOLATORS MAY BE SENTENCED TO UP TO 10 YEARS IN PRISON, OR UP TO 12 MONTHS IN JAIL AND/OR FINED UP TO $2,500." It appears that SB364 removes the language about "willfully false material statements or entries" and "materially false statement." Either SB364 should be rewritten in this section specifically to include that language or a statement made that all affirmations will remain as currently stated on the Voter Registration Application. 2) The language in SB364 amending 24.2-1000 is similarly unclear and redundant. It's imprecise, using the phrase "employee of an election official," when more appropriate language would be "employee of an election office." SB 364 is both unclear and arguably weakens the protection described for officials in the existing language in 24.1000 by substituting the undefined brief phrase "administering elections" in place of the current, precise and comprehensive language in 24.2-1000: "the officers of election at any polling place, voter satellite office, or other location being used by a locality for voting purposes from holding an election." The objective of Section B in the SB364 Amendment to 24.2-1000,, to add electors as a group protected from coercion and intimidation, could be accomplished simply by adding electors to the existing language in 24.2-1000, without any other changes. Section C in the SB364 Amendment to 24.2-1000 is entirely redundant, since both the crimes and the penalties are covered under 18.2-60 (Threats of death or bodily injury to a person or member of his family ) https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacode/title18.2/chapter4/section18.2-60/ The SB364 language amending 24.2-1020 is also unclear, with the phrase "Any person who was a victim of any conduct that constitutes a felony or misdemeanor in this title". Note that the crimes specified - "intimidation" for example - are highly subjective and could be considered permitted free speech under Brandenburg v Ohio. Is the decision as to the "conduct" and whether it "constitutes" "intimidation" up to the self-described victim? No conviction of a crime is required, merely that an action "constitutes" "intimidation"? This seems to approach the slippery slope of a "hate speech law" specific to elections, permitting civil suits against media, legislators, political parties and voters who may question "administering elections."

Hi there, I'm Natalie from Social Busy Bee, your partner in the exciting world of Instagram growth. I've discovered something phenomenal for skyrocketing your Instagram popularity and I'm thrilled to share it with you! Social Growth Engine introduces a groundbreaking service that takes your Instagram engagement to new heights. It's effortless: - Zero in on producing unforgettable content. - Extremely budget-friendly at a mere $36/month. - Completely safe (no password needed), incredibly powerful, and Instagram's best friend. I've experienced remarkable results firsthand, and I'm sure you will too! Amplify your Instagram presence right now: http://get.socialbuzzzy.com/instagram_booster Best wishes, Natalie at Social Busy Bee"

Hi I am writing to you on behalf of The Well Connection UK, a media and publishing company. We could easily get virginia.gov featured in various publications such as magazines, online blogs and news sites. This would undoubtedly help virginia.gov with publicity, reputation, domain authority and organic search engine rankings. We have a wide range of options including completely free collaborations, sponsored posts, guest posts and banner ads. If this sounds of interest, please reach out to the senior business development manager, Anita at info@thewellconnection.co.uk and whatsapp +447395206515 (GMT) Kind regards Clifton Junior Outreach Assistant

The time to bring the Commonwealth of Virginia into compliance with campaign finance restrictions is long overdue. Support for S.B. 377 is overwhelming and I agree it is necessary. Donors expect that their hard-earned $$ will be used for campaign and political purposes to advance policies in their interests, not an elected official’s personal interests. The ability of an elected official to use campaign funds for personal use is too great a temptation to go unchecked without significant regulation. Pass this bill to limit the potential for corrupt practices and restore integrity to the Commonwealth’s campaign finance structure. TY.

My name is Heidi Drauschak and last year I ran for state senate in SD35. I raised almost a million dollars. Under Virginia's current law, I could have turned around and spent that money on anything -- a yacht, a trip to the Bahamas, fancy jewelry, and/or steak dinners. I could have bought myself a new house. I of course did not make any of those purchases, but it is alarming that in Virginia I could have -- legally. My donors would have had absolutely no recourse, because it would have been perfectly legal. Virginia is one of the only places left in the United States where this behavior is still legal and presumably acceptable. Regardless of how often it actually happens, a lack of laws addressing these issues (and the General Assembly's public inaction on this issue for nearly a decade) is eroding public faith in the our government and in our elected officials. If these bills continue to die, advocates and citizens must assume that campaign funds are being used for personal use. It is time that the General Assembly finally act and make the personal use of campaign funds illegal, bringing us in line with the rest of the country on this issue.

I’m Jackie Rivas and I support SB377, which prohibits personal use of campaign funds. Virginia is ranked near the bottom of the 50 states regarding anti-corruption measures for public officials. It’s downright embarrassing. Virginians are losing faith in their elected officials because they refuse to rein in abuse of campaign funds. Certainly, the General Assembly can enact one bill this session to shed some light on the use of campaign funds. I ask you to support SB377.

Please support SB 377 - There needs to be common sense legislative codified oversight in making sure that campaign funds are spent appropriately in Virginia. According to the National Conference of State Legislators Virginia is one of only five states without restrictions on contributions.

Virginia is one of only a few states that fails to regulate political spending by elected officials. The lack of common sense regulations on political spending does not inspire public confidence on the part of the voting public. While elected officials are supposed to note the purposes for which their campaign money was spent in their disclosures, under the current regulatory structure, there exists the possibility, or at least the appearance of a possibility that campaign funds may be spent on personal use outside of campaign expenditures. With campaign donations growing exponentially in Virginia, it is critical to put regulations into place that assure the public that elected officials are in place to serve the public interest, not personal or private interests. We support SB377 sponsored by Senator Boysko as a basic first step in bringing Virginia into the norm in campaign finance regulations across the country. Lauren Coletta Senior Advisor Common Cause Virginia

This bill to reign-in personal use of campaign finances sponsored by Sen. Boysko is a lowest standard and minimum guarantee of good campaign finance governance. This anti-"George Santos" bill is a bill I strongly support, as do a majority of Virginians. Why Virginia does not have these safeguards and guardrails already is difficult for many citizens to understand, notably those of use who are restricted in all walks of life from using resources for personal gain. I strongly urge the House P&E Commitee to move this bill to the floor of the General Assembly for a full vote. I think its past due.

Using campaign funds for personal use is absolutely not acceptable. Far too much money is wasted on negative campaiging and then to know that those funds go for personal use is reprehensible. I strongly support SB377 and I hope you will as well.

My name is Jessica Mott, from Arlington VA. I am a member of the executive committee of the grassroots group We of Action (WofA). I support SB 377, which would restrict personal use of campaign funds. As a campaign contributor, it is important for me to have the confidence that my donations are being used for their intended purpose, the campaign expenses. This trust requires my knowing that candidates are restricted from using these funds for their personal use. This bill establishes well-defined and consistent standards of what does and does not entail personal use, so that all candidates are subject to the same yardstick. It includes strong provisions to prevent and penalize frivolous complaints. This should help prevent inappropriate accusations. In fact, the clarity in guidelines should help strengthen legislators’ ability to defend themselves from negative publicity. The actual incidence of formal complaints stemming from enactment of this legislation is likely to negligible, based on my perusal over the last several years of news articles regarding campaign finance in other states. Accordingly, the Department of Elections and legal authorities should easily be able to handle implementation within their existing budgets. Further, legislators will not be burdened. Virginia is currently one of only two states without restrictions on the personal use of campaign finance. According to a 2021 opinion poll, 73% of Virginians support restricting personal use of campaign funds. Passage of this bill is long overdue and should be low hanging fruit. I urge that you all support this bill.

I strongly support SB377. Last June, members of 27 Hampton Roads organizations met together to prioritize legislative issues and we agreed that campaign finance reform was a priority. Preventing undue influence by deep-pocket donors, or the public perception of such influence, is critical to voters' trust in representative democracy. Virginia's approach to campaign finance has become notorious and shames us compared to other states. The result is that the cost of running in a competitive election in Virginia has become astronomical. Virginia's vaunted transparency would be inaccessible to voters if not for the work of the Virginia Public Access Project. And still it was an insufficient deterrent to at least one candidate who is no longer a legislator. I recommend today's editorial in the Virginian Pilot. http://digitaledition.pilotonline.com/infinity/article_share.aspx?guid=5f17f6cf-713b-45e7-8f1a-26e798fcea68 SB377 is a modest step in the right direction.

I support SB377 which restricts the personal use of campaign contributions. Its high time that the legislature finally adopts this commonsense measure which will ensure certainty and accountability with regard to the use of campaign funds. Efforts to pass this legislation have gone on for over ten years --- now is the time to act! I can’t tell you how many of my friends and neighbors shake their head in disbelief when I explain that Virginia has no guidelines prevent to the misuse of campaign funds. SB 377 has strong bipartisan support in the Senate, passing 35-4. The House companion bill, HB40, passed this committee 21-0., yet died in the appropriations committee due to confusion over the costs of implementation; this despite compelling comments from JLARK which showed that information from several states that implementation costs are minimal. Legislators are rightfully concerned about frivolous complaints being used as a political cudgel – In this regard, SB377 contains a detailed process whereby the State Board of Elections investigates alleged violations. This process ensures that claims are fairly adjudicated and minimizes frivolous and unsubstantiated claims. Candidates may also request an advisory opinion from the State Board of Elections concerning the requirements. I urge that committee to give careful consideration to SB377 and support its passage. Thank you, Bill Millhouser, Fairfax County

I support SB377! Virginia has one of the weakest campaign finance legal structures in the whole United States! Year after year our General Assembly fails to address the unlimited, unrestricted millions of dollars that pour in from literally every corner of our country and beyond to influence how our elected officials - YOU - vote. The nonpartisan Wason Center polled Virginia citizens and 73% support restricting PERSONAL use of campaign funds - you can add me to that list right at the top. Supporting SB377 is a no-brainer, nonpartisan place to begin to make changes to the lack of transparency and accountability of campaign donations. Please do the RIGHT thing for our Commonwealth and support SB377. We do not need a George Santos fiasco here in our beloved Virginia. Thank you.

I write to urge you to support SB 377. Virginia ranks poorly on campaign finance laws. The non-partisan Coalition for Integrity ranked Virginia 46 out of 51 jurisdictions in their SWAMP Index. Unlike most states and the federal government, there are no currently legal restrictions on how candidates spend campaign funds. Legislation to ban the personal use of campaign funds has been introduced in the legislature as far back as 2014. Every year, legislators have failed to pass such legislation, often citing the need for more study to refine the bills. The public’s confidence in government has eroded because Virginians increasingly perceive that their legislators engage in “pay-to-play” politics and have failed to prevent the abuse of campaign funds. 73% of Virginians support closing the personal use loophole. Please vote in favor of SB 377! Thank you.

I have attached my written testimony below in strong support of SB377.

The League of Women Voters supports SB 377, as we do its companion in the House, HB 40. Currently, Virginia has no legal restrictions on how candidates can use their campaign funds, except for surplus funds at the end of a campaign or term of office. As such, Virginia has rightfully earned its rank of 46 out of 51 on the non-partisan Coalition for Integrity’s S.W.A.M.P. Index.

Seriously? In Virginia, one of the best states in the country, by almost any measure, we are really going to continue to allow legislators to use campaign donations to buy houses, cars, vacations, etc? VA rightly leads the country in voter access. We do a great job with voter registration (same day registration!!! Yay!!), with a long no excuse absentee voting period, all good stuff. But our campaign finance laws - who is PAYING for the legislators to run in the first place - are among the worst in the country. Prohibiting personal use of campaign contributions is a critical first step. You KNOW it’s the right thing to do. Please support SB 377. Thank you for your service to our state and for bringing this very fundamental reform to Virginia. Cordially, Bo Harmon Leesburg

I urge the committee to approve SB377.

Thank you for taking up and hopefully reporting this bill that passed the Senate 35-4. When the House version got referred to Appropriations with no action before Crossover, I was baffled and dismayed. This is a very important guiderail, that has been road tested at the federal level for years. Federal Election Commission advisories and rulings on a wide range of topics can be looked up easily by those seeking guidance. JLARC checked with states that follow the federal use restrictions and found that the cost was minimal. I have not been involved with BigMoneyOutVA for long, but in the time I have volunteered, I’ve seen the House pass this bill on a bipartisan basis, but it died in the Senate, and the Senate passed it on a bipartisan basis but it died in House committee last year. Please get it done. It’s time for results. We are the rare state that leaves it totally open to lawmakers on whether they can legally spend campaign donations on personal uses such as mortgages, vacations, spa days, home improvements, etc. Some say there has never been a problem, but who knows, we may be attracting George Santos types. I was Press Secretary for a Congressman, one of the so-called Watergate babies that were elected in 1974. My heart aches at how many campaign finance laws that we passed during those post-Watergate years have been killed by SCOTUS. But restricting personal use of campaign money is still allowed. Let’s not be one of the few rare exceptions any longer. The current bill does allow dependent/child care that would be required because of campaign related activities, as do more than half the states through specific law or board of election rulings

SB 377 Campaign finance; prohibited personal use of campaign funds Senator Boysko I support the passage of this bill. Virginia needs it. The public’s confidence in government has eroded because Virginians increasingly perceive that their legislators engage in “pay-to-play” politics and have failed to prevent the abuse of campaign funds. 73% of Virginians support closing the personal use loophole, I am among them. Unlike most states and the federal government, there are currently no legal restrictions on how candidates spend campaign funds. This is a reasonable bill. Thank you, Mindy Mitchell, 3601 5th St S, Apt 306, Arlington VA 22204

I’m Nancy Morgan, Coordinator of BigMoneyOutVA. We support this bill (SB377) which probably should call the George Santos bill. As you know, many of the infractions Santos was charged with are legal in Virginia, but certainly not under federal law nor in most other states. Just to remind you, this is the 10th year this bill has been introduced (2014) We hope that it gets passed so we don’t have to keep testifying on what is a common sense bill which builds citizens' confidence in their legislators and their democratic institutions. Just to remind you, Virginia is unique in this country in that I can give my legislator millions of dollars for his campaign and he can spend the money on himself, such as renting a golf course in the Bahamas and inviting lobbyists to join him. This bill protects legislators by addressing frivolous complaints through the establishment of a robust and confidential review process, and moves Virginia forward in terms of good governance legislation. It is supported by 73 percent of Votes, who in 2021 polling by the Wason Center, support restricting the personal use of campaign funds. Many thanks to Senator Boysko for her persistence in introducing a bill which moves Virginia forward in terms of good governance legislation.

The League of Women Voters supports SB 406. Tightening and clarifying the conditions for producing and distributing sample ballots, and in particular requiring that sample ballots include the names and affiliations of their sponsors, further reduces the temptation to “buy” votes and confuse voters. The League supports increased transparency around sources and content of campaign funding and materials.