Elections: voting equipment; use of electronic voting systems that contain certain parts or equipment; prohibit. Amends secs. 795 & 795a of 1954 PA 116 (MCL 168.795 & 168.795a).
Summary
Senate Bill 468 amends Michigan election law to add a new restriction on electronic voting systems. Beginning January 1, 2026, any electronic voting system acquired for use in Michigan may not include parts or equipment produced or provided by an entity that is identified by the Federal Communications Commission as having covered communications equipment or services. The bill ties this prohibition to federal law definitions and FCC listings, and it applies to new acquisitions rather than existing systems already approved before that date.
The bill also makes conforming changes to the state’s existing standards for electronic voting systems and their approval by the Board of State Canvassers. Those standards continue to require paper-ballot tabulation, secrecy, accurate counting, audit trails, accessibility for voters with disabilities, and other safeguards. The bill preserves the current approval, testing, and disapproval framework for voting systems, while clarifying that older systems approved before January 1, 2026 may still be repaired, maintained, or have components replaced as needed for proper operation.
Impact
SB 468 would amend sections 795 and 795a of the Michigan Election Law to bar future purchases of electronic voting systems containing prohibited communications equipment or services from entities on the FCC’s covered list. In practical terms, this would affect vendors, local election jurisdictions, and the Board of State Canvassers by adding a new procurement and certification limitation for voting equipment acquired on or after January 1, 2026. Existing systems already acquired and approved before that date would be grandfathered for repair, maintenance, and necessary component replacement.
Sentiment
Based on the bill text and the absence of recorded committee testimony or votes in the provided materials, the overall sentiment appears neutral and technical rather than overtly partisan. The measure is framed as an election-security and procurement safeguard, with no evidence in the record provided of formal opposition, amendments, or divided votes. The bill’s language suggests an intent to align Michigan’s voting equipment rules with federal communications-security concerns.
Contention
The main point of potential contention is the scope of the new prohibition on voting equipment components tied to FCC-listed covered communications equipment or services. Supporters would likely view the restriction as a cybersecurity and supply-chain protection measure, while critics may argue it could narrow the pool of eligible vendors, increase costs, or complicate future equipment purchases and upgrades for local election officials. Another possible issue is the practical implementation of the FCC-based restriction, including how vendors and the Board of State Canvassers would verify compliance and whether the rule could affect long-term maintenance of existing systems.