Bill Overview
Title: Sustaining Our Democracy Act
Description: This bill establishes and provides funds through FY2032 for the State Election Assistance and Innovation Trust Fund for purposes of promoting election activities. Specifically, the bill establishes the Democracy Advancement and Innovation Program, through which the Office of Democracy Advancement and Innovation (also established by this bill) shall make allocations to states for carrying out democracy promotion activities. These activities include improving the administration of federal elections, recruiting and training nonpartisan election officials and poll workers, and increasing voting access. The bill requires each state, in order to receive allocated funds, to (1) submit a plan for approval that describes how the state will distribute resources and carry out democracy promotion activities, and (2) establish uniform and nondiscriminatory state-based administrative complaint procedures. The bill prohibits states from using funds for certain activities, including any activity that diminishes the ability of any eligible voter to participate in the electoral process.
Sponsors: Rep. Williams, Nikema [D-GA-5]
Target Audience
Population: Individuals eligible to vote in federal elections
Estimated Size: 250000000
- The bill impacts voting processes which are fundamental to all eligible voters.
- Election officials and poll workers will directly benefit from training and recruitment activities funded by the bill.
- The funds are aimed at states for election administration improvements, meaning all US states are involved.
- The requirement for nondiscriminatory practices aims to protect all eligible voters' access to the electoral process.
- State governments will need to comply with new requirements to receive funding, impacting state election agencies.
Reasoning
- The policy affects all eligible voters, which encompasses a broad and diverse demographic across the US, so interviews need to reflect this diversity.
- With a large population impacted, representing different regions, occupations, and backgrounds will be important to cover the range of potential effects.
- Election officials and poll workers are directly targeted, so their perspectives are crucial.
- States receive funds for election improvements, so individual experiences may vary depending on state initiatives.
- Given the broad target, most impacts may be indirect and long-term, focused on improved access and satisfaction with the electoral process.
Simulated Interviews
Software Engineer (Austin, TX)
Age: 35 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I believe this policy will help modernize our voting system, which is much needed.
- As a previous poll worker, better training and resources would be a huge improvement.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Retired Military (Miami, FL)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Ensuring fair and easy access to voting is a right I've fought for and this bill supports it.
- I'm glad this policy prohibits activities that can restrict voting access.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 5 |
Student (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 28 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think this will help more people like me vote when we're away from home on election day.
- I'm interested in seeing how states plan to use these funds for better absentee voting methods.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Elementary School Teacher (Des Moines, IA)
Age: 42 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Better election management will hopefully mean shorter lines and more accessible voting for everyone, including busy parents.
- It's crucial that elections remain fair, and well-trained personnel can help ensure that.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Election Official (Boston, MA)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Finally, we might see the necessary resources to make significant improvements in our election processes.
- I'm excited about the prospect of more training and resources for those on the front lines during elections.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 10 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 10 | 5 |
Graphic Designer (Charlotte, NC)
Age: 23 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- More initiatives that educate and facilitate easy voting are always welcome.
- This program feels like a proactive step to ensure every voter sees value in participating.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Logistics Manager (Seattle, WA)
Age: 37 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's crucial for democracy to be upheld at all levels, and this policy is a good move.
- I'm optimistic that this will counteract some voter suppression tactics.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 3 |
Healthcare Worker (New York, NY)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Easier access to voting is something we all need, especially those with demanding jobs.
- I'd appreciate improvements that make it unnecessary to choose between voting and work.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Farmer (Rural Mississippi)
Age: 30 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- If this means more attention to our rural voting infrastructure, I'm all for it.
- I hope it ensures everyone in rural areas feels their voice counts.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Small Business Owner (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 55 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Improving state-level election processes will positively impact business stability and community trust.
- I hope to see transparent use of the funds for long-term improvement.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $500000000 (Low: $450000000, High: $550000000)
Year 2: $550000000 (Low: $500000000, High: $600000000)
Year 3: $575000000 (Low: $525000000, High: $625000000)
Year 5: $600000000 (Low: $550000000, High: $650000000)
Year 10: $800000000 (Low: $750000000, High: $850000000)
Year 100: $1000000000 (Low: $900000000, High: $1100000000)
Key Considerations
- Sustaining the funding through 2032 implies requiring cardinal allocations from Congress.
- State plans need approval to release funds, impacting timelines for distribution.
- Potential legislative changes or legal challenges might affect implementation.