Among the many sweeping budget cuts under the pretense of “government efficiency,” the Trump administration’s decision to end $10 million in federal funding for state-level election security has sent shockwaves through our nation’s election infrastructure. State and local election officials are now bracing for a catastrophic loss of resources and services that have been essential in the face of foreign interference, mis/disinformation, cybersecurity breaches, and other vulnerabilities that have tested U.S. elections in recent years.
In this post, we provide a brief history of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, explore the damaging impact of these funding cuts on election trust and security, and predict how state and local governments may try to fill the gap in the absence of federal support – if they possibly can.
What Programs Lost Federal Funding?
This month, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) announced debilitating funding cuts that will eliminate two election-related programs: the Elections Infrastructure Information Sharing and Analysis Center (EI-ISAC) and the Multi-State Information Sharing and Analysis Center (MS-ISAC). Housed in the nonprofit Center for Internet Security and created in response to Russia’s attempts to influence the election in 2016, these initiatives have been instrumental in defending our elections from foreign interference and domestic cyberattacks.
Since its inception in 2018, EI-ISAC has expanded dramatically, growing from a small team of 25 analysts to over 135 regional experts who have conducted more than 1,000 vulnerability scans of election systems. EI-ISAC helped ensure states were better prepared to defend against cyberattacks in 2020 and 2024, from sending cybersecurity experts to local election offices to recommending updates and best practices and training officials on how to spot foreign interference. Additionally, MS-ISAC has fostered cybersecurity information sharing and collaboration across over 17,000 state, local, territorial, and tribal agencies. Together, these vital programs have kept election officials safe and our elections secure – even in the face of escalating political violence and threats to election officials.
Federal Cuts Will Reverberate Down to Local Level
The dismantling of federal support for election security has already begun to affect state and local elections. The halt in services and lack of communication from CISA is raising alarms, particularly in rural areas where election offices are often short-staffed and underresourced.
From Pennsylvania to Florida, election administrators are expressing grave concern about recent cuts:
“I have seen firsthand how CISA’s work has helped prevent and address security incidents, and I worry about the serious consequences of removing this support for our local elections officials without an adequate substitute.”
— Pennsylvania Secretary of State Al Schmidt
“Disappointed is not the right word, and I haven’t figured out what it is yet. This is leaving an unfillable vulnerability for the conduct of elections in the US.[…]The majority of elections offices are small and have less than 5 or maybe 10 total staff. Even those large sophisticated operations are NOT going to be able to replicate what was/is possible on a national scale.”
— Florida Supervisor of Elections for Marion County and Election Center Board Member Wesley Wilcox
…And Exacerbate Chronic Underfunding Problem
Federal funding for election administration has always been unreliable, often dictated by the political climate and the perceived urgency of election threats. In the wake of the contested 2000 election, Congress passed the Help America Vote Act (HAVA), which created a framework for federal assistance to state and local election offices, particularly for equipment upgrades. However, funding quickly dried up after the early 2000s, with only modest grants available in the years following.
It wasn’t until the 2016 election that the federal government significantly ramped up election-related funding. From 2018 to 2020, states received over $800 million in grants aimed at enhancing election security. But even this uptick in funds was short-lived. By 2022, funding had dropped to just $75 million.
In its 2020 Report, CISA noted that chronic underfunding continues to be challenging at all levels of government:
“If election officials are unable to replace antiquated or unsupported systems in a timely fashion, additional vulnerabilities and risks to the system are created. If election administrators are unable to hire sufficient technical support staff or provide sufficient training to existing staff, this too has real consequences.”
The persistent lack of sufficient funding has trickle-down effects on the election process. In Georgia, for example, federal funds covered just 10% of the $100 million required to update voting systems for the 2020 election. And in Michigan, nearly 90% of clerk races in 2024 were uncontested – heavier workloads, a rise in misinformation and threats, and low pay have left many communities struggling to find qualified talent.
Early Predictions: Cash-Strapped State and Local Offices Will Struggle to Fill the Void
The 2024 election saw unprecedented collaboration between federal, state, and local law enforcement, election officials, and private sector partners to ensure our elections were safe and secure. Thanks to CISA, local and state election officials were able to anticipate and address cyber threats and disinformation, which also boosted voters’ confidence in our election systems. But now, with the loss of federal resources, already cash-strapped states will be left to fend for themselves.
So what does this mean for future elections? Here’s how states could try to adapt and respond in with fewer resources and tools at their disposal:
- Some states are considering creating nonprofit organizations dedicated to securing elections and restoring trust in the system. However, these proposals are in their early stages, and it remains to be seen whether they can replicate the comprehensive support that CISA and EI-ISAC provided.
- Many states may have to choose between funding election security or addressing other pressing needs, such as upgrading physical voting equipment.
- Larger, better-funded counties may step up to help smaller, more rural counties, which will be hit hardest by these funding cuts.
The loss of funding for crucial initiatives through CISA leaves state and local governments grappling with the daunting challenge of safeguarding elections with fewer resources and diminished support. Without viable alternatives or restored funding, free and fair elections in 2026 and 2028 are far from guaranteed.