Georgia Took the Next Voting-System Purchase Away From the Sitting Secretary of State.

Who gets to choose the machines that count Georgia's next statewide election?

For the 2028 system, the answer is no longer the Secretary of State who held office when Senate Bill 3EX took effect.

The law creates a nine-member Election Equipment Specifications and Standards Committee. The Governor appoints three members. Senate leaders choose three, and the House Speaker chooses three. By January 31, 2027, the committee must recommend a uniform system based on hand-marked paper ballots produced through ballot-on-demand printing.

The report must give state leaders enough detail to plan funding, procurement, and implementation. The committee can ask election administrators, cybersecurity experts, disability specialists, and Secretary of State staff for advice.

Picture a county election director preparing for 2028. The director needs to know which ballot printers to buy, how many voting stations will fit in each precinct, how voters with disabilities will mark a ballot privately, how results will be scanned, and what training poll workers will need. Those decisions now begin with a committee report rather than a procurement led by the Secretary of State.

Hand-marked paper ballots also change the voter's experience. The voter fills in a physical ballot that can be inspected during an audit or recount. Ballot-on-demand printing can reduce the need to stock every ballot style at every location, but it places new importance on printer reliability, correct precinct data, paper supply, and contingency plans when equipment fails.

SB3EX states that the Secretary of State in office on the law's effective date has no authority to select, certify, or procure the new system. That includes drafting requests for proposals or qualifications. Any action the sitting Secretary takes toward that purchase is declared void and beyond his authority.

That is a direct legal stop sign. A vendor cannot safely rely on a request, specification, certification, or purchasing step issued by the excluded officeholder. State purchasing staff, counties, and prospective bidders must trace their authority back to the new process before spending money or committing resources.

Lawmakers publicly described the broader compromise as a way to create stability, restore confidence, avoid litigation and election chaos, and give the state time to make an informed decision. The legislative record reviewed so far does not contain a sponsor statement directly explaining why the exclusion had to apply personally to the current officeholder.

The surrounding dispute is visible. Secretary Brad Raffensperger supported a less expensive software approach after lawmakers had directed Georgia away from QR-code tabulation. Legislators questioned that change in direction and ultimately put the next system's design in a committee they control. That history explains the conflict. It should not be presented as the sponsor's stated motive without a direct statement.

Specified statewide contests decided by one-half of one percent or less receive a full manual recount. The state reimburses reasonable county costs when the work is completed within seventeen days. The law also expands risk-limiting audits.

In a close statewide race, county workers will physically review every ballot while the certification calendar keeps moving. The reimbursement protects local budgets, while the seventeen-day limit forces counties to plan staffing, secure space, document custody, and resolve disputed marks quickly. A paper ballot becomes meaningful only when the state can count it by hand under rules the public can follow.

Georgia moved toward hand-marked paper ballots and moved the purchasing power out of one elected office. Voters gained a paper-centered design goal. They also received a procurement structure whose political accountability now runs through several appointing authorities.

If lawmakers take the pen away from the Secretary of State, they owe the public a line-by-line record of who writes the specifications and who benefits from the contract.

This is our read of the law. We encourage you to read it yourself and reach your own conclusions.