Well, welcome, everyone. And good morning. We expect a few other members to arrive momentarily, but while were waiting, i think well begin with our Opening Statements. And id like to note that our committee is charged with overseeing the administration of federal elections. And todays hearing will help us fufill the responsibility by providing an opportunity to hear from the vendors of most of our countrys Voting Systems. This is the first time the ceos of the three major vendors have appeared together in a congressional hearing. The companies they represent provide at least 80 of the estimated 350,000 Voting Machines in use today reaching over 100 million registered voters. However, despite their outsized role and the mechanics of our democracy, some have accused these companies of obfuscating and others suggest theres an insufficient regulatory structure for the sector. In the committees may 2019 hearing on Election Security, Lawrence Norden wrote in his testimony, i quote, there are more federal regulations for ballpoint pens and magic markers than there are for Voting Systems and other parts of our election infrastructure. So there may be more work to do and much for congress to learn about this industry. Many have concerns about Voting Systems with Remote Access software. And i want to make sure that companies no longer sell Voting Machines that have Network Capabilities. In 2019, according to a report in motherboard, a group of Election Security experts, they uncovered that back end election systems in at least ten states despite one companys claims that its systems were not. We need also to understand supply chains. In december 2019, a Study Released by a supply chain Monitoring Company showed that onefifth or 20 of components in a popular voting machine came from chinabased companies. Furthermore furthermore, close to 59 of suppliers within that machines supply chain had locations in either china or russia. Interos didnt name the vendor but said it was widely used. Ive also heard concerns about the ownership and control of voting machine vendors. Public reporting indicates that all three of the major Voting System vendors represented here today are privately held or are partially controlled by private equity firms. I believe its in the Public Interest for congress to better understand who could financially benefit from the administration of our elections. There are also, of course, threats to our voting infrastructure. We learned in special counsel muellers report that russian Intelligence Officers targeted employees of Voting Technology companies that developed software to manage voter roles and installed malware on the company network. We also know that our own voluntary Voting System guidelines have not been substantially upgraded before the iphone was even available. It then took the eac another decade to make small changes which were adopted in 2015 almost five years ago. So theres more we have to do together to bolster Public Confidence and trust in our election systems. That is why this congress has acted. Last june the house passed hr2722, the safe act that would require individual durable voter verified paper ball t los, would require risk limiting audits, prohibit wireless and internet connectivity, and create accountability mechanisms for Election Technology vendors. The bill awaits consideration in the senate. Just last month, congress appropriated 425 million to the states to improve Election Security. This builds on the 380 Million Congress appropriated in 2018. Securing our elections should not be a partisan issue. Election security is about upholding a democracy of, by, and for the people. The American People be they republican, democratic, third party, or no party at all. Our democracy is resilient, but it relies on everyone having their vote counted as cast. I now recognize our Ranking Member mr. Davis for any Opening Statement he may wish to make. Thank you, madam chair. Especially also thank you for holding this necessary and longoverdue hearing that ive been looking forward to since the beginning of this congress. And i want to thank our witnesses for being here today to discuss the important issues regarding elections and Election Security and elections administration. My agenda since becoming the Ranking Member of this committee has been and continues to be focused on nonpartisan and effective oversight of our nations elections. Which are maintained by the states, not the federal government. But that does not mean that this committee and the house itself does not have an important oversight role to play in securing elections. Our witnesses here today have state, county, and local jurisdictions as clients. Who know their electorate best. We also have witnesses who have experience with running those elections. But we know that threats from foreign actors to our nations elections are not going away. It should be noted from the Senate Intelligence committees report on the 2016 election, there were, quote, no indications that votes were changed, vote tallying systems were manipulated, or that any data were altered or deleted, end quote. By russia or any foreign actor. Dhs assistant secretary manfred said in the senate intels opening hearing in 2017 that, quote, we do have confidence in the overall integrity of our electoral system because our voting infrastructure is fundamentally resilient. End quote. While we have faith in the electoral system, we still have a responsibility to strengthen the relationship between states and the federal government to ensure that americansvotes are and will continue to be protected. There has been some disagreement with my colleagues across the aisle on how best to accomplish this mission. But i believe our goal is the same. Instead of getting into a winded debate today between paper versus electronic, state versus federal, lets focus on things in the federal reach that need improvement. Areas where we may come to a bipartisan agreement as weve seen in this Committee Many times in the past. This committee created in past the help america act of 2002 which provided muchneeded funds to states so they could update their Election Security and voting infrastructure. And created the Election Assistance Commission or eac. One notable requirement of hava was for the eac to create a set of specific a set of specifications and requirements against which Voting Systems could be tested called the voluntary Voting Systems guideline. Or vvsg. The eac adopted the virs vfirst vvsg in december 2005 and provided an updated version in january of 2016. Now we are currently waiting for the eac to produce the newest guidelines vvsg 2. 0. This year our committee should also hold a hearing with the eac to discuss this voting Guideline Development process and several other processes within our jurisdiction. Perhaps we should not only focus on the eac but instead hava itself. The help america vote act was originally created in 2002 following the 2000 president ial election. Its many issues with ballot marking devices much like well be discussing today. There have been many developments in Voting System technology that are not addressed in the original hava language like epollbooks and registering data bases. Its been almost 20 years since this law has been updated and with the recent developments in Election Security and technology, its time to modernize these laws again and incentivize new more secure Infrastructure Development from vendors like each of you. Also lets recognize the steps weve taken this congress alone to secure our elections. As chairperson said, the fy 2020 National Defense authorization last month contains several provisions related to elections security. Most involved providing congress, federal, or state agencies with information about election interference. Something that was in the Election Security bill i introduced hr3412. It also requires the director of National Intelligence in coordination with several other agencies to develop a strategy for countering russian cyberattacks against u. S. Elections. Another provision i had in my bill. In addition to the ndaa, the recent appropriations as chairperson lofgren said including 425 million for territories to make general improvements to the administration of federal elections including upgrades to Election Technology and security. Much has been done but we still have much to do. Which is why youre all here with us today. A fundamental right of our nations ability is to choose our leaders. The American People deserve that right to be protected. We should secure and protect our nations elections without partisan politics and i hope we can remember that not only during this hearing, but also for the duration of this congress. Thank you, madam chair. I yield back. Thank you. Gentleman yields back. All other members are invited to admit an Opening Statement for the record. At this point, id like to welcome our witnesses. Thank you for being here today. Joining us are the president and ceo of election systems and software mr. Tom bert. President and ceo of dominion Voting Systems mr. John paolos. And president and ceo of inner heart civic julie mathis. Id like to introduce each witness. Tom bert became president and ceo of election systems and software in 2015. He joined ens in 2008 leading sales, customer services, operations, and the product departments departments. Before joining ens, he developed his general management and leadership at mcmaster carr, a supply company. And Anderson Consulting where he served in a variety of executive management roles. John paolos is the founding president and ceo of dominion. He leads the business operations. Since its inception in 2003, dominion has grown to support over 1200 jurisdictions across north america. He holds a bachelor of arts in Electrical Engineering from the university of toronto as well as a masters of Business Administration from ncad france. Julie mathis joined hart in 2014 but became its ceo just nine days ago, so congratulations. She has previously served as president and cfo of the company and prior to joining hart, she served as Vice President of finance at dell. Miss mathis holds a bachelor of Business Administration degree in accounting from the university of texas at austin and is a certified public accountant. I would at this point ask unanimous consent that all members have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and their written statements be made part of the record. And without objection, that is so ordered. Id also like to remind witnesses their entire statements will be made part of the record and the record will remain open at least five days for additional materials to be submitted. At this point, i would ask each of the witnesses to rise and hold up their right hand. So that you may answer this question. Do you swear or affirm under penalty of perjury that the testimony you are about to give is true and correct to the best of your knowledge, information, and belief so help you god . The record will reflect that all three witnesses answered in the affirmative and we will first recognize you, mr. Bert, for your testimony. Thank you. Chairperson lofgren, Ranking Member davis, and members of the House Administration committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify on the vitally important subject of elections security. My name is tom bert and im ceo of elections systems and software. Im encouraged to see the growing tension to Stronger Security in elections and thankful for the recent funding provided by grgs under your leadership. Founded 40 years ago, ess was roughly half of our employees live and work. Others live or work locally near where we provide products and Services Including employees who reside in california, georgia, illinois, maryland, North Carolina, and ohio. Let me be clear and unequivocal with you. Ess is committed to doing everything we can to safeguard our Election Security. It is why each of our employees goes to bed and wakes up thinking about. Additionally i want to make sure that ess supports federal mandates for the following three policies. First a paper record for every vote cast. Second, postelection audits of these paper records. And third, more rigorous standards for the security testing of voting equipment by a federally controlled regulatory body. Id like to elaborate on a few of the many examples ess has raised the bar on itself for Election Security and called on congress to raise the bar on the entire industry. First as mentioned, it is important than a paper trail be required for each vote cast. Ess has stopped selling machines that do not produce a paper record as the primary voting device. Second, we support and applaud the increase in dedicated resources coming from congress. State and local officials, the Election Assistance Commission, and the department of Homeland Security. We embrace our partnerships with these bodies because we believe that collectively we can provide necessary and Continuous Improvement in Election Security. While the recent appropriations bill including additional elections related funding from congress, we believe the federal government needs to devote these resources to state and local jurisdictions on an annual basis. Third, id like to highlight just a few of the many important steps ess takes to bolster Election Security. Every ess system we field undergoes rigorous testing. Since 2009 ess has certified 22 unique Voting System releases through this federal Testing Program. Our standard procedure is to conduct thorough and pervasive Penetration Testing through our hardware and software using the same modern security tools that hackers use to make sure our equipment is secure before it ever enters the federal program. We recommend increased eac funding for security testing. Managed at the federal level with standards and testing methods that are applied evenly and comprehensively to all providers. All ess tabulation firmware and software are not only housed domestically but are written exclusively inside the United States. Ess engages an independent third party to regularly test samples inside the Voting Agreement that our programmable devices. We do this to validate the supply chain and ensure no back door tampering has occurred. Ess voting machine components are produced in certified manufacturing facilities and the entire Voting System is managed by a change order control process. All of our Voting Machines are performed in nebraska. We are working with our providers seated here with me today to create the nations first coordinated vulnerability disclosure for elections equipment. Designed to provide for even greater testing of Voting Systems through the use of ethical hackers. Because we strive for Continuous Improvement in all facets of our business, they are continuous, ongoing, and dynamic. Finally i want to be clear that we do not believe we are perfect. On rare occasions, machines falter and humans make mistakes. When these circumstances arise, we always do Everything Possible to remedy the issue and ensure that final Election Results are reported accurately. As i noted previously, we strongly urge congress to require an auditable record of every vote cast. While we are proud of the actions weve taken to date, we recognize this is a race that has no finish line. Ess is committed to continually enhancing the security of our products for the long run. We take nothing more seriously than our role in supporting our nations democracy. Thank you for your