What federal agencies oversee the administration of midterm elections?
Executive summary
The administration of midterm (federal) elections in the United States is primarily a state and local responsibility, but several federal agencies play distinct supporting and enforcement roles: the U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC) for guidance and voting-system certification; the Department of Homeland Security’s Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) and DHS more broadly for infrastructure protection; the Department of Justice (DOJ) and FBI for law enforcement and voting-rights enforcement; the Federal Election Commission (FEC) for campaign finance oversight; and the U.S. Postal Service (USPS) for election mail — all operating within a framework where federal authority is limited and collaborative [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6].
1. States run the show; federal actors support and enforce
State and local governments administer elections and count votes, with secretaries of state or local election boards typically running the logistics, which means federal agencies generally do not “run” midterms but provide tools, standards, funding, and enforcement where federal law applies [7] [1] [6]. Federal law creates requirements on registration, accessibility, and civil-rights protections, but the day-to-day conduct of polling places and certification of results is decentralized and managed by states [1] [8].
2. The Election Assistance Commission: the sole federal agency dedicated to administration
The EAC is the only federal agency whose mission is explicitly about election administration — it develops guidance to implement the Help America Vote Act (HAVA), maintains voluntary voting system guidelines, accredits testing laboratories, certifies voting systems, serves as a clearinghouse for best practices, and administers federal election-related grants [2] [4] [9]. Although the EAC’s guidance and certification are influential, many of its standards are voluntary and implemented through state and local adoption, reflecting the cooperative federal-state dynamic [2] [9].
3. CISA and DHS: protecting election infrastructure
Since 2017 the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (within DHS) has been the focal point for protecting election infrastructure — online registration systems, voting machines, and supporting networks — and DHS serves as the Sector-Specific Agency for the Elections Infrastructure Subsector, coordinating information-sharing among vendors, states, and federal partners [3] [6]. CISA’s role grew after concerns about foreign interference and it works directly with election officials to bolster cyber and physical security, though it does not take over election administration from states [9] [10].
4. DOJ, FBI and law enforcement: enforcing federal crimes and civil rights
The Department of Justice enforces federal voting rights and election-crime statutes, with the Public Integrity Section and the FBI investigating offenses like ballot theft, vote tampering, and discrimination in access to voting; DOJ also brings civil suits to protect federally protected classes’ access to the ballot [1] [9]. Federal law limits certain operational interventions — for example, armed federal personnel cannot be sent to active polling places — but DOJ and federal investigators can and do prosecute and litigate when federal statutes are violated [1].
5. FEC, USPS and other federal players with narrower roles
The Federal Election Commission regulates and enforces federal campaign finance law — monitoring contributions, disclosure, and public financing of presidential campaigns — rather than running election logistics, and its regulatory role is separate from the EAC’s administrative focus [5] [11] [12]. The U.S. Postal Service plays a practical, material role in transmitting absentee and mail-in ballots, which makes it operationally important to midterms even though USPS is not an election-administration authority [6] [1]. Other federal entities — including GAO, which analyzes and reports on election funding and administration, and agencies that intersect on accessibility and public health in special circumstances — provide oversight, audits, and specialized support [9].
6. Tensions, limits, and political friction to watch
Federal involvement is intentionally circumscribed; Congress and the courts define the boundary between federal standards and state control, and federal agencies can clash or be constrained by statutory design or partisan deadlock — for example, the FEC’s bipartisan structure can lead to enforcement gridlock, which critics argue hampers timely regulation of campaign finance [13] [12]. Similarly, federal agencies like DHS/CISA must balance offering protective assistance with respecting state autonomy, and the EAC’s voluntary model depends on state uptake and stable funding to be effective [2] [3] [6].