How did state-level certification lists for voting vendors change between 2020 and 2024, and which states switched vendors?
Executive summary
Between 2020 and 2024 state-level certification lists for voting systems did not undergo a single, uniform nationwide replacement of vendors; rather, they changed through a mix of periodic technical recertifications, administrative change‑orders, state rulemaking and localized procurement decisions — processes governed by federal guidance but executed at the state level [1] [2]. Public reporting documents scattered, state‑by‑state updates (for example Idaho’s updated certified system list in January 2024), but there is no comprehensive public dataset in the provided reporting that lists every state that “switched” vendors between 2020 and 2024 [3] [4].
1. The baseline: how vendor certification is supposed to work
The federal framework requires that voting systems be tested and certified by accredited labs under voluntary federal standards and roughly 93% of jurisdictions require testing and certification by statute or formal guidance, meaning state lists should reflect systems that either meet federal standards or state-specific test outcomes [1]. The EAC maintains a federal certification program and a public record of engineering change orders and approved systems — a mechanism by which vendors update previously certified systems without full re‑certification [2].
2. What changed between 2020 and 2024: standards, rules and political pressure
The period saw two overlapping kinds of change: technical and political. On the technical side, the federal Voluntary Voting System Guidelines (VVSG) lifecycle policy and the EAC’s change‑order process made it possible for vendors to submit updates and for states to require newer standards before adoption — a pathway that produces incremental updates to certified lists rather than wholesale vendor swaps [2] [5]. On the political and administrative side, several states altered certification or post‑election rules in the run‑up to 2024, producing new administrative requirements and scrutiny of how and when counties and states certify results; those legal and procedural changes affected procurement windows and timelines for deploying new systems [6] [7].
3. Hard evidence of vendor list updates (examples and limits)
Concrete, state‑level evidence is fragmentary in the reporting provided: Idaho’s Secretary of State page shows a certification entry for Hart InterCivic’s Verity system certified in January 2024, and notes downloadable certification reports and lists of systems “no longer in use,” demonstrating active maintenance of certified‑system lists at the state level [3]. State websites such as Texas’s certification‑by‑vendor page likewise indicate state-specific tracking of vendors and exam reports but do not, in the sources given, present a simple before‑and‑after 2020 vs. 2024 vendor‑switch inventory [4]. The EAC’s published change‑order log shows the federal mechanism through which certified systems can be modified — a technical channel that often results in version updates recorded on state lists rather than headline vendor replacements [2].
4. Which states “switched” vendors? The reporting gap
The provided sources do not supply a comprehensive, corroborated list of states that switched their primary voting vendors between 2020 and 2024, and public reporting sampled here focuses on rules, certification mechanics and isolated state pages rather than an aggregated vendor‑switch dataset [1] [2] [3]. AP, Brennan Center and Voting Rights Lab reporting document changes in certification procedures, increased political scrutiny and a few county‑level refusals to certify, but they do not catalog statewide procurement switches [6] [7] [8]. Therefore, any claim listing every state that switched vendors in that period would go beyond what these sources support.
5. What can be reliably said and how to confirm specifics
It is reliable to say that state certification lists were actively managed between 2020 and 2024 through federal lab testing, state certification pages and EAC change orders, and that at least some states updated certified systems (for instance Idaho’s January 2024 certification entry) [2] [3]. To determine which states switched vendors, the only verifiable method using these sources is to consult each state secretary of state’s certified‑systems page and cross‑reference it with archived certification lists from 2020 and 2024 and the EAC’s national certification records [4] [2]. The reporting shows the architecture for verification but does not itself produce the exhaustive, state‑by‑state vendor‑switch list requested [1] [2].