Expanding the VOTE Act: Digital Voting Materials Must Be Translated, Plus $15M for Voluntary Language Help

The “Expanding the Voluntary Opportunities for Translations in Elections Act,” or Expanding the VOTE Act, aims to significantly upgrade language accessibility in elections. The core change is a clear update to what counts as “voting materials” under the Voting Rights Act, specifying that the definition now explicitly includes digital information alongside traditional printed forms, instructions, and ballots (SEC. 2). This means that if your county is required to provide language assistance, that assistance must now cover the election website, online registration forms, and any voting apps or digital guides.

Closing the Language Gap: The State and Federal Push

This bill tightens the net on language assistance in two key ways. First, states now have a new responsibility: if a state sends voting materials to a local area (a political subdivision) that is already required to provide language assistance, the state must also provide that assistance for its materials (SEC. 2). This prevents a gap where local materials are translated but state-issued guides are not.

Second, the Attorney General must now play a proactive role. They are required to notify any state or local area that is close to hitting the mandatory language assistance threshold—specifically, those less than 1,000 people or 0.5 percent below the trigger point (SEC. 2). Think of it as a friendly but firm warning shot: if your community is almost required to translate materials for a specific language group, the federal government will let you know. This is designed to help jurisdictions prepare and possibly prevent future compliance issues.

Flexible Rules for Indigenous Languages

For American Indian and Alaska Native languages, the bill introduces necessary flexibility (SEC. 3). Recognizing that many indigenous languages are primarily oral and may not have a standardized written form, or that Tribal governments may prefer oral instruction, the bill allows for an exception. If a Tribal government notifies the Attorney General that their language is unwritten or they prefer not to have written translations, the state or local government only has to provide oral instructions and assistance to voters.

However, there’s a smart safeguard built in: even if the materials aren't written for the voters, the state must still provide written translations of all voting materials to the election workers if the Tribal government agrees (SEC. 3). This ensures that every worker giving oral assistance is using the exact same, accurate, and consistent translation, preventing confusion at the polling place.

The $15 Million Incentive Grant: A Long-Term Commitment

Perhaps the most interesting section is the new grant program managed by the Election Assistance Commission (EAC), authorizing $15 million in funding (SEC. 4). This money is designed to incentivize states and local governments to voluntarily provide voting materials in languages that are not currently required by federal law. For example, if a county has a growing population of Arabic speakers but hasn't hit the mandatory threshold, they could apply for this grant to cover the cost of translating materials.

But here’s the catch that any budget-conscious local official needs to know: if a jurisdiction accepts this funding for a specific language group, they must promise to continue providing those translated materials in every subsequent election cycle (SEC. 4). This isn't a one-time grant to test the waters; it’s a commitment. You only get out of this obligation if the population of that language group drops by 0.5 percent or more. For states and localities, this means the initial federal grant money is great, but they need to be prepared to budget for this new service indefinitely once the grant runs out. It’s a permanent addition to the election administration budget unless that population moves away.

Studying Future Expansion

Finally, the Act mandates a study by the Comptroller General (SEC. 5). This study, due within one year, will examine what would happen if the mandatory language assistance thresholds were lowered (looking at 7,500 and 5,000 people) and if certain languages—specifically Arabic, French, and Haitian Creole—were automatically included in the definition of language minorities. This study will lay the groundwork for potential future legislation that could significantly expand mandatory language access nationwide.