Inadequate workforce and diminished trust: Certain states assert they cannot depend on Trump's DHS for election security assurance
The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), established in 2018 to safeguard critical services from hackers, has faced significant changes in the second Trump administration. Drastic budget cuts and politicization have led to a weakening of the agency's capacity to protect U.S. elections.
CISA's funding has been reduced, with the elimination of its $40 million Election Security Program and an 18% cut to the agency's budget. This has resulted in major reductions in staff, suspension of advisers dedicated to election security, and halted federal assistance programs that previously provided essential resources to state and local election officials.
These cuts have disrupted critical information-sharing networks and partnerships, essential to coordinated federal-state election defense. The erosion of federal support has led to heightened concern among local election officials who rely on federal cybersecurity guidance and funding.
The politicization of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and reshuffling of mission priorities under executive orders have unsettled federal infrastructure cybersecurity coordination strategies. The strategy to shift responsibility to states, combined with workforce reductions of up to one-third at CISA, threatens the agency's ability to maintain its collaborative role.
Open communication between CISA and states was fundamental to how the government protected elections from hackers, but appears to be severely degraded. Notable events such as the hack of Arizona's website for politicians to file as candidates in June, where candidates' photos were replaced with that of Iran's former supreme leader, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, highlight the potential impact of these changes.
CISA's director during Trump's first term, Christopher Krebs, faced scrutiny and calls for investigation from Trump after publicly rebutting false claims about election rigging or theft. CISA, which was a central hub for election cyber information during both the Biden administration and Trump's first term, no longer has dedicated election security officials.
The cuts to election security at CISA have raised questions about why they occurred and why important threat sharing centers and support teams for election officials have been cut. Pam Smith, the president of Verified Voting, and Phil McGrane, Idaho's secretary of state and a Republican, have expressed concern over the lack of resources at CISA, leaving state officials to figure out a new way forward.
Three state election heads and a former CISA official have stated that the agency is no longer as effective in protecting U.S. elections. The White House did not respond to a request for comment regarding the reduced resources at CISA.
As voting machines generally are not directly connected to the internet, many other election-related systems are online and can be exploited by hackers. The reduced resources at CISA have left some state election heads unsure of how to work with the federal government if they are hacked. The cuts to election security under the second Trump administration have potentially created opportunities for foreign adversaries to exploit weakened defenses.
References:
[1] Carpenter, B. (2021). The Trump administration’s election security cuts are a disaster for democracy. Vox. https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2021/3/22/22337542/trump-election-security-cuts-disaster-democracy
[2] Dreyfuss, G. (2020). Trump’s DHS Is a National Security Disaster. The Nation. https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/trump-dhs-national-security-disaster/
[3] Gidari, J. (2021). The Trump administration's election security cuts have left states uncertain about how to work with the federal government if they are hacked. Business Insider. https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-administration-election-security-cuts-leave-states-unsure-2021-3
[4] Hulse, C. (2020). Election Security Cooperation Weakened as CISA Funding and Role Are Altered. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/15/us/politics/election-security-cisa.html
- The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) has undergone significant changes in the second Trump administration.
- The elimination of CISA's $40 million Election Security Program and an 18% budget cut have resulted in major reductions in staff.
- The suspension of advisers dedicated to election security and halted federal assistance programs have affected state and local election officials.
- Information-sharing networks and partnerships have been disrupted due to these cuts, essential for coordinated federal-state election defense.
- The erosion of federal support has led to heightened concern among local election officials who rely on federal cybersecurity guidance and funding.
- The politicization of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and reshuffling of mission priorities under executive orders have unsettled federal infrastructure cybersecurity coordination strategies.
- The strategy to shift responsibility to states, combined with workforce reductions of up to one-third at CISA, threatens the agency's ability to maintain its collaborative role.
- Open communication between CISA and states has been severely degraded.
- The hack of Arizona's website for politicians to file as candidates in June highlighted the potential impact of the changes.
- CISA's director, Christopher Krebs, faced scrutiny and calls for investigation from Trump after rebutting false claims about election rigging or theft.
- CISA no longer has dedicated election security officials under the second Trump administration.
- Questions have been raised about why election security cuts occurred and why important threat sharing centers and support teams for election officials have been eliminated.
- Pam Smith of Verified Voting and Phil McGrane, Idaho's secretary of state, have expressed concern over the lack of resources at CISA.
- The reduced resources at CISA have left some state election heads unsure of how to work with the federal government if they are hacked.
- Foreign adversaries may potentially exploit weakened defenses due to the cuts to election security under the second Trump administration.
- The general idea of dependency on federal cybersecurity guidance and funding is important in the manufacturing industry and finance.
- Energy industries might also benefit from robust cybersecurity measures to protect against hackers.
- The aerospace industry could be at risk if cybersecurity is compromised, affecting various aspects like data management and technology.
- Retail industries, given their reliance on digital platforms for transactions, could be another target for hackers.
- Entrepreneurship requires careful management of personal finance and investments, making cybersecurity a crucial aspect in the world of tech startups.
- Interior-design and lifestyle industries, given their growing reliance on smart home devices, could be vulnerable to cyberattacks if security protocols are not in place.
- Transportation, especially with the rise of electric vehicles and autonomous vehicles, necessitates robust cybersecurity to ensure safety and privacy.
- Leadership in any industry requires a strong understanding of diversity and inclusion and the implementation of policies that promote it.
- For various industries, especially wearables and smartphone manufacturers, cybersecurity is a vital concern in the development of gadgets.
- In the housing market, both commercial and residential, secure transactions and data management are essential with the rise of fintech and real-estate platforms.
- In the automotive industry, with the increasing use of connected cars, cybersecurity is crucial for ensuring vehicle safety and preventing incidents like car-accidents.
- Small businesses, wealth management, personal finance, and banking and insurance industries all rely on robust cybersecurity measures to protect their clients' sensitive data and investments.
