The DATA Act

May 14, 2025

As Americans, we’re familiar with decentralized government. We’re a nation of states, which are a network of municipalities, and we elect our leaders by the adage that all politics is local. Ohio’s election system follows that same time-tested model. We’re one of a few states that manage our elections on the frontlines of democracy, specifically through 88 bipartisan county boards of elections.

Think of it like a fast-food corporation with a network of independently owned and operated franchise stores. They each use the same brand, sell the same product, and generally function the same way under local management that takes operating cues from a corporate headquarters. As our state’s chief election officer, my job is to run that “corporate” office, ensuring consistency in the operation of 88 different county operations. We provide general guidance on everything from processing absentee ballots to managing voter registrations.

This structure is largely why Ohio is considered to have one of the nation’s most accountable and efficient voting systems, but it isn’t without its challenges. When there’s an inconsistency, we work to fix it. Revisiting the fast-food analogy, you learn quickly that, without uniform guidance, 88 different stores can develop 88 different operating procedures. That was certainly the case when it came to how our county election officials handled voting records, especially those in electronic format.

All 50 states use some form of electronic voting equipment. Remarkably, every one of them lacked clear laws on retaining that digital information. Federal law only requires states to keep paper ballots for less than two years after certain federal elections, but it says nothing about what to do with electronic voting data. This means election officials often erased and discarded data instead of archiving it for accountability. They also lacked clear protocols for defining the data, leaving some counties to document voter activity differently from other counties. That, in turn, led to confusing outcomes for anyone trying to analyze historic election results.

Ohio took the lead in fixing this problem. In 2023, the Ohio General Assembly worked with us to pass landmark legislation called the DATA Act, becoming the first state to create a uniform definition of electronic election data and to establish rules for retaining and publicizing those records. The new law also allowed us to set up the first-ever Office of Data Analytics and Archives, devoting a full-time staff to this important work.

So far, it’s been a game-changer for our elections. Ohioans can now visit OhioSoS.gov/data to see custom-built data dashboards that track early voting trends and display historical election results. We’ll soon launch a new dashboard to provide real-time voter registration data. These resources empower citizens to fact-check our election statistics with empirical evidence, not just rely on political rhetoric or speculation.

Transparency is foundational to our democracy. When voters see how elections are run, they’re more likely to participate and trust the system. Even beyond these public-facing tools, the new data initiative is helping our county boards of elections more accurately maintain Ohio’s voter rolls.

Earlier this year, we expanded a statewide election integrity initiative utilizing advanced data-matching technology to help counties identify potential errors in their voter registration records, such as duplicate registrations, outdated addresses, and other inconsistencies. Election officials have already corrected more than 90 percent of the issues identified through the system, which continues to grow daily.

Because of the DATA Act, I can confidently say Ohio has the most accountable and transparent election infrastructure in our state’s history. That’s not just a claim—it’s a measurable achievement you can see for yourself. At a time when election integrity is under unprecedented scrutiny, Ohio is leading the way and showing other states how it should be done.