Big changes to the agency charged with securing elections lead to midterm worries

States Left Scrambling as Federal Cybersecurity Agency Pulls Back from Election Support

Since its inception in 2018, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) has been a crucial resource for state and local election officials, offering protection against potential foreign threats, polling place security measures, and contingency planning for emergencies like bomb threats or disinformation campaigns.

Now, that support appears to be dwindling. CISA’s diminished presence in several state elections this month has election officials concerned about what to expect for the 2026 midterms, when control of Congress will be at stake.

“We do not have a sense of whether we can rely on CISA for these services as we approach a big election year in 2026,” said Minnesota Secretary of State Steve Simon, a Democrat who until recently led the bipartisan National Association of Secretaries of State.

The association’s leadership reached out to Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem in February, urging preservation of CISA’s core election security functions. Noem responded in March that the agency was reviewing its “funding, products, services, and positions” related to election security, while assuring that services would remain available to election officials.

Months later, Simon says they’re still waiting to hear concrete plans. “I regret to say that months later, the letter remains very timely and relevant,” he noted.

CISA, established during Trump’s first term to protect the nation’s critical infrastructure, has undergone significant changes since his return to office in January. Public records indicate roughly 1,000 CISA employees have lost their jobs, and the administration cut $10 million from cybersecurity initiatives in March, including funding dedicated to supporting state and local election officials.

The agency’s electoral work has been under scrutiny, with more than a dozen election-focused staffers placed on administrative leave earlier this year. Meanwhile, CISA continues to operate without a permanent director, as Trump’s nomination of cybersecurity expert Sean Plankey remains stalled in the Senate.

When asked about specific plans for future election cycles, CISA officials provided only general statements. Marci McCarthy, CISA’s public affairs director, said the agency remains “laser-focused on securing America’s critical infrastructure and strengthening cyber resilience” and would announce organizational plans “at the appropriate time.”

Christine Serrano Glassner, CISA’s chief external affairs officer, added that the agency’s experts remain ready to provide guidance if requested.

The impact is already being felt across states. California’s secretary of state’s office reported that CISA provided little to no assistance for the state’s November 4 special congressional redistricting election.

“Over the past year, CISA’s capacity to support elections has been significantly diminished,” the office stated. “The agency has experienced major reductions in staffing, funding, and mission focus — including the elimination of personnel dedicated specifically to election security and foreign influence mitigation. This shift has left election officials nationwide without the critical federal partnership they have relied on for several election cycles.”

In September, CISA informed California officials it would no longer participate in a task force coordinating federal, state, and local agencies supporting county election offices. State officials and the governor’s Office of Emergency Services scrambled to fill these gaps.

Orange County Registrar of Voters Bob Page said state offices and other county departments “stepped up” to “fill the void left by CISA’s absence.” Los Angeles County, meanwhile, reported continued access to CISA’s cybersecurity services, though local jurisdictions now must cover costs for some previously federally funded services.

Similar patterns emerged in other states holding recent elections. Mississippi’s secretary of state confirmed CISA was not involved in the state’s recent elections. Pennsylvania, which held a closely watched retention election for three state Supreme Court justices, reported “relying much less on CISA than it had in recent years,” turning instead to state police, Pennsylvania’s homeland security department, and local cybersecurity experts.

State officials are increasingly looking for alternatives. Simon emphasized that while some CISA services, like classified intelligence briefings, have no substitute, others might be replaceable. For instance, states might find alternative ways to test election equipment for external vulnerabilities or conduct tabletop exercises to prepare for Election Day scenarios.

“We are starting to assume that some of those services are not going to be available to us, and we are looking elsewhere to fill that void,” Simon said, highlighting the uncertainty facing election officials nationwide as they prepare for future elections without the federal support they’ve come to rely on.