State election officials express significant doubt that the federal government will reliably share critical threat information during the upcoming midterm elections, according to internal documents from the National Association of Secretaries of State obtained by USA TODAY. A memo dated March 27 indicates that federal agencies are no longer viewed by states as dependable or sufficient hubs for intelligence sharing, with officials noting they do not expect these entities to adequately disseminate information they receive.
This loss of confidence stems from a series of organizational changes, funding cuts, and staffing reductions at the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), which had served as the primary conduit for election cyber support and briefings since 2018. In response to these shifts, election officials have spent months collaborating across party lines with tech companies and nonprofits to establish alternative intelligence channels, though many concede these efforts cannot fully replicate the federal system they are replacing.
Arizona Secretary of State Adrian Fontes, a Democrat, noted that while states will likely manage through 2026, the alternative measures are not equal to previous federal standards, creating a potential for security gaps. The concerns were detailed in a March 27 memo summarizing discussions between the National Association of Secretaries of State, the National Association of State Election Directors, and intelligence teams from Google and Microsoft. The memo was approved by the association’s bipartisan leadership, including Republican Mississippi Secretary of State Michael Watson and staff for Democratic Washington Secretary of State Steve Hobbs.
Property of the People, a national security transparency nonprofit, obtained these documents and suggested they highlight how even Republican state leaders are turning to private industry to protect elections amid ongoing federal administrative changes. While Watson and his executive board urged the White House on March 11 to maintain threat information support, there remains ongoing uncertainty regarding federal service availability. CISA stated its continued commitment to safeguarding democracy, though it did not provide specific examples of recent collaboration with states.
The federal government underwent significant changes in 2025, with the Department of Homeland Security letting go of one-third of CISA staff and cutting millions from infrastructure information-sharing programs. These actions, coupled with the lack of a Senate-confirmed director for the agency, have led many officials to feel abandoned. David Becker, director of the Center for Election Innovation and Research, noted that local jurisdictions are no longer looking to the federal government as a partner, but are instead preparing for a lack of guidance.
Maine Secretary of State Shenna Bellows reported that states are now absorbing costs previously covered by the federal government and are often forced to learn about cyber threats via media reports rather than official briefings. Hobbs and other leaders emphasized that as multiple nation-states increase their interference efforts, the lack of a unified federal response puts individual states at a disadvantage. While private companies like Cloudflare, Halcyon, Microsoft, and Google are stepping up to provide briefings, officials maintain they lack the specific intelligence-gathering capabilities of federal agencies like the NSA or FBI.
Hobbs illustrated the critical nature of this shift by recalling a 2023 incident where a CISA warning allowed him to mitigate a foreign cyber intrusion into the Clark County, Washington, election system within 100 hours. He fears that without that federal “safety blanket” during the 2026 midterms, similar attacks might go entirely undetected by local officials.
