<P> Federal observers are tasked with observing poll worker and voter conduct at polling places during an election and observing election officials tabulate the ballots . The goal of the federal observer provision is to facilitate minority voter participation by deterring and documenting instances of discriminatory conduct in the election process, such as election officials denying qualified minority persons the right to cast a ballot, intimidation or harassment of voters on election day, or improper vote counting . Discriminatory conduct that federal observers document may also serve as evidence in subsequent enforcement lawsuits . Between 1965 and the Supreme Court's 2013 decision in Shelby County v. Holder to strike down the coverage formula, the Attorney General certified 153 local governments across 11 states . Because of time and resource constraints, federal observers are not assigned to every certified jurisdiction for every election . Separate provisions allow for a certified jurisdiction to "bail out" of its certification . </P> <P> Under Section 4 (a), a covered jurisdiction may seek exemption from coverage through a process called "bailout ." To achieve an exemption, a covered jurisdiction must obtain a declaratory judgment from a three - judge panel of the District Court for D.C. that the jurisdiction is eligible to bail out . As originally enacted, a covered jurisdiction was eligible to bail out if it had not used a test or device with a discriminatory purpose or effect during the 5 years preceding its bailout request . Therefore, a jurisdiction that requested to bail out in 1967 would have needed to prove that it had not misused a test or device since at least 1962 . Until 1970, this effectively required a covered jurisdiction to prove that it had not misused a test or device since before the Act was enacted five years earlier in 1965, making it impossible for many covered jurisdictions to bail out . However, Section 4 (a) also prohibited covered jurisdictions from using tests or devices in any manner, discriminatory or otherwise; hence, under the original Act, a covered jurisdiction would become eligible for bailout in 1970 by simply complying with this requirement . But in the course of amending the Act in 1970 and 1975 to extend the special provisions, Congress also extended the period of time that a covered jurisdiction must not have misused a test or device to 10 years and then to 17 years, respectively . These extensions continued the effect of requiring jurisdictions to prove that they had not misused a test or device since before the Act's enactment in 1965 . </P> <P> In 1982, Congress amended Section 4 (a) to make bailout easier to achieve in two ways . First, Congress provided that if a state is covered, local governments in that state may bail out even if the state is ineligible to bail out . Second, Congress liberalized the eligibility criteria by replacing the 17 - year requirement with a new standard, allowing a covered jurisdiction to bail out by proving that in the 10 years preceding its bailout request: </P> <Ol> <Li> The jurisdiction did not use a test or device with a discriminatory purpose or effect; </Li> <Li> No court determined that the jurisdiction denied or abridged the right to vote based on racial or language minority status; </Li> <Li> The jurisdiction complied with the preclearance requirement; </Li> <Li> The federal government did not assign federal examiners to the jurisdiction; </Li> <Li> The jurisdiction abolished discriminatory election practices; and </Li> <Li> The jurisdiction took affirmative steps to eliminate voter intimidation and expand voting opportunities for protected minorities . </Li> </Ol>

Which was a major provision of the voting rights act of 1965 (points 3)