Latest action: Referred to the House Committee on House Administration.
Referred to one or more standing committees for review, hearings, and possible markup.
Specific committees not parsed from action data.
The committee may hold hearings, amend the bill, or let it die without action.
Next: Reported
Full chamber floor — Speaker / Majority Leader controls scheduling
Sets federal standards for polling places where Americans vote.
The problem
Polling places across the country lack consistent standards for accessibility, equipment, and operations. This creates unequal voting experiences and confusion about voting procedures.
The proposal
Establishes federal minimum standards for polling place facilities, staffing, technology, and accessibility requirements that states must follow during elections.
The impact
Voters get more consistent voting experiences nationwide. States and local election offices must meet new requirements. Voting accessibility improves for people with disabilities.
Consistent standards could ensure polling places have ramps, accessible voting machines, and proper assistance. This removes barriers that prevent some Americans from voting easily.
Standard procedures mean voters know what to expect regardless of location. This reduces confusion and helps election workers do their jobs consistently.
Uniform standards for staffing and equipment can improve how elections run. Better training and consistent procedures may reduce errors and delays.
Standards prevent some communities from having worse polling places than others. All voters get comparable facilities and resources for voting.
Meeting new federal standards requires upgrading facilities, buying equipment, and training staff. Smaller communities with tight budgets may struggle with these expenses.
States and counties traditionally manage their own elections. Federal standards limit local decisions about how to run polling places in their areas.
Rural areas, small towns, and rural counties may find it hard to meet uniform standards. Finding suitable buildings and staffing might be difficult in less populated areas.
The bill doesn't specify if federal government pays for upgrades or if states must fund them. This creates uncertainty about the actual cost burden.
Generated by AI from the bill text. Not a prediction and not legal or policy advice. The percentage is the model's own rating of each item — self-reported, and not a measure of how accurate it is.
Loading map…
Loading...
0 citizens have already voted
Free · No spam · See how your representatives voted
Be the first to weigh in
Your vote starts the conversation
How citizen engagement works
Citizens vote & comment
Public opinion data is aggregated and updated in real time.
Patterns become visible
Representatives can see constituent sentiment broken down by district.
Your voice on the record
Contact your rep directly — one constituent call can shift a staffer's priority list.
Research shows that constituent contacts — especially calls — are among the most effective ways to influence a legislator's position on active bills.
Other bills in this policy area
SRES 929
A resolution expressing the sense of the Senate regarding equity stakes held by the Federal Government in private companies.
HR 5235
Skills-Based Federal Contracting Act of 2025
HR 2332
SHARE Act of 2026
HR 9191
National Fossil Act of 2026
Individual contributions, grouped by employer · FEC
Where their individual donors work · 2026 cycle
Money from people who work there, not from the company. Not tied to this bill.
Itemized individual contributions via FEC, grouped by the employer each contributor self-reported. Companies and unions cannot contribute to federal candidates from their treasuries, so these totals are money from people who work at an employer — never from the organization itself. They are campaign contributions covering a full election cycle and are not connected to this bill.
Senate LDA lobbying disclosures
Couldn't load lobbying disclosures right now.