the annotated will 2021

You are using an outdated browser. Please upgrade your browser to improve your experience.

Suggested Results

Antes de cambiar....

Esta página no está disponible en español

¿Le gustaría continuar en la página de inicio de Brennan Center en español?

al Brennan Center en inglés

al Brennan Center en español

Informed citizens are our democracy’s best defense.

We respect your privacy .

Policy Solutions

Annotated Guide to the For the People Act of 2021

Summary: The For the People Act would transform our democracy by making it fairer, stronger, and more inclusive. The Brennan Center explains the key provisions of this historic bill.

The For the People Act of 2021 (H.R. 1) passed the House of Representatives on March 3, 2021. footnote1_pix1p0a 1 This guide currently reflects the version of the bill that passed the House of Representatives in March. The Senate version of the bill, which has been designated S. 1 and tracks closely to the House’s language, was introduced on March 17, 2021. A previous version of the bill passed the House of Representatives in the 116th Congress on March 8, 2019, by a vote of 234 to 193 (the previous Senate version, S. 949 , was cosponsored by all 45 Senate Democrats and both Independents). Across 10 titles, this historic legislation would make it easier to vote in federal elections, end congressional gerrymandering, overhaul federal campaign finance laws, increase safeguards against foreign interference, strengthen government ethics rules, and more. Most of these reforms would be implemented for the November 2022 general election, with the exception of some redistricting and public financing changes that would go into effect later. This explainer provides details about each title and subtitle of the bill as passed by the House, as well as information about related legislation and pertinent Brennan Center research on the issues that the bill seeks to address.

Title I: Modernizing Voter Registration, Restoring Voting Rights, Protecting the Ballot
Title II: Restoring the Voting Rights Act, DC and Territorial Voting Rights, Ending Gerrymandering
Title III: Election Security
Title IV: Campaign Transparency, Countering Foreign Interference
Title V: Empowering Small Donors and Related Reforms
Title VI: Enforcing Campaign Finance Laws, Strengthening Campaign Contribution Limits
Title VII: Supreme Court Ethics Reform, Expanding Lobbyist Disclosure, FARA Reform, Recusal of Presidential Appointees
Title VIII: Executive Branch Ethics Reforms
Title IX: Congressional Ethics Reforms
Title X: Disclosure of Presidential Tax Returns

Findings of General Constitutional Authority

Background & summary of key changes:.

This section affirms Congress’ power to protect the right to vote, regulate federal elections, and defend the democratic process in the United States. It notes that the Constitution gives Congress broad authority to regulate congressional elections, a power that the Supreme Court has recently affirmed, as well as the power to guarantee a republican form of government in the states and the power to enforce the Fourteenth Amendment which protects the right to vote. It also emphasizes that both the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments give Congress the power to eliminate racial discrimination in voting and the democratic process, which persists in areas like voting restrictions, redistricting, access to the polls, and felony disenfranchisement.

Standards for Judicial Review

Background and summary of key changes:.

This section provides that any challenge to the constitutionality of any provision of H.R. 1 shall be filed in or transferred to the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. That court, the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, and the Supreme Court are tasked to expedite such litigation to the greatest possible extent. Any member of the House of Representatives or the Senate will have the right to intervene in any such case.

Title I — Election Access

This title aims to modernize voter registration and take other steps to improve voting access in federal elections.

Part 1 — Promoting Internet Registration

Part 2 — automatic voter registration, part 3 — same day voter registration, part 4 — conditions on removal on basis of interstate cross-checks, part 5 — other initiatives to promote voter registration, part 6 — availability of help america vote act requirement payments, part 7 — prohibiting interference with voter registration, part 8 — voter registration efficiency act, part 9 — providing voter registration information to secondary school students, part 10 — voter registration of minors, subtitle b — access to voting for individuals with disabilities, subtitle c — prohibiting voter caging, subtitle d — prohibiting deceptive practices and preventing voter intimidation, subtitle e — democracy restoration, subtitle f — promoting accuracy, integrity, and security through voter-verified permanent paper ballot, subtitle g — provisional ballots, subtitle h — early voting, subtitle i — voting by mail, subtitle j — absent uniformed services voters and overseas voters, subtitle k — poll worker recruitment and training, subtitle l — enhancement of enforcement, subtitle m — federal election integrity, part 1 — promoting voter access, part 2 — disaster and emergency contingency plans, part 3 — improvements in operation of election assistance commission, part 4 — miscellaneous provisions, subtitle o — severability, subtitle a — voter registration modernization, background:.

This subtitle would modernize voter registration processes for federal elections. The United States has one of the lowest voter turnout rates among developed nations, with nearly one in four eligible voters not registered . The reforms in this subtitle seek to boost voter registration rates by eliminating unnecessary barriers and bring voter registration systems into the 21 st century.

This part would provide for online voter registration in federal elections nationwide. Traditionally, voters register using paper forms. State officials then manually transfer each qualified voter’s information from the paper form into the state registration system. This process is both costly and prone to error , which is why a majority of states have moved to offer online registration. As of October 2020, online registration had been implemented in 40 states and the District of Columbia . This part would require its use for all federal elections. Specifically, it would:

require each state to provide an online voter registration application that may be completed, submitted, and received by election officials electronically;
allow registered voters to update their voter registration information online; and
permit voters without DMV records to register online using electronic copies of handwritten signatures, secure online signatures, or by providing a signature upon actually requesting a ballot.

Related Legislation:

H.R. 1275, Voter Empowerment Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.), Title I, Subtitle A (Senate: S. 549 )
H.R. 5785, Jobs and Justice Act of 2018 (115 th Cong.) , Division B, Title VIII, Subtitle B

Related Research and Materials:

Wendy R. Weiser, Daniel I. Weiner, and Dominique Erney, Congress Must Pass the ‘For the People Act’ (2021), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/policy-solutions/congress-must-pass-people-act .
VRM in the States: Online Registration (2020), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/vrm-states-online-registration .
Automatic Voter Registration and Modernization in the States (2019), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/automatic-voter-registration-and-modernization-states .
H.R. 1, The For the People Act, Hearing Before the Comm. on House Administration , 116th Cong. (2019) (statement of Wendy Weiser, Director, Democracy Program, Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law), 4–6, https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/testimony-house-committee-administration-support-people-act .
Holly Maluk, Myrna Pérez, and Lucy Zhou, Voter Registration in a Digital Age: 2015 Update (2015), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/voter-registration-digital-age-2015-update .

This part would require states (including U.S. territories) to use Automatic Voter Registration (AVR) for federal elections nationwide. Under AVR, when eligible citizens provide information to government agencies like the Department of Motor Vehicles, they are automatically registered to vote (or have their existing registration information updated) unless they affirmatively decline. In other words, AVR shifts voter registration from an “opt-in” to an “opt-out” approach. As of February 2021, nine teen states and the District of Columbia had already enacted AVR. If adopted nationwide, as this part would require, AVR could register up to 50 million new eligible voters while making voter registration rolls more accurate, saving money, and cutting down on confusion and other problems at the polls.

Summary of Key Changes:

This part would, among other things:

require each state (including U.S. territories) to implement a process whereby eligible voters who provide information to certain state agencies (such as the DMV, social service providers, and public universities) will be automatically registered to vote unless the voter declines registration at the point of service (a so-called “front-end” opt out);
require state agencies to inform prospective voters that they will be automatically registered unless they decline, and inform them of voter eligibility requirements and the consequences of false registration;
require agencies to transfer voter registration information to election officials electronically, eliminating paper registration forms;
order a one-time transfer of existing records for those eligible for registration, effectively applying AVR retroactively;
require states to allow registered voters to update their address information at the polls;
authorize the Election Assistance Commission (EAC) to monitor states’ election practices and provide additional funds to assist them with implementing new AVR requirements; and
require states to ensure that AVR processes remain nonpartisan, nondiscriminatory, and accessible to individuals with disabilities.
H.R. 645, Automatic Voter Registration Act (116 th Cong.)
H.R. 1275, Voter Empowerment Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.), Title I, Subtitle B (Senate: S. 549 )
S. 1353, Automatic Voter Registration Act of 2017 (115 th Cong.)
H.R. 1612, Nonpartisan Bill for the People Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.) , Title I, Subtitle A
Kevin Morris and Peter Dunphy, AVR Impact on State Voter Registration (2019), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/avr-impact-state-voter-registration .
Automatic Voter Registration, a Summary (2019), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/automatic-voter-registration-summary .
The Case for Automatic Voter Registration (2016), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/case-automatic-voter-registration .
Wendy R. Weiser and Alicia Bannon, Democracy: An Election Agenda for Candidates, Activists, and Legislators (2018), 6–8, https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/policy-solutions/democracy-election-agenda-candidates-activists-and-legislators .
H.R. 1, The For the People Act, Hearing Before the Comm. on House Administration , 116 th Cong. (2019) (statement of Wendy Weiser, Director, Democracy Program, Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law), 7–8, https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/testimony-house-committee-administration-support-people-act .
Protecting the Right to Vote: Best and Worst Practices, Hearing Before the Comm. On Oversight and Reform , 116 th (2019) (statement of Myrna Pérez, Deputy Director, Democracy Program, Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/testimony-house-committee-oversight-and-reform-subcommittee-civil-rights .

This part would require states to offer same day registration (SDR) for federal elections. Traditionally, eligible voters have been required to register in advance of an election in order to cast a ballot. In many states, the voter registration deadline falls more than four weeks before a given election. SDR allows eligible residents to register to vote and cast a ballot on the same day. By ensuring that all eligible voters who go to the polls can participate in an election, SDR helps safeguard against registration system errors, cyber-attacks, and wrongful purges. As of 2020, 21 states and the District of Columbia had enacted SDR.

This part would amend the Help America Vote Act of 2002 (HAVA) to allow all eligible voters nationally to register and vote on the same day in federal elections, both on Election Day and during early voting periods.

H.R. 93, Same Day Registration Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.) (Senate: S. 624 )
H.R. 1438, To amend the Help America Vote Act of 2002 to require States to allow same day registration for Federal elections, and for other purposes (116 th Cong.)
H.R. 1275, Voter Empowerment Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.), Title I, Subtitle C (Senate: S. 549 )
H.R. 5785, Jobs and Justice Act of 2018 (115 th Cong.) , Division B, Title VIII, Subtitle B, Part 3
Walter Shapiro, Election Day Registration Could Cut Through Many of the Arguments in the Voting Wars (2018), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/election-day-registration-could-cut-through-many-arguments-voting-wars .
Wendy R. Weiser and Alicia Bannon, Democracy: An Election Agenda for Candidates, Activists, and Legislators (2018), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/policy-solutions/democracy-election-agenda-candidates-activists-and-legislators .
Fact Sheet: Voter Registration for the 21st Century (2015), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/fact-sheet-voter-registration-21st-century .
H.R. 1, The For the People Act, Hearing Before the Comm. on House Administration , 116 th Cong. (2019) (statement of Wendy Weiser, Director, Democracy Program, Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law), 7, https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/testimony-house-committee-administration-support-people-act .

This part places limits on states’ use of data compiled through interstate cross-checks to purge eligible voters from the rolls. Cross-check programs are shared databases that collect voter registration records from multiple states to identify duplicate registrations. When poorly designed, their use can result in eligible voters being purged from the rolls. One program, created by former Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach, was shown in a recent study to have a greater than 99 percent error rate. To protect against wrongful purges related to the use of such programs, this part would, among other things:

their full name, date of birth, and the last four digits of the individual’s social security number; or
documentation from the Electronic Registration Information Center (ERIC) (a non-profit partnership that allows participating states to compare official registration data through a secure data-matching tool) that a voter is no longer a resident of that state; and
require election officials to complete cross-check purges at least six months prior to a given election.
H.R. 1275, Voter Empowerment Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.), Title I, Subtitle D (Senate: S. 549 )
Kevin Morris, Voter Purge Rates Remain High, Analysis Finds (2019), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/voter-purge-rates-remain-high-analysis-finds .
Kevin Morris, Myrna Pérez, Jonathan Brater, and Christopher Deluzio, Purges: A Growing Threat to the Right to Vote (2018), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/purges-growing-threat-right-vote .
Jonathan Brater, Voter Purges: The Risks in 2018 (2018), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/voter-purges-risks-2018 .

This part would create additional mechanisms to facilitate voter registration. Among other things, it would:

amend the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 (NVRA) to ensure that pre-election registration deadlines are consistent with the timing of public holidays;
require states to create voter privacy programs that allow victims of domestic violence, stalking, and sexual assault, among others, to have their personally identifiable information kept confidential, and to notify residents of how and to whom state and local officials share or sell voter registration information;
require the Postal Service to include a reminder to update voter registration on its hard copy change of address form; and
empower the EAC to make grants to states to help boost youth involvement in state election activities.
H.R. 1275, Voter Empowerment Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.), Title I, Subtitle E (Senate: S. 549 )

This part would provide additional funding to help states update voter registration processes. HAVA authorizes the EAC to distribute payments to states to cover compliance with certain of its provisions. This part would allow states to use HAVA money to cover the cost of compliance with H.R. 1’s new voter registration modernization requirements.

H.R. 1275, Voter Empowerment Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.), Title I, Subtitle F (Senate: S. 549 )
H.R. 5785, Jobs and Justice Act of 2018 (115 th Cong.) , Division B, Title VIII, Subtitle B, Part 4

This part seeks to boost safeguards against unlawful interference with voter registration. It would, among other things:

ban attempts to corruptly hinder, interfere with, or prevent another person from registering to vote;
establish criminal penalties for such conduct; and
direct the EAC to develop and publish recommendations for states to deter and prevent interference with voter registration.
H.R. 1451, Alice Paul Voter Protection Act (116 th Cong.)
H.R. 1275, Voter Empowerment Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.), Title I, Subtitle G (Senate: S. 549 )
H.R. 5785, Jobs and Justice Act of 2018 (115 th Cong.) , Division B, Title VIII, Subtitle B, Part 5

This part seeks to reduce duplicate voter registrations across states. Because many individuals register to vote when they apply for a driver’s license, information sharing between state DMVs can help ensure that individuals are not registered in multiple states. Accordingly, this part would:

indicate the states in which they previously resided; and
confirm that they intend to use the new state for voter registration purposes; and
require state authorities to provide the voter’s responses to their counterparts in the state where the voter previously resided, who would in turn be required to notify their state’s chief election official.
H.R. 2115, Voter Registration Efficiency Act (113 th Cong.)

These parts would take steps to enhance voter participation by young Americans. Although 2020 and 2018 saw record-high levels of youth electoral participation, young voters still turn out to vote at a lower rate than the whole of the electorate. Part 9 would direct the EAC to create a pilot program to offer funding to local initiatives that provide voter registration information to high school seniors. To qualify for funding, such initiatives would have to prioritize schools with the highest number of students from vulnerable or low-income backgrounds. Part 10 would require states to allow future voters age 16 and older to pre-register to vote in federal elections once they turn 18.

H.R. 126, Students Voicing Opinions in Today’s Elections (VOTE) Act (116 th Cong.) (Senate: S. 625 )
H.R. 734, Next Generation Votes Act (116 th Cong.)
H.R. 1442, Pre-Registration of Voters Everywhere (PROVE) Act (116 th Cong.) (Senate: S. 621 )
Kevin Morris, Young Voters Are Changing the Democratic Party, (2018), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/young-voters-are-changing-democratic-party .
Lucy Zhou, Today in 1971, Sparking the Youth Vote (2013), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/today-1971-sparking-youth-vote .

This subsection consists of the Disability Voting Rights Act, which would increase protections for the more than 35 million disabled Americans who are of voting age. Many people with disabilities face barriers to participation in elections, such as inaccessible registration procedures, polling places, and voting machines. This subtitle seeks to address some of the biggest challenges confronted by these voters.

This subtitle would, among other things:

guarantee individuals with disabilities the right to use absentee voting procedures to register to vote and cast their ballots;
establish processes for people with disabilities to register to vote and request an absentee ballot by mail and electronically (whichever the voter chooses);
establish procedures to securely transmit blank absentee ballots by mail or electronically;
designate a single office to provide information on registration and absentee balloting to people with disabilities; and
designate at least one e-mail address or other means of electronic communication for individuals with disabilities to request and receive voter registration and absentee ballot applications, which shall be included on informational and instructional materials for balloting;
create a process where states that feel they cannot comply with the above requirements could apply for a hardship waiver;
expand and reauthorize a grant program to assure voting access for individuals with disabilities;
direct the EAC to make grants for states to conduct pilot programs that use technology to help individuals with disabilities register to vote and cast their ballots independently and privately; and
direct the comptroller general of the United States to conduct an analysis after each general election of voting access for individuals with disabilities and submit a report to the appropriate congressional committees.
H.R. 1573, Disability Voting Rights Act (116 th Cong.)
H.R. 1275, Voter Empowerment Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.), Title II (Senate: S. 549 )
H.R. 1612, Nonpartisan Bill for the People Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.) , Title VII, Subtitle B
H.R. 5785, Jobs and Justice Act of 2018 (115 th Cong.) , Division B, Title VIII, Subtitle C
Lawrence Norden, The Machinery of Democracy (2006), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/machinery-democracy .

This subtitle would prohibit “voter caging”—the practice of sending mail to people on the voter rolls, compiling a list of the mail that is returned undelivered, and using that list to purge or challenge voters’ registrations. Voter caging is not a reliable method for determining voter eligibility, and has in the past been employed for discriminatory and/or partisan ends. Because of its fraught history , Congress included a provision in the NVRA limiting it use. This subtitle would expand on the restrictions in the NVRA. It would, among other things:

prohibit election officials from using voter caging or unverified match lists (compiled by matching voters’ and/or applicants’ registration information to a list of ineligible voters without looking at additional criteria such as signatures, social security numbers, or photos to ensure that they are accurate) to prevent any individual from registering or voting in a federal election;
prohibit challenges to an individual’s eligibility to vote in a federal election within 10 days of Election Day, unless the individual registered to vote within 20 days of the election; and
establish penalties for challenging a voter’s eligibility to register or cast a ballot where the challenger knows the voter is eligible.
H.R. 1460, To amend title 18, United States Code, to prohibit voter caging and other questionable challenges. (116 th Cong.)
H.R. 1275, Voter Empowerment Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.), Title III (Senate: S. 549 )
H.R. 5785, Jobs and Justice Act of 2018 (115 th Cong.) , Division B, Title VIII, Subtitle D
“Voter Challenges & Caging” (2015), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/voter-challenges-caging .
Justin Levitt, A Guide to Voter Caging (2007), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/guide-voter-caging .

This subtitle consists of the Deceptive Practices and Voter Intimidation Prevention Act. The use of deceptive and intimidating practices is a longstanding voter suppression tactic. Moreover, the Internet and social media have made it easier to target specific communities with precision. This is true for foreign as well as domestic actors. For instance, the Kremlin’s disinformation campaign during the 2016 presidential election targeted African Americans , and also spread false information about voting rules, for example suggesting that people could vote by text. Some state laws prohibit such tactics, but there is wide variation across the states. This subtitle would establish a uniform national standard and boost related safeguards.

prohibit knowing and intentional communication of false and misleading information — including about the time, place, or manner of elections, public endorsements, and the rules governing voter eligibility and voter registration — made with the intent of preventing eligible voters from casting ballots;
establish federal criminal penalties for deceiving or intimidating voters;
upon learning that false information is being disseminated to the public, disseminate accurate information if state officials fail to do so, in a manner that does not favor any party or candidate;
develop written procedures for the dissemination of such corrective information; and
submit a report to Congress within 180 days of a federal general election documenting all allegations of deceptive practices.
H.R. 3281, Deceptive Practices and Voter Intimidation Prevention Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.) (Senate: S. 1834 )
H.R. 1275, Voter Empowerment Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.), Title IV (Senate: S. 549 )
H.R. 4617, Stopping Harmful Interference in Elections for a Lasting Democracy (SHIELD) Act (116 th Cong.), Title III, Subtitle B
H.R. 5785, Jobs and Justice Act of 2018 (115 th Cong.) , Division B, Title VIII, Subtitle E
H.R. 1, The For the People Act, Hearing Before the Comm. on House Administration , 116 th Cong. (2019) (statement of Wendy Weiser, Director, Democracy Program, Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law), 15–16, https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/testimony-house-committee-administration-support-people-act .
Young Mie Kim, Voter Suppression Has Gone Digital, (2018), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/voter-suppression-has-gone-digital .
Sean Morales-Doyle and Sidni Frederick, “Intentionally Deceiving Voters Should Be a Crime” (2018), https://thehill.com/opinion/civil-rights/400941-intentionally-deceiving-voters-should-be-a-crime .
Wendy H.R. Weiser and Alicia Bannon, Democracy: An Election Agenda for Candidates, Activists, and Legislators (2018), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/policy-solutions/democracy-election-agenda-candidates-activists-and-legislators .
The Deceptive Practices and Voter Intimidation Prevention Act of 2011 (S.1994), Hearing Before the Comm. Of the Judiciary , 112th Cong. (2011) (statement of the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/testimony-deceptive-practices-and-voter-intimidation-prevention-act-2011 .

This subtitle would restore federal voting rights to Americans who are disenfranchised due to a previous criminal conviction. Felony disenfranchisement laws, most of which date back to the Jim Crow era, disproportionately affect African Americans; as of 2016, they were disenfranchised at a rate four times that of all other Americans . Federal action would build off recent progress in the states, including Florida’s historic vote in 2018 to end permanent disenfranchisement for all persons with criminal convictions. This section includes findings concerning Congress’s Article I power to set the rules for federal elections, as well as its authority under the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments to stop discriminatory denials of the right to vote. It also notes how the lack of a uniform national standard for voting creates unfair disparities on who can participate in federal elections, and how current felony disenfranchisement laws disproportionately affect Black and Latino communities.

This subtitle would:

guarantee federal voting rights for citizens with past felony convictions who have completed any term of incarceration; and
require states to inform citizens of their restored voting rights in writing.
H.R. 196, Democracy Restoration Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.) (Senate: S. 1068 )
H.R. 1893, Next Step Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.) , Title X (Senate: S. 697 )
H.R. 12, Voter Empowerment Act of 2017 (115 th Cong.) , Title V (Senate: S. 1437)
H.R. 5785, Jobs and Justice Act of 2018 (115 th Cong.) , Division B, Title VIII, Subtitle F
Kevin Morris, Thwarting Amendment 4 (2019), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/thwarting-amendment-4 .
H.R. 1, The For the People Act, Hearing Before the Comm. on House Administration , 116 th Cong. (2019) (statement of Wendy Weiser, Director, Democracy Program, Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law), 12–15, https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/testimony-house-committee-administration-support-people-act .
Protecting the Right to Vote: Best and Worst Practices, Hearing Before the Comm. On Oversight and Reform , 116 th (2019) (statement of Myrna Pérez, Deputy Director, Democracy Program, Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/testimony-house-committee-oversight-and-reform-subcommittee-civil-rights .
Erika Wood, Florida: An Outlier in Denying Voting Rights (2016), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/florida-outlier-denying-voting-rights .
Erin Kelley, Racism & Felony Disenfranchisement: An Intertwined History (2016), https://www.brennancenter.org/sites/default/files/publications/Disenfranchisement_History.pdf .

This subtitle would require all jurisdictions to use paper ballots that voters can mark by hand or with a ballot marking device. Voting machines and other infrastructure are likely to be a target for hackers and others looking to disrupt or otherwise interfere with U.S. elections, including those working for foreign governments. Paper ballots are an important safeguard against such threats, because they create a tangible record of each voter’s selections that the voter can use to ensure their choices have been accurately recorded and that election officials can use to verify electronic results. Ballots that can be marked by hand also provide insurance against ordinary equipment failures that can result in long lines at the polls. Since the 2016 election, many jurisdictions have replaced outdated paperless voting equipment — but as many as 16 million Americans may have cast their votes using paperless machines in 2020. This subtitle aims to eliminate the risk of paperless voting machines in all federal elections.

conduct federal elections using “voter-verified paper ballots”— i.e. ballots that can be marked either by hand or a ballot marking device and inspected by the voter before the ballot is cast;
give voters the opportunity to correct any errors on their paper ballot before it is cast;
give voters the option to mark their ballots by hand;
preserve paper ballots for recounts or audits;
count ballots by hand for recounts and audits; and
provide individuals with disabilities the opportunity to vote privately and independently using paper ballots;
instruct the director of the National Science Foundation to make grants to study, test, and develop accessible paper ballot voting, verification, and casting mechanisms, as well as develop best practices for making paper ballot voting and verification procedures accessible to individuals with disabilities;
establish durability and readability requirements for voter-verified paper ballots; and
direct the EAC to study and report on optimal ballot design.
H.R. 2722, Securing America’s Federal Elections (SAFE) Act, (116 th Cong.) , Title I, Subtitle A, Part 1 (Senate: S. 2053)
S. 2238, SAFE Act (116 th Cong.) , Title I, Subtitle A, Part 1
H.R. 1946, Securing America’s Elections Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.)
H.R. 2754, Protecting American Votes and Elections Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.) (Senate: S. 1472 )
H.R. 2660, Election Security Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.) , Title I, Subtitle A, Part 1 (Senate: S. 1540 )
H.R. 1275, Voter Empowerment Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.), Title VI (Senate: S. 549 )
H.R. 5785, Jobs and Justice Act of 2018 (115 th Cong.) , Division B, Title VIII, Subtitle G, Part 1
Edgardo Cortés, Gowri Ramachandran, Liz Howard, and Lawrence Norden, Preparing for Cyberattacks and Technical Failures: A Guide for Election Officials (2019), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/policy-solutions/preparing-cyberattacks-and-technical-failures-guide-election-officials .
Lawrence Norden, “How to Secure Elections for 2020 and Beyond” (2019), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/how-secure-elections-2020-and-beyond .
Lawrence Norden and Andrea Córdova McCadney, “Voting Machines at Risk: Where We Stand Today” (2019), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/voting-machines-risk-where-we-stand-today .
Andrea Córdova McCadney, Elizabeth Howard, and Lawrence Norden, “Voting Machine Security: Where We Stand a Few Months Before the New Hampshire Primary” (2019), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/voting-machine-security-where-we-stand-few-months-new-hampshire-primary .
Recommendations to Defend America’s Election Infrastructure (2019), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/recommendations-defend-americas-election-infrastructure .
Election Security , Hearing Before the Comm. On House Administration , 116 th (2019) (statement of Lawrence D. Norden, Deputy Director, Democracy Program, Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law), https://docs.house.gov/meetings/HA/HA00/20190508/109410/HH.RG-116-HA00-Wstate-NordenL-20190508-U1.pdf .
H.R. 1, The For the People Act, Hearing Before the Comm. on House Administration , 116 th Cong. (2019) (statement of Wendy Weiser, Director, Democracy Program, Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law), 33–34, https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/testimony-house-committee-administration-support-people-act .
Lawrence Norden, How to Fix Long Lines (2013), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/policy-solutions/how-fix-long-lines .

This subtitle would create additional safeguards for provisional balloting. Under HAVA , voters whose registration and eligibility cannot be determined at the polling place must be offered a provisional ballot that is counted once the voter’s eligibility has been verified. Provisional balloting procedures vary greatly across states . In some places, even eligible voters may not have their provisional ballots counted — if, for example, the voter accidentally cast their ballots in the wrong precinct. To address these issues, this subtitle would:

require every provisional ballot to be counted with respect to the contests in which the voter who cast it was eligible to vote (so, for example, a voter who cast their ballot in a precinct where they were ineligible to vote in local contests would still have their vote for statewide office counted); and
require states to establish uniform and nondiscriminatory standards for issuing, handling, and counting provisional ballots in federal elections.
H.R. 118, Streamlined and Improved Methods at Polling Locations and Early (SIMPLE) Voting Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.)
H.R. 1275, Voter Empowerment Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.), Title VII (Senate: S. 549 )
H.R. 5785, Jobs and Justice Act of 2018 (115 th Cong.) , Division B, Title VIII, Subtitle H
Max Feldman and Peter Dunphy, The State of Voting Rights Litigation (July 2019) (2019), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/state-voting-rights-litigation-july-2019 .
Federal Court Demands Georgia Do Better With Provisional Ballot Counting Process (2018), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/federal-court-demands-georgia-do-better-provisional-ballot-counting .
Wendy Weiser, Are HAVA’s Provisional Ballots Working? (2006), https://www.brennancenter.org/sites/default/files/legacy/d/download_file_39043.pdf .

This subtitle would extend early voting to all 50 states and establish minimum standards for its implementation in federal elections. Voting on a single weekday can be challenging for many Americans with work, family, or other obligations, especially when long lines form at the polls. In-person early voting, including on weekends and during evening hours, helps shorten lines and allows people to cast their ballots when it is most convenient. Many states have already passed laws permitting citizens to vote in person prior to Election Day. Specifically, it would:

require states to allow at least two weeks of early voting for federal elections (including weekends), for a period of at least ten hours per day, including some early morning and evening hours;
require states to ensure, to the greatest extent practicable, that early voting locations are within walking distance of public transportation, are accessible to rural voters, and are located on college campuses; and
require states to begin processing and scanning ballots cast during early voting for tabulation at least two weeks before the date of the election.
S. 957, Early Voting Act (116 th Cong.)
H.R. 1546, To amend the Help America Vote Act of 2002 to establish a minimum period for early voting in elections for Federal office (116 th Cong.)
H.R. 1275, Voter Empowerment Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.), Title VIII (Senate: S. 549)
H.R. 5785, Jobs and Justice Act of 2018 (115 th Cong.) , Division B, Title VIII, Subtitle I
Kevin Morris, Georgia’s Proposed Voting Restrictions Will Harm Black Voters Most (2021), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/georgias-proposed-voting-restrictions-will-harm-black-voters-most .
Brennan Center for Justice, State Voting Bills Tracker 2021 (2021), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/state-voting-bills-tracker-2021 .
Hannah Klain, “Six Ways for Election Officials to Prepare for High Voter Turnout in 2020” (2019), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/six-ways-election-officials-prepare-high-voter-turnout-2020 .
H.R. 1, The For the People Act, Hearing Before the Comm. on House Administration , 116 th Cong. (2019) (statement of Wendy Weiser, Director, Democracy Program, Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law), 11–12, https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/testimony-house-committee-administration-support-people-act .
Tim Lau, “Early Voting Numbers Soar as Midterms Approach” (2018), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/early-voting-numbers-soar-midterms-approach .
Walter Shapiro, “Finding the Golden Mean for Early Voting” (2016), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/finding-golden-mean-early-voting .
Phoenix Rice-Johnson, “A Step in the Wrong Direction: Cutting Early Voting Hurts Voters” (2016), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/step-wrong-direction-cutting-early-voting-hurts-voters .
Diana Kasdan, Early Voting: What Works (2013), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/early-voting-what-works .

This subtitle would expand opportunities to vote by mail in federal elections. Voting by mail is a necessary option, as demonstrated by its crucial role during the Covid-19 pandemic despite a variety of confusing and unnecessary barriers in many states. A Pew Research Center survey indicates that 46 percent of people voted by mail during the November 2020 election . This subtitle would create a national standard permitting ballots to be cast by mail in most instances for federal elections.

require states to allow any eligible voter to vote by mail in federal elections (no-excuse absentee voting);
require state or local election officials to transmit mail-in ballot applications to all registered voters at least 60 days before Election Day;
require states to allow voters to request mail-in ballots online or by phone;
prohibit states from requiring voters casting a ballot by mail to provide identification aside from a signature, and require signature discrepancy issues to be resolved by at least two trained election officials affiliated with different parties;
require states to make a good faith effort to notify voters of apparent signature discrepancies and provide an opportunity to cure any issues within ten days;
prohibit notarization or witness signatures requirements for mail-in ballots in federal elections;
require mail-in ballots and ballot applications to be accessible for voters with disabilities;
require states to send a mail-in ballot to any voter who requests one at least five business days prior to Election Day, and to accept any mail-in ballot postmarked on or before Election Day if it arrives within ten days after the election;
direct the postal service to ensure that mail-in ballots are processed and cleared within one day of arriving at a postal facility;
prohibit the postal service from carrying out any operational changes that would restrict the prompt and reliable delivery of voting materials within 120 days of a federal election;
require states to allow voters to return mail-in ballots to designated drop-off locations or to a polling place during early voting or on Election Day;
require states to permit voters to designate someone else to return their completed and sealed mail-in ballot, as long as the person is not being compensated, and prohibit limits on the number of ballots any designated person can return;
prevent states from prohibiting any person from distributing mail-in ballot applications, or from prohibiting election officials from distributing voter registration applications;
require states to begin processing mail-in ballots at least 14 days prior to an election;
require states to establish tracking programs for mail ballots and provide information on whether an individual’s vote was counted and, if not, why not; and
require prepaid return envelopes for mail-in ballots and ballot applications.
H.R. 138, Universal Right to Vote by Mail Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.)
H.R. 92 Vote By Mail Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.) (Senate: S. 26 )
H.R. 1275, Voter Empowerment Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.), Title IX (Senate: S. 549 )
H.R. 5785, Jobs and Justice Act of 2018 (115 th Cong.) , Division B, Title VIII, Subtitle I
H.R. 6800, HEROES Act (116 th Cong.)
H.R. 7427, ACCESS Act (116 th Cong.)
Lawrence Norden, What to Do About Vote by Mail, (2012), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/what-do-about-vote-mail .

This subtitle aims to protect voting rights for absent military and overseas voters by ensuring they receive their ballots earlier. According to data compiled by the EAC , 44.4 percent of overseas ballots that were rejected were not counted because they were not received on time. Research from the Federal Voting Assistance Program suggests that if military and overseas voters receive their ballots earlier, they are more likely to return them, and the ballots are less likely to be rejected by state officials. Accordingly, this subtitle would, among other things:

require all states to take steps to ensure compliance with the Uniformed and Overseas Citizen Absentee Voting Act mandate to send uniformed service and overseas voters’ ballots at least 45 days before a federal election (provided a request was received at least 45 days before the election);
require states to use and pay for express delivery and return of ballots if they fail to send ballots to uniformed and overseas voters by that deadline;
extend the guarantee of state residency for voting purposes to all spouses and dependents of absent servicemembers (current law extends the guarantee of residency only to servicemembers themselves);
establish a cause of action for violations of these provisions, enforceable by the attorney general or private litigants;
require states to submit pre- and post-election reports to Congress documenting the availability of absentee balloting for servicemembers and overseas voters, how many ballots were transmitted, and how many were returned; and
require states to electronically send blank absentee ballots to qualified individuals who request them, including voters with disabilities and voters in areas impacted by natural disasters or public health emergencies within five days of an election (although they may not return their marked ballots electronically).
H.R. 1275, Voter Empowerment Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.), Title X (Senate: S. 549 )
H.R. 3300, Help Our Service Members and Citizens Abroad Vote Act (115 th Cong.)
H.R. 5785, Jobs and Justice Act of 2018 (115 th Cong.) , Division B, Title VIII, Subtitle J
Adam Skaggs, Registering Military and Overseas Citizens to Vote (2009), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/registering-military-and-overseas-citizens-vote .
Adam Skaggs, “Voting Obstacles Suppress Military Vote” (2009), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/voting-obstacles-suppress-military-vote .
“Military & Veteran Voting” (2009), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/military-veteran-voting .

This subtitle provides for grants to fund poll worker recruitment and training. Inexperienced, untrained poll workers can contribute to long lines and other problems that make it harder to vote. To help address this problem, this subtitle would, among other things, direct the EAC to make grants to states for recruiting and training poll workers and prepare a manual for grantees documenting best practices.

H.R. 1275, Voter Empowerment Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.), Title XI (Senate: S. 549 )
H.R. 5785, Jobs and Justice Act of 2018 (115 th Cong.) , Division B, Title VIII, Subtitle K
Myrna Pérez, Christopher Famighetti, and Amanda Melillo, Election Day Long Lines: Resource Allocation (2014), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/election-day-long-lines-resource-allocation .
Renée Paradis, “We Want You…to be a Poll Worker” (2008), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/we-want-youto-be-poll-worker .

Background & Key Changes:

This subtitle would expand mechanisms for processing complaints alleging a violation of HAVA’s minimum standards governing ballots and voting machines, polling place accessibility, provisional balloting, and other aspects of the voting process. Under current law, complaints are submitted directly to state officials according to procedures that vary considerably across states, with some states providing little or no information about how to submit a complaint. To address this issue, this subtitle would:

allow individuals to file notarized complaints with the U.S. attorney general (who has authority to sue states in federal court to enforce HAVA’s provisions);
direct the attorney general to respond to each complaint and provide both the complaint and response to relevant state officials; and
create a right for private litigants to sue for certain HAVA violations related to inadequate voting technology.
H.R. 1513, Count the Vote Act (116 th Cong.)
H.R. 2754, Protecting American Votes and Elections Act of 2019 (116th Cong.) (Senate: S. 1472 )
H.R. 1275, Voter Empowerment Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.), Title XII (Senate: S. 549 )
H.R. 5785, Jobs and Justice Act of 2018 (115 th Cong.) , Division B, Title VIII, Subtitle L
Kele Williams, Key Provisions of the Help America Vote Act (2004), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/policy-solutions/key-provisions-help-america-vote-act .

This subtitle would address apparent conflicts of interest on the part of chief state election officials, such as elected secretaries of state, who are either on the ballot or otherwise participating in an election they are also administering. It would prohibit them from being involved in any campaign with respect to an election for federal office they are overseeing, unless the official is the candidate, in which case they would be required to recuse from overseeing the election in which they are running.

H.R. 1535, Election Official Integrity Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.)
H.R. 137, Federal Election Integrity Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.)
H.R. 1275, Voter Empowerment Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.), Title XIII (Senate: S. 549 )
H.R. 5785, Jobs and Justice Act of 2018 (115 th Cong.) , Division B, Title VIII, Subtitle M
Rebecca Ayala, “What’s the Matter with Georgia?” (2018), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/whats-matter-georgia .

Subtitle N — Promoting Voter Access Through Election Administration

This subtitle would make a number of additional changes to improve voting access and the administration of federal elections.

This part includes several reforms that aim to promote voting access for students, voters who lack identification, voters living on tribal lands, and voters who may have difficulty voting in person on Election Day. Among other things, it would:

amend the NVRA to treat public universities as “voter registration agencies,” which would obligate them to facilitate voter registration in connection to providing other services (as is currently the case for state DMVs and public assistance agencies);
express a sense of Congress that students should be allowed to vote in the jurisdiction where they are attending school, without being subjected to intimidation or deceptive practices;
require states to provide notice (in a way that accounts for local linguistic preferences) of polling place changes at least seven days before an election;
require states with voter identification requirements to permit voters who lack identification to vote if they complete a sworn written statement attesting to their identity (unless the individual is a first-time voter who registered by mail);
allow Native American tribes to designate buildings as ballot pickup and collection locations and require states to provide language accessible mail-in ballots to people who live on tribal lands without requiring residential addresses;
direct the attorney general to coordinate the establishment of state-based voter information response systems and hotlines to assist people with voting or voter registration problems;
direct states to equitably allocate voting systems, poll workers, and other election resources among polling places to ensure a fair and equitable waiting time and that no individual will be required to wait longer than 30 minutes to cast a ballot;
require states to limit variations in the number of hours of operation for polling places within the state, including requiring that all polling places be open for at least four hours outside of regular working hours;
require states to provide a sufficient number of secure, accessible, and widely distributed drop-boxes for completed absentee ballots in federal elections, starting at least 45 days before an election;
require that these drop-boxes be accessible for use by individuals with disabilities, by individuals with limited English proficiency, and by unhoused individuals;
prohibit states from restricting curbside voting; and
make Election Day a public holiday.
H.R. 1275, Voter Empowerment Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.), Title XV, Subtitle A (Senate: S. 549 )
H.R. 7068, VoteSafe Act of 2020 (116 th Cong.)
H.R. 5785, Jobs and Justice Act of 2018 (115 th Cong.) , Division B, Title VIII, Subtitle O
Hannah Klain, Kevin Morris, Max Feldman, and Rebecca Ayala, Waiting to Vote: Racial Disparities in Election Day Experiences (2020), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/waiting-vote .
Max Feldman and Peter Dunphy, The State of Voting Rights Litigation (July 2019) (2019), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/state-voting-rights-litigation-july-2019 .
Tomas Lopez, “Voters Need More Access to Ballot, Not Less” (2013), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/voters-need-more-access-ballot-not-less .

This part directs state and local jurisdictions to develop contingency plans to enable eligible voters to participate in federal elections during times of emergency, such as the Covid-19 pandemic. These plans must be updated every five years and must include measures to protect the health and safety of voters and poll workers, as well as measures to recruit additional poll workers if required.

H.R. 6800, HEROES Act (116th Cong.)
H.R. 7427, ACCESS Act (116th Cong.)
Wendy R. Weiser and Max Feldman, How to Protect the 2020 Vote from the Coronavirus (2020), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/policy-solutions/how-protect-2020-vote-coronavirus .

This part deals with the EAC, an independent, bipartisan commission that was created under HAVA to serve as a national clearinghouse of information about election administration. The EAC’s original budget authorization expired more than a decade ago, although Congress has continued to fund the agency on a year-to-year basis. This part would, among other things, permanently reauthorize the EAC and require states to participate in the agency’s post-general election surveys of voting issues that occurred.

H.R. 1275, Voter Empowerment Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.), Title XV, Subtitle B (Senate: S. 549 )
H.R. 794. EAC Reauthorization Act of 2017 (115 th Cong.)
H.R. 5785, Jobs and Justice Act of 2018 (115 th Cong.) , Division B, Title VIII, Subtitle O
Wendy Weiser and Nicole Austin-Hillery, Brennan Center to House: Do Not Terminate the Only Federal Agency Protecting Voter Systems (2017), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/brennan-center-house-do-not-terminate-only-federal-agency-protecting .

Background & Summary of Key Changes

This part extends application of the NVRA and HAVA to Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa, the United States Virgin Islands, and the Northern Mariana Islands — all territories of the United States. It also clarifies that Title I does not (except where explicitly provided) supersede or restrict existing voting laws such as the Voting Rights Act and the NVRA, and that state governments are free to expand opportunities to vote and register to vote in ways that go beyond the provisions of Title I. Finally, it clarifies that states that do not require individuals to register to vote do not have to comply with the voter registration provisions of Title I.

H.R. 1275, Voter Empowerment Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.), Title XV, Subtitle C (Senate: S. 549 )

This subtitle would provide that if any of the other provisions of Title I are found unconstitutional, the remainder of the title would not be affected by the holding.

Title II — Election Integrity

This title would address restoration of the full protections of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 and several other pressing voting rights issues, and also seeks to curb partisan gerrymandering of congressional districts.

Subtitle A — Findings Reaffirming Commitment of Congress to Restore the Voting Rights Act

Subtitle b — findings relating to native american voting rights, subtitle c — findings relating to district of columbia statehood, subtitle d — territorial voting rights, subtitle e — redistricting reform, subtitle f — saving eligible voters from voter purging, subtitle g — no effect on authority of states to provide greater opportunities for voting, subtitle h — residence of incarcerated individuals, subtitle i — findings relating to youth voting, subtitle j — severability.

This subtitle would affirm Congress’s commitment to update and restore the full protections of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (VRA) . The VRA is considered the most effective civil rights legislation in the history of the United States . Much of that success rested upon Section 5’s pre-clearance provision, which required states and localities with histories of discriminatory voting practices to secure federal government approval prior to making any changes to their voting rules. In Shelby County v. Holder (2013), however, the Supreme Court rendered Section 5 inoperable by striking down the coverage formula used to determine which states were subject to pre-clearance. The Shelby County decision allowed states to move forward with many new voting restrictions that previously would have been subject to federal pre-clearance. In the last Congress, the House fulfilled the commitment made in this subtitle (after building an extensive legislative record) on December 6, 2019 by passing H.R. 4, the Voting Rights Advancement Act of 2019 . Work to pass an updated version of this bill — the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act — is ongoing in the current Congress.

H.R. 4, Voting Rights Advancement Act of 2019 (116th Cong.) (Senate: S. 561)
H.R. 1799, Voting Rights Amendment Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.)
Kevin Morris, Georgia’s Proposed Voting Restrictions Will Harm Black Voters Most (2021), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/georgias-proposed-voting-restrictions-will-harm-black-voters-most .
H.R. 1, The For the People Act, Hearing Before the Comm. on House Administration , 116 th Cong. (2019) (statement of Wendy Weiser, Director, Democracy Program, Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law), 9–11, https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/testimony-house-committee-administration-support-people-act .
Voting Rights and Election Administration in America , Hearing Before the Comm. on House Administration , 116 th (2019) (statement of Michael Waldman, President, Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/testimony-house-administration-committees-subcommittee-elections .
Current Conditions: Evidence of Continued Discrimination in Voting and the Need for Preclearance , Hearing Before the House Comm. on the Judiciary , 116 th (2019) (statement of Myrna Pérez, Director, Voting Rights & Elections Program, Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/testimony-house-subcommittee-constitution-civil-rights-and-civil .
Wendy R. Weiser and Max Feldman, The State of Voting 2018 (2018), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/state-voting-2018 .
“The Effects of Shelby County v. Holder” (2018), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/policy-solutions/effects-shelby-county-v-holder .
Tomas Lopez, ‘Shelby County’: One Year Later (2014), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/shelby-county-one-year-later .

This subtitle would commit to protecting and promoting Native American voting rights. It notes that Native American voters have faced many obstacles to voting , such as discriminatory voter identification laws, inadequate language assistance, and a lack of conveniently located registration and voting sites. These obstacles continued through the 2018 and 2020 elections. In response, the subtitle would commit Congress to hold hearings on legislation to restore the full protections of the Voting Rights Act (which passed on December 6, 2019) and on H.R. 1694, the Native American Voting Rights Act of 2019 .

H.R. 1694, Native American Voting Rights Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.)
H.R. 4, Voting Rights Advancement Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.) (Senate: S. 561 )
Peter Dunphy, “The State of Native American Voting Rights” (2019), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/state-native-american-voting-rights .
Max Feldman and Peter Dunphy, The State of Voting Rights Litigation (2019), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/state-voting-rights-litigation-october-2019 .

This subtitle would make findings in support of statehood for the District of Columbia. It notes, among other things, that District residents have always carried out all the obligations of citizenship, but without congressional voting rights or self-determination in purely local matters. Moreover, the District is larger in terms of population than two other states, pays more per capita in taxes than any state, and is in one of the strongest fiscal positions of any U.S. jurisdiction. The subtitle would affirm the authority of Congress under Article IV of the U.S. Constitution to create a new state out of the area that currently comprises the District, while maintaining the federal seat of government in the areas comprising the Capitol complex, the White House, the National Mall, and other federal buildings and grounds. That legislation, H.R. 51, the Washington, D.C. Admissions Act , was introduced on January 3, 2020.

H.R. 51, the Washington, D.C. Admissions Act (116 th Cong.) (Senate: S. 631 )

This subtitle would make findings in support of federal voting rights for Americans living in the U.S. territories of American Samoa, Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. It would also establish a congressional task force to analyze roadblocks to enfranchisement in the territories, in order to recommend measures to facilitate federal voting rights for citizens there.

H.J.Res. 24, Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States regarding Presidential election voting rights for residents of all United States territories and commonwealths (116 th Cong.)
H.R. 5526, Territorial Representation in the Senate Act (116 th Cong.)

This subtitle establishes new requirements for congressional redistricting, including uniform rules for drawing districts, a ban on partisan gerrymandering, stronger protections for minority communities, and a requirement that states use independent commissions to draw maps. Last decade, new map-drawing technologies helped both parties draw congressional maps to insulate seats from even the most dramatic shifts in political winds. In many instances, partisan gerrymandering also limited the ability of communities of color to elect candidates of their choice. Although the Supreme Court recognized that such extreme gerrymandering is at odds with bedrock constitutional principles, two years ago it held that partisan gerrymandering was a “political question” and declined to intervene. But momentum for reform continues to build. In the past three years alone, five states passed measures creating independent commissions or otherwise significantly overhauling congressional redistricting, all by bipartisan margins. A growing number of states now place some significant constraint on partisan gerrymandering for congressional and/or state legislative redistricting. The provisions in this subsection are modeled on these state-level reforms. Depending on when the Senate passes the For the People Act, some of these provisions might not take effect until the 2031 round of redistricting, but others could be implemented immediately.

ban partisan gerrymandering by prohibiting adoption of any map that has the intent or effect of “unduly favoring or disfavoring” one political party over another;
establish uniform rules that every state would have to follow when drawing congressional districts, including enhanced protections to make sure the political effectiveness of communities of color is not diluted and a mandate to keep towns, neighborhoods, and other geographic areas where people have shared identities and common interests together in one district, where possible;
require that congressional redistricting be transparent and participatory, with open meetings and public hearings, opportunities for the public to review and comment on proposed maps, and public access to underlying data and software so that members of the public can analyze maps and/or create and propose alternatives;
give voters an expedited right of action to redress violations of this subtitle, with added provisions to ensure that, if necessary, blatant violations can be corrected on an interim basis through a temporary redistricting plan; and
prohibit current and recent lawmakers, staff, and lobbyists and others with conflicts of interest from serving on the commission;
include an equal number of Republican, Democratic, and unaffiliated or third-party members selected through a rigorous screening process, with voting rules designed to ensure that maps can pass only with support from all three groups; and
include members who are representative of the state’s demographic makeup and different geographic regions, with enough members from racial, ethnic, and language minorities to give those groups a meaningful opportunity to participate in the redistricting process.
H.R. 3572, Redistricting Reform Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.) (Senate: S. 2226 )
H.R. 4000, Fair Representation Act (116 th Cong.)
Michael Li, Why the For the People Act is Critical for Fair Voting Maps (2021), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/why-people-act-critical-fair-voting-maps .
Yurij Rudensky and Annie Lo, Creating Strong Rules for Drawing Maps (2019), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/policy-solutions/creating-strong-rules-drawing-maps .
“Redistricting Commissions: What Works” (2018), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/redistricting-commissions-what-works .
Laura Royden, Michael Li, and Yurij Rudensky, Extreme Gerrymandering & the 2018 Midterm (2018), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/extreme-gerrymandering-2018-midterm .
Laura Royden and Michael Li, Extreme Maps (2017), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/extreme-maps .
H.R. 1, The For the People Act, Hearing Before the Comm. on House Administration , 116 th Cong. (2019) (statement of Wendy Weiser, Director, Democracy Program, Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law), 31–32, https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/testimony-house-committee-administration-support-people-act .

This subtitle would create new safeguards against improper purges of the voting rolls. Purge rates have increased in recent years, especially in states previously subject to federal pre-clearance under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. Flawed purges can leave large numbers of eligible voters off the rolls and unable to vote. Without adequate notice, some of these voters may still show up on Election Day, resulting in confusion and longer lines at the polls. This subtitle would establish new protections that aim to protect eligible voters from being purged and ensure that purged voters are made aware of changes to their registration status ahead of an election.

Among other things, this subtitle would:

failure to vote;
failure to respond to a mailed notice, unless the notice is returned as undeliverable; or
failure to take any other action with respect to voting.
provide timely notice to any voter removed from the rolls, and an opportunity to contest that removal or get their registration reinstated; and
publish a public notice within 48 hours of a purge being conducted
H.R. 3201, Stop Automatically Voiding Eligible Voters Off Their Enlisted Rolls in States (Save Voters) Act (116 th Cong.) (Senate: S. 507)
S. 958, SAVE VOTERS Act (116 th Cong.)
H.R. 1, The For the People Act, Hearing Before the Comm. on House Administration , 116 th Cong. (2019) (statement of Wendy Weiser, Director, Democracy Program, Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law), 8–9, https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/testimony-house-committee-administration-support-people-act .

This subtitle would establish that the provisions of Title II do not prevent states from passing laws to expand opportunities for voter registration and voting in federal elections that go beyond this title.

This subtitle would require that the Census Bureau record incarcerated persons as living in their pre-incarceration communities rather than at the prison facilities where they are serving their sentences. The Census Bureau’s current practice is to count incarcerated people as living in the communities where they are incarcerated, which entitles those communities to a larger share of legislative seats and government resources. But most incarcerated people have little or no connection to the communities where they are incarcerated, and typically return to their home communities upon release. This subtitle would direct the Bureau to count incarcerated people at their last address prior to imprisonment. It would also direct the commerce secretary, who oversees the Bureau, to consult with state corrections departments to gather the relevant information about home addresses of incarcerated persons.

H.R. 794, Correct the Census Count Act (116 th Cong.)
Michael Li, “Proposed Census Rule Could Hurt Communities” (2016), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/proposed-census-rule-could-hurt-communities .

This subtitle would make findings in support of further protections for the rights guaranteed by the Twenty-Sixth Amendment, which sets the federal voting age as 18 and prohibits the denying or abridging of that right to vote “by the United States or by any state on account of age.” It finds that youth voter suppression is a growing problem in the United States, noting recent court decisions holding that certain state policies violated the Twenty-Sixth Amendment, and calls on Congress to take further steps to defend the right to vote.

This subtitle would provide that if any of the other provisions of Title II are found unconstitutional, the remainder of the title would not be affected by the holding.

Title III — Election Security

This title aims to improve the security of U.S. election infrastructure to counter the threat of foreign interference.

Part 1 — Voting System Security Improvement Grants

Part 2 — grants for risk-limiting audits of results of elections, part 3 — election infrastructure innovation grant program, subtitle b — security measures, subtitle c — enhancing protections for united states democratic institutions, subtitle d — promoting cybersecurity through improvements in election administration, subtitle e — preventing election hacking, subtitle f — election security grants advisory committee, subtitle g — miscellaneous provisions, subtitle h — use of voting machines manufactured in the united states, subtitle i — study and report on bots, subtitle a — financial support for election infrastructure.

This subtitle would establish a variety of new grants to fund election security upgrades. States and localities are on the front lines of protecting U.S. elections against foreign interference. They rely on the federal government for help in paying for equipment upgrades and other security enhancements. While the federal government provided some additional funding in the FY2020 budget, more still needs to be done.

This part would provide grants for states and localities to update voting systems. It would also create new security requirements for private companies that sell voting machines and other election equipment purchased with grant money. These companies are currently subject to almost no federal regulation . Specifically, this part would, among other things:

direct the Election Assistance Commission (EAC) to provide grants to states to upgrade voting systems to comply with applicable laws and voluntary guidance promulgated by the Commission, improve ballot design, and perform other security upgrades;
be owned and controlled by citizens or permanent residents of the United States;
disclose any election infrastructure parts sourced from outside the United States and the identities of any entity or individual with an ownership interest above five percent in the vendor to the EAC, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and the chief election official of any state with which the vendor does business;
comply with technical guidelines for election infrastructure promulgated by the EAC;
report cybersecurity incidents involving goods and services provided by the vendor to the EAC and DHS; and
permit the EAC and DHS to conduct independent cybersecurity testing on the goods and services that the vendor provides.
H.R. 2660, Election Security Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.) , Title I, Subtitle A (Senate: S. 1540)
H.R. 1612, Nonpartisan Bill for the People Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.) , Title III, Subtitle A
H.R. 2722, Securing America’s Federal Elections (SAFE) Act, (116 th Cong.) , Title I, Subtitle A (Senate: S. 2053)
S. 2238, SAFE Act (116 th Cong.) , Title I, Subtitle A
2020 Election Security – Perspectives from Voting System Vendors and Experts , Hearing Before the Comm. on House Administration , 116 th (2020) (statement of Elizabeth L. Howard, Counsel, Democracy Program, Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/congressional-testimony-2020-election-security-and-election-vendors .
Lawrence Norden, Gowri Ramachandran, and Christopher Deluzio, A Framework for Election Vendor Oversight (2019), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/policy-solutions/framework-election-vendor-oversight .
Elizabeth Howard, Defending Elections: Federal Funding Needs for State Election Security (2019), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/defending-elections-federal-funding-needs-state-election-security .
Lawrence Norden, How to Secure Elections for 2020 and Beyond (2019), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/how-secure-elections-2020-and-beyond .
H.R. 1, The For the People Act, Hearing Before the Comm. on House Administration , 116 th Cong. (2019) (statement of Wendy Weiser, Director, Democracy Program, Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law), 35, https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/testimony-house-committee-administration-support-people-act .

This part would provide funds for states to conduct risk-limiting audits (RLAs) of their election results. In an RLA, election officials manually recount a sufficient number of paper ballots to ensure with a high level of statistical probability that the electronic tally is accurate. To encourage state and local officials to conduct more RLAs, this part would, among other things, direct the EAC to issue grants to state officials to conduct RLAs and establish minimum requirements for grant-funded RLAs.

H.R. 2660, Election Security Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.) , Title I, Subtitle B (Senate: S. 1540 )
H.R. 1, The For the People Act, Hearing Before the Comm. on House Administration , 116th Cong. (2019) (statement of Wendy Weiser, Director, Democracy Program, Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law), 34–35, https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/testimony-house-committee-administration-support-people-act .

This part would direct DHS (in consultation with the EAC and the National Science Foundation) to establish competitive private sector grants to incentivize research and development regarding new and efficient ways to improve the security of elections.

H.R. 2660, Election Security Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.) , Title I, Subtitle C (Senate: S. 1540 )

This subtitle aims to facilitate timely information sharing between federal and state governments about security threats faced by state election systems. It would, among other things:

authorize DHS to ease security clearances for state election officials;
direct DHS to submit annual reports to Congress on information sharing with state election officials, as well as foreign threats to election infrastructure; and
direct the director of national intelligence to prepare a comprehensive pre-election threat assessment 180 days before every regularly scheduled general election, for distribution to Congress and chief state election officials.
H.R. 2660, Election Security Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.) , Title II (Senate: S. 1540 )
H.R. 1612, Nonpartisan Bill for the People Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.) , Title III, Subtitle B

This subtitle would direct the president to develop a national strategy and implementation plan to protect democratic institutions from threats — such as cyberattacks and disinformation campaigns — from other countries and non-governmental actors (foreign and domestic). It would also establish a national commission within the legislative branch tasked with holding hearings, gathering evidence, and reporting its findings and recommendations to Congress on ways to increase protections for American democratic institutions.

H.R. 2660, Election Security Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.) , Title III (Senate: S. 1540 )
H.R. 1612, Nonpartisan Bill for the People Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.) , Title III, Subtitle C

This subtitle would expand the Help America Vote Act (HAVA)’s voluntary testing and certification process for voting machines and other equipment. Among other things, that process currently does not include electronic poll books — the equipment (usually a tablet computer loaded with voter registration data) used to check in voters and confirm their registrations. This subtitle would, among other things:

amend the definition of “voting systems” subject to voluntary testing and certification under HAVA to include electronic poll books;
direct the EAC to develop cybersecurity guidelines to incorporate into the testing and certification process;
direct the EAC to decertify equipment used in prior elections that fails to meet existing guidelines; and
require states to submit detailed information to the EAC 120 days before a general election regarding how they plan to use voting systems.
H.R. 2660, Election Security Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.) , Title IV (Senate: S. 1540 )
H.R. 2722, Securing America’s Federal Elections (SAFE) Act, (116 th Cong.) , Title II (Senate: S. 2053)
S. 2238, SAFE Act (116 th Cong.) , Title II
H.R. 1612, Nonpartisan Bill for the People Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.) , Title III, Subtitle D
H.R. 1, The For the People Act, Hearing Before the Comm. on House Administration , 116th Cong. (2019) (statement of Wendy Weiser, Director, Democracy Program, Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law), 33, https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/testimony-house-committee-administration-support-people-act .
Andrea Córdova McCadney, “Want a Simple Way to Increase Election Security? Use Paper” (2018), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/want-simple-way-increase-election-security-use-paper .
“VRM in the States: Electronic Poll-books” (2017), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/vrm-states-electronic-poll-books .

This subtitle would direct DHS to establish “bug bounty” programs for election systems. A bug bounty is compensation provided to ethical, “white hat” hackers for discovering and reporting technological vulnerabilities. Bug bounties have become a common tool in both government (including the Department of Defense) and the private sector. This subtitle would direct DHS to create programs to encourage independent cybersecurity assessments in cooperation with voluntarily participating state and local election officials and election system vendors.

H.R. 2660, Election Security Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.) , Title V (Senate: S. 1540 )
H.R. 1612, Nonpartisan Bill for the People Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.) , Title III, Subtitle E
H.R. 6188, Prevent Election Hacking Act of 2018 (115 th Cong.)
S. 2261, Secure Elections Act (115 th Cong.) , Sec. 8
Tim Lau, “U.S. Elections Are Still Vulnerable to Foreign Hacking” (2019), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/us-elections-are-still-vulnerable-foreign-hacking .

This subtitle would create a 15-member advisory committee of election security experts, appointed by the EAC’s executive director, to review election security grant applications and make recommendations to the Commission as to how money should be awarded.

H.R. 2660, Election Security Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.) , Title VI (Senate: S. 1540 )
H.R. 6663, Secure Elections Act (115 th Cong.) , Sec. 5 (Senate: S. 2593 )
S. 2261, Secure Elections Act (115 th Cong.) , Sec. 5
Elizabeth Howard, Christopher Deluzio, Paul Rosenzweig, Rachael Dean Wilson, and David Salvo, Defending Elections: Federal Funding Needs for State Election Security (2019), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/defending-elections-federal-funding-needs-state-election-security .
Christopher Deluzio, “Federal Election Security Grants Don’t Go Far Enough” (2018), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/federal-election-security-grants-dont-go-far-enough .

This subtitle would require the chair of the EAC and the secretary of homeland security to evaluate the adequacy of the funding, resources, and personnel available to implement new election security requirements and submit a report to Congress.

H.R. 2660, Election Security Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.) , Title VII (Senate: S. 1540 )
H.R. 1612, Nonpartisan Bill for the People Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.) , Title III, Subtitle F

This subtitle would direct states to ensure that, as of the November 2024 general election, all voting machines used for federal elections are manufactured in the United States, in response to concerns that have been raised about suppliers with ties to foreign governments.

H.R. 2652, Secure American-Made Voting Machines Act (116 th Cong.)
H.R. 2722, Securing America’s Federal Elections (SAFE) Act, (116 th Cong.) , Title III (Senate: S. 2053)
S. 2238, SAFE Act (116 th Cong.) , Title III

This subtitle would direct the EAC to establish a task force of experts to conduct a study on the impact of automated social media accounts (known as “bots”) on public discourse and American elections.

This subtitle would provide that if any of the other provisions of Title III are found unconstitutional, the remainder of the title would not be affected by the holding.

Title IV — Campaign Finance Transparency

The provisions in this title aim to increase campaign finance transparency, deter corruption, and prevent foreign money from infiltrating U.S. elections.

Subtitle A — Establishing Duty To Report Foreign Election Interference

Part 1 — Closing Loopholes Allowing Spending By Foreign Nationals In Elections

Part 2 — Reporting of Campaign-Related Disbursements

Part 3 — other administrative reforms, part 4 — disclosure of contributions to political committees immediately prior to election, subtitle c — strengthening oversight of online political advertising, subtitle d — stand by every ad, subtitle e — deterring foreign interference in elections, subtitle f — secret money transparency, subtitle g — shareholder right-to-know, subtitle h — disclosure of political spending by government contractors, subtitle i — limitation and disclosure requirements for presidential inaugural committees, subtitle j — miscellaneous provisions.

This subtitle would require campaigns and other political committees to report contacts with foreign governments that involve offers of unlawful campaign contributions or other substantial collaboration to influence U.S. elections. As documented in the Mueller Report, during the 2016 presidential election, President Trump’s campaign had multiple contacts with agents purportedly working on behalf of foreign governments, who in some cases claimed to possess opposition research that could help the campaign, and failed to disclose these meetings to law enforcement.

require political committees to notify the FBI and the Federal Election Commission (FEC) of all contacts with any representative of a foreign government, party, or other entity that involve offers to make a contribution or substantially collaborate to influence a U.S. election, subject to certain exemptions (including for official government business);
mandate that political committees establish certain internal reporting and compliance mechanisms to ensure accurate and timely reporting; and
direct the FBI to submit an annual report to Congress concerning notifications of reportable foreign contacts made by political committees.
H.R. 2353, Duty to Refuse and Report Foreign Interference in American Elections Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.)
H.R. 3236, Anti-Collusion Act (116 th Cong.)
H.R. 3873, Foreign Influence Reporting in Elections Act (116 th Cong.) (Senate: S. 2242)
H.R. 4617, SHIELD Act (116 th Cong.) (Senate: S. 2669 )
“Limiting Foreign Meddling in U.S. Campaigns” (2019), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/limiting-foreign-meddling-us-campaigns .
Ian Vandewalker and Lawrence Norden, Getting Foreign Funds Out of America’s Elections (2018), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/policy-solutions/getting-foreign-funds-out-americas-elections .
“Components of an Effective Law on Foreign Spending,” in The Brennan Center’s Money in Politics Toolkit (2018), https://www.brennancenter.org/sites/default/files/stock/2018_10_MiPToolkit_ForeignSpending.pdf .

Subtitle B — DISCLOSE Act

This subtitle consists of the DISCLOSE Act, which aims to bolster transparency in federal elections and strengthen safeguards against foreign interference. Citizens United made it possible for many new types of entities to spend money on electoral advocacy without being subject to any legal limits. Gaps in the law make it possible for these entities to keep their sources of funding secret — which is why their spending is often called “ dark money .” Dark money groups have spent more than $1 billion on federal elections since 2010. Almost all of this spending is concentrated on the most competitive races . Dark money is also an avenue for foreign funds to infiltrate U.S. campaigns. The DISCLOSE Act seeks to close the major loopholes responsible for dark money and make other related changes to protect the integrity of the U.S. political system. The version included in this package would also extend disclosure requirements to ads seeking to influence federal judicial nominations ( more than $30 million was spent on ads related to the last two Supreme Court nominations alone).

Part 1 — Closing Loopholes Allowing Spending by Foreign Nationals in Elections

This part would expand the prohibition on campaign spending by foreign nationals. Current law bars non-U.S. citizens or lawful permanent residents (“foreign nationals”) from making campaign contributions or certain types of expenditures in federal, state, or local elections. But this prohibition does not extend to companies they own or otherwise control, or, according to the FEC’s interpretation , to state and local ballot initiative and referenda campaigns. Moreover, it does not cover the full range of political ads, including many of the ads Kremlin operatives deployed to interfere in the 2016 election. Among other things, this part would:

clarify that foreign nationals are banned from participating in any aspect of decision-making related to campaign spending by any person, corporation, union, political committee, or other political organization;
require that any organization making a federal campaign contribution or expenditure first certify that no foreign nationals were involved in the relevant decision-making process.
clarify that the ban on foreign national campaign spending applies to ballot measure and referenda campaigns;
expand the range of communications covered by the foreign national ban to cover many of the types of political ads commonly deployed to interfere in U.S. elections, including paid issue ads funded by foreign governments or their agents;
prohibit the use of a corporation or other entity to conceal any such activity by a foreign national; and
require the FEC to conduct and publish an audit of illicit foreign spending on U.S. elections, including whether any such foreign spending attempted to depress turnout among rural communities, African American or other minority communities, or military and veteran communities.
H.R. 2135, PAID AD Act (116 th Cong.) (Senate: S. 1962 )
H.R. 2977, DISCLOSE Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.) (Senate: S. 1147 )
H.R. 4612, Firewall Act (116 th Cong.)
H.R. 4703, DEFEND Act (116 th Cong.)

This part would close loopholes that have permitted dark money groups to keep the donors who fund their campaign spending secret. Its provisions are similar to legislation passed by a number of states over the last decade, often with strong bipartisan support . Among other things, this part would:

all donors who gave at least $10,000 during that cycle, unless the donor restricted the use of funds, the funds were received in the ordinary course of the organization’s business, or disclosure would subject the donor to serious threats of harassment or reprisal;
all campaign-related disbursements above $1000, the name of the candidate supported or opposed by the disbursement, and a certification that the spending was not coordinated with any candidate; and
every person who has a substantial ownership or control interest in the organization;
give covered organizations that do not want to disclose all of their donors the option of establishing a segregated fund from which to pay for all campaign spending, in which case only donors to the fund would need to be disclosed; and
clarify that an organization that transfers funds to others for the purpose of paying for campaign spending is also subject to the Act (with special rules for transfers among corporate affiliates).
H.R. 2977, DISCLOSE Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.) (Senate: S. 1147 )

Related Research and Materials

H.R. 1, The For the People Act, Hearing Before the Comm. on House Administration , 116 th Cong. (2019) (statement of Wendy Weiser, Director, Democracy Program, Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law), 22–25, https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/testimony-house-committee-administration-support-people-act .
Daniel I. Weiner, “Response to Testimony of Bradley M. Smith to the House Committee on Oversight and Reform” (2019), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/response-testimony-bradley-m-smith-house-committee-oversight-and-reform .
“Components of an Effective Disclosure Law,” in The Brennan Center’s Money in Politics Toolkit (2018), https://www.brennancenter.org/sites/default/files/stock/2018_10_MiPToolkit_DisclosureLaw.pdf .
Chisun Lee, Katherine Valde, Benjamin T. Brickner, and Douglas Keith, Secret Spending in the States (2016), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/secret-spending-states .
Daniel I. Weiner, Citizens United Five Years Later (2015), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/citizens-united-five-years-later .
Ian Vandewalker, Election Spending 2014: Outside Spending in Senate Races Since ‘Citizens United’ (2015), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/election-spending-2014-outside-spending-senate-races-citizens-united .

This part would address certain procedural issues that have arisen in lawsuits challenging the constitutionality of federal campaign finance laws and regulations. Among other things, it would require such challenges to be filed and litigated in the federal courts of the District of Columbia. It would also require that Members of Congress be given standing to participate in such cases.

This part would require political committees to disclose to the FEC before Election Day any large contributions of $5000 or more they receive in the 20 days prior to Election Day.

This subtitle consists of the Honest Ads Act, which would increase transparency requirements for online political ads and take other steps to combat foreign interference. Most online political ads are not covered under current campaign finance laws, allowing anonymous groups to purchase targeted digital ads without disclosing who paid for them. In the 2016 election, Kremlin-backed groups took advantage of these loopholes to purchase thousands of ads , which reached millions of Americans. This subtitle would update federal transparency rules to reach the sorts of ads the Russian government and others seeking to interfere in U.S. elections commonly deploy.

extend generally applicable transparency and other rules to paid internet and digital communications that mention federal candidates in the run-up to an election and reach significant numbers of people;
strengthen “paid for” disclaimers on online ads to ensure that all ads disclose “in a clear and conspicuous manner” who paid for and authorized them;
require online platforms with at least 50 million unique monthly U.S. visitors to create a database of all requests they receive to purchase political advertisements, including a copy of the ad, the ad’s targeted audience and number of views, the rate charged for the ad, and the purchaser of the ad;
require broadcast stations, cable and satellite providers, and online platforms to make reasonable efforts to ensure that political advertisements are not purchased by foreign nationals; and
direct the FEC to commission an independent study on internet media literacy in the United States.
H.R. 2592, Honest Ads Act (116 th Cong.) (Senate: S. 1356 )
H.R. 2853, Corporate Duty to Report Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.)
Ian Vandewalker and Lawrence Norden, “We Regulate TV And Radio Ads. Facebook Ads Should Be No Different.” (2018), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/we-regulate-tv-and-radio-ads-facebook-ads-should-be-no-different .
“Components of an Effective Internet Advertising Law,” in The Brennan Center’s Money in Politics Toolkit (2018), https://www.brennancenter.org/sites/default/files/stock/2018_10_MiPToolkit_InternetAdvertising.pdf .

This subtitle consists of the Stand By Every Ad Act, which would require outside groups like super PACs who purchase political advertisements to disclose their top donors and chief officials in a disclaimer as part of the ad. Currently, disclaimers need disclose only the name of the organization that purchased the ad, which often consists of an anodyne phrase (“Americans for Prosperity,” “Priorities USA”) that is meaningless to ordinary viewers or listeners. This subtitle would, among other things:

for video and online ads, their top five donors or a link to a website with that information;
for audio ads (including prerecorded telephone calls). their top two donors or a link to a website with that information;
require a group’s highest ranking official to also disclose their name and title as part of the ad; and
create special rules for video communications lasting ten seconds or less.
H.R. 4054, Stand By Every Ad Act (116 th Cong.)
Ian Vandewalker, Election Spending 2016: Outside Groups Outspend Candidates and Parties in Key Senate Races (2016), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/election-spending-2016-outside-groups-outspend-candidates-and-parties-key .

This subtitle would create several new safeguards against foreign interference in U.S. campaigns, including by addressing various incidents documented in the Mueller Report. It would, among other things:

establish that a campaign or political committee providing or offering to provide nonpublic campaign material to a covered foreign national qualifies as soliciting a contribution or donation from a foreign national;
clarify that a formal agreement or collaboration is not necessary for a campaign expenditure to be considered to have been made in cooperation with a foreign national;
prohibit knowingly providing substantial assistance to a foreign national in making a campaign contribution;
require the FEC to notify the state in question if the FEC determines that a foreign national has initiated or attempted to initiate a disinformation campaign targeting elections in that state; and
prohibit the distribution of intentionally manipulated but authentic-seeming audio or visual media (so-called “Deepfakes”) within 60 days of an election with the intent to injure a candidate’s reputation or deceive voters.
H.R. 3442, DETER Act (116 th Cong.) (Senate: S. 1328 )
H.R. 4114, Stop Supporting Foreign Interference in Our Democracy Act (116 th Cong.)
H.R. 6088, Deepfakes in Federal Elections Prohibition Act (116 th Cong.)
Limiting Foreign Meddling in U.S. Campaigns” (2019), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/limiting-foreign-meddling-us-campaigns .
Ian Vandewalker and Lawrence Norden, Getting Foreign Funds Out of America’s Elections (2018), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/policy-solutions/getting-foreign-funds-out-americas-elections .

This subtitle would repeal a budget rider prohibiting the Internal Revenue Service from requiring greater transparency from tax-exempt organizations. Many organizations registered under section 501(c) of the Internal Revenue Code engage in substantial campaign activities but are not required to disclose their donors. Repeal of the rider would allow the IRS to require them to disclose the donors who fund their political activities as a condition of their tax-exempt status.

H.R. 868, End Dark Money Act (116 th Cong.)
Ciara Torres-Spelliscy, “Dark Money Loses a Round” (2019), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/dark-money-loses-round .

This subtitle would require publicly traded companies to consult with their shareholders before making political expenditures and permit the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to create additional requirements. Current law generally does not require that shareholders be consulted before their company spends money on politics. Because many corporations give to dark money groups that keep their donors secret, shareholders often are not even aware of a company’s political spending. In response, this subtitle would:

require publicly traded companies, before making a political expenditure, to assess the preferences of their shareholders (except those who are foreign nationals prohibited from campaign spending) regarding whether the company ought to make political expenditures, which candidates or parties the company ought to support or oppose, and which elections the company should seek to influence;
specify that if a majority of a company’s shares are held by persons prohibited by law, contract or fiduciary duty from expressing partisan or political preferences, those companies are not capable of fulfilling the requirements of this subtitle and are therefore prohibited from making political expenditures; and
repeal a budget rider prohibiting the SEC from issuing or implementing any rules related to the disclosure of political spending by publicly traded corporations.
H.R. 936, Shareholders United Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.)
Daniel I. Weiner, Citizens United Five Years Later (2015), https://www.brennancenter.org/sites/default/files/analysis/Citzens_United_%20Five_Years_Later.pdf .
Wendy Weiser, Lawrence Norden, David Earley, Jonathan Brater, and Avram Billig, “Action to Strengthen Democracy,” in 15 Executive Actions, Michael Waldman and Inimai Chettiar (2014), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/policy-solutions/15-executive-actions .
Ciara Torres-Spelliscy, Corporate Campaign Spending: Giving Shareholders A Voice (2010), https://www.brennancenter.org/sites/default/files/2019–08/Report_Corporate-Campaign-Spending-Giving-Shareholders-Voice.pdf .

This subtitle would repeal a budget rider prohibiting the president from requiring entities applying for federal contracts to disclose their political spending in federal elections. Although federal contractors are prohibited from making contributions because of the heightened risk of corruption , companies can often avoid this restriction by giving through corporate affiliates, officers or shareholders. Repeal of the budget rider would allow the president to issue an executive order requiring all contractor-affiliated contributions to be disclosed, including contributions to dark money groups that keep their donors secret.

Daniel I. Weiner, Lawrence Norden, and Brent Ferguson, Requiring Government Contractors to Disclose Political Spending (2015), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/requiring-government-contractors-disclose-political-spending .

This subtitle consists of the Presidential Inaugural Committee Oversight Act, which would impose new safeguards for donations to Presidential Inaugural Committees. Inaugural committees are currently exempt from most campaign finance regulations. Donations are unlimited and can come from corporations. While foreign nationals are prohibited from giving to inaugural committees, they have previously used intermediaries to evade these restrictions. This subtitle would, among other things:

limit donations to Inaugural Committees to $50,000 (to be adjusted going forward for inflation);
require all donations over $1000 to be disclosed within 24 hours;
prohibit Inaugural Committees from soliciting or accepting donations from corporations;
prohibit donations to Inaugural Committees that are made on behalf of another person; and
prohibit the use of money donated to an Inaugural Committee for non-Inaugural purposes, other than donations to charity.
H.R. 210, Presidential Inaugural Committee Oversight Act (116th Cong.)
H.R. 1382, Inaugural Fund Integrity Act (116 th Cong.)
Ciara Torres-Spelliscy, “The Sheer Weirdness of an Illegal Inaugural” (2019), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/sheer-weirdness-illegal-inaugural .

This subtitle would establish that each provision of Title IV will take effect on the date specified by the bill even if the FEC, the Attorney General, or any other person fails to promulgate regulations to implement any such provision. It would also provide that if any of the other provisions of Title IV are found unconstitutional, the remainder of the title would not be affected by the holding.

Title V — Campaign Finance Empowerment

The provisions in this title aim to counter the harmful effects of Citizens United v. FEC and related court decisions by empowering small donors and taking other steps to help working and middle class candidates run for office.

Subtitle A — Findings Relating to Citizens United Decision

Part 1 — my voice voucher pilot program, part 2 — small dollar financing of congressional election campaigns, subtitle c — presidential elections, subtitle d — personal use services as authorized campaign expenditures, subtitle e — empowering small dollar donations, subtitle f — severability.

This subtitle would make findings about the harmful effects of Citizens United and related court decisions. It notes that Citizens United overturned more than a century of precedent allowing reasonable campaign spending limits, including restrictions on corporate and union spending. Thanks to the Court’s decisions, wealthy special interests have spent billions of dollars to influence U.S. elections, drowning out the voices and preferences of ordinary Americans. This subtitle would find that the Constitution should be amended to allow Congress and the states to set reasonable campaign spending limits that distinguish between natural persons and artificial entities like corporations.

H.J.Res. 2, Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relating to contributions and expenditures intended to affect elections (116 th Cong.) (Senate: S.J.Res. 51 )
H.J.Res. 57, Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relating to the authority of Congress and the States to regulate contributions and expenditures in political campaigns and to enact public financing systems for such campaigns (116 th Cong.)
Ian Vandewalker, “The 2018 Small Donor Boom Was Drowned Out by Big Donors, Thanks to Citizens United” (2020), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/2018-small-donor-boom-was-drowned-out-big-donors-thanks-citizens-united .
Lawrence Norden and Iris Zhang, Fact Check: What the Supreme Court Got Wrong in its Money in Politics Decisions (2017), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/fact-check-what-supreme-court-got-wrong-its-money-politics-decisions .
Lawrence Norden, Douglas Keith, and Bren Ferguson, Five to Four (2016), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/five-four .
Chisun Lee, Brent Ferguson, and David Early, After Citizens United: The Story in the States (2014), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/after-citizens-united-story-states .

Subtitle B — Congressional Elections

This subtitle would establish a system of voluntary small donor public financing for elections to the House of Representatives, along with a funding mechanism — the “Freedom From Influence Fund” — that would fund public financing without using any taxpayer money. Citizens United and other court decisions dramatically shifted the fundraising balance in federal elections away from small donors towards elite donors able to give $100,000 or more. The latter accounted for more than a third of all the money spent in the 2018 midterms (up from less than ten percent a decade ago), with most of this total coming from donors who spent more than $1 million. A mere eleven individuals have contributed roughly a fifth of the $4.9 billion that super PACs have raised since 2010. The central role of elite donors in our political system inevitably requires elected officials to focus on their priorities, even when they are not shared by most other Americans. This system also makes it challenging for those who lack wealthy networks to run for office, including many people of color and women of all backgrounds. This subtitle would address these concerns through a fundamental overhaul of how congressional campaigns are funded.

This part would establish a “My Voice Voucher” pilot program in three states. Voucher programs typically provide eligible citizens with small grants to award to any participating candidate. The city of Seattle implemented a voucher program for city elections in 2017. Preliminary research has shown that the program allows city candidates to raise more money from city residents, and has also broadened the city’s donor base to include more women, people of color, and non-wealthy residents. This subtitle would establish a voucher pilot program in three states under which eligible voting-age citizens could request vouchers worth $25 and donate them to the congressional candidates of their choice.

H.R. 1613, Democracy Dollars Act (116 th Cong.) (Senate: S. 1274 )

This part would establish a small donor matching system for Congressional elections. Small donor matching provides candidates with a “match” of public funding for eligible private donations — for example, a private donation of $100 to a candidate participating in a 6–1 matching system would attract $600 in matching public funds, for a total contribution of $700. Small donor matching was used in presidential primary elections for decades, and has also been implemented in many states and localities. Research on New York City’s longstanding small donor matching program has found that it helps candidates to raise more money from small donors in their districts, encourages a broader and more diverse population to give, and also helps bolster diversity in who runs for office . Based in part on the success of New York City’s system, the State of New York recently adopted a small donor matching program for all state elections. This part would create a similar matching program.

establish a voluntary small donor matching system for congressional elections, under which donations of up to $200 to participating congressional candidates would be matched at a 6–1 ratio with public funds;
create a “Freedom From Influence Fund” as the exclusive source of funds for all federal public financing programs, to be funded primarily by a small surcharge on criminal or civil penalties and settlements from corporations, corporate officers, or (in very limited cases) individual tax code violators who are in the top income bracket;
specify that no taxpayer dollars may be used to support the Freedom From Influence Fund;
raise at least $50,000 in small donations from at least 1,000 individuals to qualify;
adhere to a $1,000 individual limit for all contributions (indexed to inflation) and additional fundraising restrictions;
limit use of personal funds to $50,000;
disclose all contributors;
spend public and privately raised funds at the same rate;
spend public funds only for campaign-related purposes; and
return unspent public funds exceeding $100,000.
create an “enhanced match” of up to $500,000 for participating candidates on the general election ballot who meet additional qualifications and requirements;
establish civil penalties for participating candidates who violate the terms of the program; and
require the Comptroller General to review the congressional small donor matching system after each election, including eligibility requirements, payment amounts, and the extent to which the program increases opportunities for candidates of diverse backgrounds.
H.R. 20, Government By the People Act of 2017 (115 th Cong.)
S. 1640, Fair Elections Now Act (115 th Cong.)
H.R. 3955, Empowering Citizens Act of 2017 (115 th Cong.) (Senate: S. 1931 )
Brennan Center for Justice, Faces of Small Donor Public Financing 2021 (2021), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/faces-small-donor-public-financing-2021 .
Chisun Lee, Gregory Clark, and Nirali Vyas, Small Donor Public Financing Could Advance Race and Gender Equity in Congress (2020), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/small-donor-public-financing-could-advance-race-and-gender-equity .
Ian Vandewalker and Kevin Morris, “The Reform Law Needed to Counter Citizens United: H.H.R.1” (2020), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/reform-law-needed-counter-citizens-united-hr-1 .
H.R. 1, The For the People Act, Hearing Before the Comm. on House Administration , 116 th Cong. (2019) (statement of Wendy Weiser, Director, Democracy Program, Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law), 19–21, https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/testimony-house-committee-administration-support-people-act .
Gareth Fowler and Daniel I. Weiner, Understanding H.R. 1’s Public Financing Provisions (2019), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/understanding-hr1s-public-financing-provisions-0 .
The Case for Small Donor Public Financing in New York State (2019), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/policy-solutions/case-small-donor-public-financing-new-york .
“Components of an Effective Public Financing Law,” in The Brennan Center’s Money in Politics Toolkit (2018), https://www.brennancenter.org/sites/default/files/stock/2018_10_MiPToolkit_PublicFinancingLaw.pdf .
DeNora Getachew and Ava Mehta, Breaking Down Barriers: The Faces of Small Donor Public Financing (2016), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/breaking-down-barriers-faces-small-donor-public-financing .
Daniel I. Weiner, Citizens United Five Years Later (2015), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/citizens-united-five-years-later .
Adam Skaggs and Fred Wertheimer, Empowering Small Donors in Federal Elections (2012), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/policy-solutions/empowering-small-donors-federal-elections .

This subtitle aims to revamp the existing presidential public financing program . The system, which was first introduced in 1976, matches small donations to primary candidates at a 1–1 ratio and provides a block grant to party nominees for the general election. Most major Democratic and Republican candidates, including every candidate who won their party’s nomination, used the system until 2008. In 1984, President Reagan won reelection under the system without holding any fundraisers. More recently, however, the amount of funds provided under the system and its strict limits on how much participating candidates can spend have not kept pace with the mounting cost of campaigns. Since 2012, neither major party nominee has used the system. This subtitle would update the presidential public financing system to make it once again viable. Its provisions, like those in the previous subtitle, would be funded exclusively by the new Freedom From Influence Fund.

increase the match for primary candidates to a 6–1 ratio on contributions of $200 or less;
require candidates to receive $25,000 in small donations from donors spread across 20 states in order to qualify for public funding;
impose a $1,000 individual contribution limit for participating candidates (indexed to inflation) and other requirements similar to those for participating congressional candidates under the previous subtitle;
replace general election block grants with a 6–1 match on small donations, with total public funds limited to $250 million per candidate (indexed to inflation);
eliminate expenditure limits for participating candidates in the primary and general election;
allow the national committees of political parties to spend more money in coordination with their candidates; and
require participating candidates to commit to using the public financing system and adhering to its requirements for both the primary and general election, if they win their party’s nomination.
H.R. 4053, Empower Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.) (Senate: S. 1917 )
H.R. 1, The For the People Act, Hearing Before the Comm. on House Administration , 116 th Cong. (2019) (statement of Wendy Weiser, Director, Democracy Program, Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law), 22, https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/testimony-house-committee-administration-support-people-act .
Adam Skaggs and Fred Wertheimer, Empowering Small Donors in Federal Elections (2012), https://www.brennancenter.org/sites/default/files/2019–08/Report_Empowering_Small_Donors_Federal_Elections.pdf .

This subtitle consists of the Help America Run Act (HARA), which would allow federal candidates who are not incumbents to use their campaign funds for childcare and certain other expenses. Running for office can often preclude full-time paid work. The need to cover childcare and other living expenses can function as a barrier making it harder for non-wealthy candidates, especially women, to run. While candidates are allowed to use campaign funds to pay themselves a salary up to the amount they would earn if elected, many choose not to do so . As an alternative, this subtitle would allow non-incumbents to use campaign funds to pay for child, elder, and dependent care, and health insurance premiums.

H.R. 1623, Help American Run Act (116 th Cong.) (Senate: S. 2726 )
Kristen Coopie Allen, “FEC Childcare Ruling Could Lower Institutional Barriers to Office” (2018), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/fec-childcare-ruling-could-lower-institutional-barriers-office .
Shyamala Ramakrishna, “States’ Campaign Spending Proposals Could Help Level the Playing Field for Working Parents” (2018), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/states-campaign-spending-proposals-could-help-level-playing-field-working .
Makeda Yohannes, “States and Cities Should Follow Recent FEC Ruling on Childcare” (2018), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/states-and-cities-should-follow-recent-fec-ruling-childcare .

This subtitle would allow political party committees to create designated small-donor accounts subject to fewer restrictions than other party committee accounts. Current law limits the amount of direct support traditional party organizations can give to their own candidates (including through coordinated spending), due to the risk that large donations to the parties will be used to circumvent candidate contribution limits. These and other restrictions mean that party organizations are subject to significantly more regulation than super PACs and other outside groups. This subtitle seeks to counter this imbalance and encourage the parties to raise more small contributions. It would allow them to establish special accounts funded by donors who give $200 or less, from which they could donate up to $10,000 to any federal candidate (twice the current limit of $5,000) and also spend unlimited funds in coordination with candidates.

Ian Vandewalker, “The Rise of Shadow Parties” (2018), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/rise-shadow-parties .
Daniel I. Weiner, “The Party is Broken — Because It’s Broke” (2017), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/party-broken-because-its-broke .
Ian Vandewalker and Daniel I. Weiner, Stronger Parties, Stronger Democracy: Rethinking Reform (2015), https://www.brennancenter.org/sites/default/files/publications/Stronger_Parties_Stronger_Democracy.pdf .

This subtitle would provide that if any of the other provisions of Title V are found unconstitutional, the remainder of the title would not be affected by the holding.

Title VI — Campaign Finance Oversight

This title aims to improve the administration and enforcement of campaign finance rules and take other steps to counter corruption.

Subtitle A — Restoring Integrity to America’s Elections

Subtitle b — stopping super pac-candidate coordination, subtitle c — disposal of contributions or donations, subtitle d — recommendations to ensure filing of reports before date of election, subtitle e — severability.

This subtitle would overhaul the Federal Election Commission (FEC), which is responsible for the administration and enforcement of most federal campaign finance laws. The FEC’s six seats are evenly divided between Democratic and Republican appointees. Over the last decade, as partisan polarization in Washington has increased, commissioners have been unable to reach agreement on most of the critical issues that have come before them. That has produced a steep drop off in enforcement and has also largely prevented the agency from issuing new regulations or other guidance to deal with emerging problems, such as the threat of foreign interference in U.S. elections. Currently, the FEC does not even have a quorum , preventing it from carrying out most of its statutory responsibilities. This subtitle seeks to address the FEC’s many weaknesses by bringing its structure more in line with that of other independent federal regulators, but with more safeguards against partisan overreach and other types of abuse.

reduce the number of commissioners from six to five, with no more than two commissioners from any one party (effectively requiring one commissioner to be a tie-breaking independent);
require the use of a bipartisan blue-ribbon advisory commission to publicly vet potential nominees;
give the FEC a real chairperson to serve as its chief administrative officer;
end the practice of allowing commissioners to serve indefinitely past the expiration of their terms as holdovers;
streamline the FEC’s enforcement process by giving its career staff the ability to investigate alleged violations and dismiss frivolous complaints;
extend the statute of limitations for certain campaign finance violations; and
provide for stronger judicial review of FEC enforcement decisions, including decisions to dismiss alleged violations without investigation.
H.R. 1272, Restoring Integrity to America’s Elections Act (116 th Cong.) (Senate: S. 2639 )
S. 2232, Campaign Finance Transparency Act (116 th Cong.)
Daniel I. Weiner, Get a Grip on Money in Politics (2020), https://www.seattletimes.com/opinion/get-a-grip-on-money-in-politics/ .
Daniel I. Weiner, Fixing the FEC: An Agenda for Reform (2019), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/policy-solutions/fixing-fec-agenda-reform .
H.R. 1, The For the People Act, Hearing Before the Comm. on House Administration , 116 th Cong. (2019) (statement of Wendy Weiser, Director, Democracy Program, Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law), 25–28, https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/testimony-house-committee-administration-support-people-act .
Oversight of the Federal Election Commission, Hearing Before the Comm. on House Administration , 116 th (2019) (statement of Daniel I. Weiner, Senior Counsel, Democracy Program, Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/testimony-house-committee-administration-oversight-federal-election .
Daniel I. Weiner, “FEC’s Status Quo is Hazardous — Proposed Legislation Would Help Fix It” (2019), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/fecs-status-quo-hazardous-proposed-legislation-would-help-fix-it .

This subtitle would tighten restrictions on coordination between candidates and outside groups, such as super PACs. Federal law treats spending that is coordinated with a candidate as a direct contribution to that candidate and thus subject to limits. Under Citizens United , supposedly “independent” groups like super PACs that do not make such contributions cannot be subject to any limits, on the theory that donations to them are not especially valuable to candidates, and so unlikely to be traded for government favors. But the independence of these groups is often fictitious . Many actually maintain strong ties to candidates and work closely with their campaigns. This subtitle aims to address the disconnect between Citizens United ’s core premise and the reality of how super PACs and other outside groups actually operate. It would, among other things:

expand the types of campaign spending that would be deemed a contribution if coordinated with a candidate;
clarify that an outside group’s reproduction of campaign-produced video footage (so-called “b-roll footage”) also constitutes a contribution; and
establish a new category of “coordinated spenders” whose actual ties to candidates — such as being run by their former staff or the candidate fundraising for the group — are so close that all the group’s spending in support of the candidate will treated as a direct contribution.
H.R. 4055, Stop Super PAC-Candidate Coordination Act (116 th Cong.)
H.R. 1, The For the People Act, Hearing Before the Comm. on House Administration , 116 th Cong. (2019) (statement of Wendy Weiser, Director, Democracy Program, Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law), 28–29, https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/testimony-house-committee-administration-support-people-act .
“Components of an Effective Coordination Law,” in The Brennan Center’s Money in Politics Toolkit (2018), https://www.brennancenter.org/sites/default/files/stock/2018_10_MiPToolkit_CoordinationLaw.pdf .
Brent Ferguson, Candidates & Super PACs: The New Model in 2016 (2015), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/candidates-super-pacs-new-model-2016 .
Chisun Lee, Brent Ferguson, and David Earley, After Citizens United: The Story in the States (2014), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/after-citizens-united-story-states .

This subtitle would require disposal of unused campaign funds. Former candidates are currently permitted to hold onto unused campaign funds indefinitely, including after they become registered lobbyists. This subtitle would require candidates to dispose of unused campaign funds no later than six years after the last election in which the candidate ran, or earlier, if the candidate becomes a registered lobbyist. After paying off debts, candidates could dispose of funds by returning money to contributors or donating them to a charitable organization or political party committee.

H.R. 1308, Let It Go Act (116 th Cong.)

The subtitle would direct the FEC to issue a report to Congress on how best to ensure that all political donations are disclosed before election day. Current reporting rules allow some donations to be disclosed after the election. In the 2018 election cycle, seventeen newly created super PACs spent over $29 million without having to report their donors until votes had already been cast.

Joanna Zdanys, In Alabama, Senate Race Raises Disclosure Concerns (2017), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/alabama-senate-race-raises-disclosure-concerns .

This subtitle would provide that if any of the other provisions of Title VI are found unconstitutional, the remainder of the title would not be affected by the holding.

Title VII — Ethical Standards

This title would, among other things, require new ethical standards for Supreme Court justices and presidential appointees, bolster enforcement of rules governing foreign agents operating in the United States, and strengthen lobbying disclosure rules.

Subtitle A — Supreme Court Ethics

Subtitle b — foreign agents registration, subtitle c — lobbying disclosure reform, subtitle d — recusal of presidential appointees, subtitle e — clearinghouse on lobbying information.

This subtitle would require a code of ethics for the United States Supreme Court. The Court’s nine justices are the only U.S. judges — state or federal — not bound by a written code of ethical conduct. All other federal judges are subject to the official Code of Conduct for United States Judges , which requires them to uphold the integrity and independence of the judiciary and governs matters like recusal, financial disclosure, outside employment, partisan political engagement, and gifts. This subtitle would require the Judicial Conference of the United States to issue a code of ethics for the entire federal judiciary, including the justices of the Supreme Court, within one year of enactment.

H.R. 1057, Supreme Court Ethics Act (116 th Cong.) (Senate: S. 393 )
H.R. 1612, Nonpartisan Bill for the People Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.) , Title VI, Subtitle A
H.R. 7140, Anti-Corruption and Public Integrity Act (115 th Cong.), Title IV (Senate: S. 3357)
Johanna Kalb and Alicia Bannon, Supreme Court Ethics Reform (2019) , https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/supreme-court-ethics-reform .
Wendy R. Weiser, Myrna Pérez, Daniel I. Weiner, and Max Feldman, Letter to House Judiciary Committee in Support of the For the People Act (2019), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/letter-house-judiciary-committee-support-people-act .

This subtitle would expand enforcement and make other changes with respect to the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) . FARA requires U.S. agents working on behalf of a foreign government or other foreign principal to register with the attorney general and report political and lobbying activities. It also requires public communications on behalf of a foreign principal to be identified as such. A 2016 report by the Department of Justice (DOJ) inspector general found that FARA was significantly under-enforced. The Mueller Report documented a number of instances of individuals or entities who should have registered under FARA but failed to do so —including Kremlin-backed media organizations that produced content used in the Russian government’s disinformation campaign that targeted the 2016 election. In response, this subtitle would, among other things:

establish a dedicated FARA investigation and enforcement unit within DOJ;
authorize civil as well as criminal penalties for FARA violators, and bar foreign principals from paying civil penalties on behalf of agents who fail to register;
require agents registered under FARA to disclose all transactions of financial value between their foreign principal and federal or state officeholders;
require all FARA registration statements to be made accessible online; and
require agents registered under FARA to include disclosure statements when posting materials on behalf of a foreign principal to an online platform.
H.R. 1467, Protect Against Unlawful Lobbying (PAUL) Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.)
H.R. 1612, Nonpartisan Bill for the People Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.) , Title VI, Subtitle B
Limiting Foreign Meddling in U.S. Campaigns (2019), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/limiting-foreign-meddling-us-campaigns .
The Mueller Report Exposed Weaknesses in U.S. Democratic Institutions that H.H.R. 1 Would Address (2019), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/mueller-report-exposed-weaknesses-us-democratic-institutions-hr-1-would .

This subtitle would increase federal lobbying disclosure requirements. The Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995 (LDA) requires individuals and entities who spent at least 20 percent of their time lobbying federal officials to register as lobbyists and disclose their clients, issues on which they lobbied, and other information. But the Act defines lobbying to exclude many activities that can be critical to the provision of lobbying services, including paid strategic advice from consultants and advisors (who are often former officials themselves). This subtitle would address this perceived gap and make other changes to the LDA. It would, among other things:

amend the LDA’s definition of lobbying to include strategic advice and counseling in support of lobbying efforts, even if the individual providing these services does not have direct contact with a public official;
lower the LDA’s lobbyist registration threshold to 10 percent;
prohibit individuals from being compensated for lobbying on behalf of foreign countries that the president has identified as perpetrators of gross human rights violations; and
require federally registered lobbyists to disclose their status as lobbyists at the time of contact with high level executive or legislative branch officials.
H.R. 783, Lobbyist Loophole Closure Act (116 th Cong.)
H.R. 1612, Nonpartisan Bill for the People Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.) , Title VI, Subtitle C

This subtitle would require presidential appointees to recuse themselves from government matters to which the president or their spouse is a party. Executive branch officials (except for the president and vice president) are generally required to recuse from matters in which they have a personal financial interest distinct from that of the general public, but the requirement does not extend to matters involving the official who appointed and can remove them. President Trump’s continued ownership and control of businesses that have contracts with the government and White House interference in the Mueller investigation are among the recent episodes that have raised the prospect of presidents using their authority to exert pressure on their appointees for personal gain. In an effort to guard against this risk, this subtitle would:

require all presidential appointees to recuse themselves from matters (such as investigations, contract negotiations, permitting proceedings, etc.) to which the president, the president’s spouse, or an entity in which the president or their spouse have substantial interest is a party; and
direct that matters from which a presidential appointee is recused under this subtitle generally be handled by a career civil servant (except for instances where the recused appointee is part of a multi-member board whose other members are not required to recuse).
S. 882, Presidential Conflicts of Interest Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.)
H.R. 1612, Nonpartisan Bill for the People Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.) , Title VI, Subtitle D
Preet Bharara, Christine Todd Whitman, et al., Proposals for Reform , National Task Force on Rule of Law & Democracy (2018), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/policy-solutions/proposals-reform-national-task-force-rule-law-democracy .
Daniel I. Weiner, Strengthening Presidential Ethics Law (2017), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/policy-solutions/strengthening-presidential-ethics-law .

This subtitle aims to ensure easy public access to registration statements filed under the LDA and FARA . It would direct the attorney general to create a database and make it accessible online in a searchable, sortable format.

This subtitle would provide that if any of the other provisions of Title VII are found unconstitutional, the remainder of the title would not be affected by the holding.

Title VIII — Ethics Reforms for the President, Vice President, and Federal Officers and Employees

This title would create a variety of new ethics requirements for executive branch officials, including the president and vice president, and bolster enforcement of ethics rules in the executive branch.

Subtitle A — Executive Branch Conflict of Interest

Subtitle b — presidential conflicts of interest, subtitle c — white house ethics transparency, subtitle d — executive branch ethics enforcement, subtitle e — conflicts from political fundraising, subtitle f — transition team ethics, subtitle g — ethics pledge for senior executive branch employees, subtitle h — travel on private aircraft by senior political appointees, subtitle i — severability.

This subtitle would address conflicts of interest in the executive branch. It is common in Washington, D.C. for high-level officials to move back and forth between government and the private sector (the so-called “ revolving door ”). Ethics rules provide some constraint on official self-dealing, but often do not prevent senior government officials from overseeing matters likely to be of interest to past or future employers, leaving government to lobby their former colleagues (following a brief one-year cooling-off period ), or even selling goods and services to the government (as some of President’s Trump’s businesses routinely do ). This subtitle aims to close these gaps by tightening relevant ethics standards in several respects.

require officials to recuse from matters in which they know or should have known that a former employer or client had a financial interest;
prohibit federal employees from awarding contracts to their former employers for two years after leaving a company, and from joining an industry they oversaw for two years after leaving government service;
increase the cooling-off period before senior officials can lobby their former colleagues from one to two years;
outlaw private sector compensation for government work, such as accelerated bonuses or other incentive payments to encourage employees to join the government;
direct the Office of Government Ethics (OGE) to issue guidance on ethical standards for unpaid agency employees; and
restrict federal funds from being spent at businesses owned or controlled by the president, vice president, cabinet members, or any of their families.
H.R. 599, Executive Branch Conflict of Interest Act (116 th Cong.) (Senate: S. 156 )
H.R. 1612, Nonpartisan Bill for the People Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.) , Title VII, Subtitle A
H.R. 1: Strengthening Ethics Rules for the Executive Branch, Hearing Before the Comm. on Oversight and Reform , 116th Cong. (2019) (statement of Rudy Mehrbani, Spitzer Fellow and Senior Counsel at the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU Law), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/testimony-support-people-act .

This subtitle would require the president and vice president to divest from any personal financial holdings that could pose a conflict of interest with their official duties. The president and vice president are exempt from many federal ethics rules, including the prohibition on financial conflicts of interest . To avoid even an appearance of impropriety, past presidents going back to the 1960s limited their personal holdings to assets like cash and treasury bonds, or used a blind trust — a financial arrangement in which assets are kept hidden from beneficiaries and administered by an independent trustee. President Trump broke with this tradition when he became president, choosing to maintain effective ownership and control of his many businesses. According to ethics experts , this has created at least an appearance of numerous conflicts of interest, making it hard to discern where the public’s interests end and the president’s self-interest begins. This subtitle aims to address this concern and restore the prior longstanding practice. It also addresses legal defense funds for federal officials, which are currently exempt from most gift rules.

require the president and vice president to limit personal holdings to assets that do not pose any potential conflict of interest, or use a blind trust;
require additional financial disclosures beyond those required for other federal officials from the president, vice president and their immediate family members;
prohibit the president, vice president, and cabinet members from entering into contracts with the United States government; and
set a $5,000 limit on donations to legal defense funds, and ban donations from a variety of sources, including lobbyists, foreign governments, and persons doing business with the official for whose benefit a fund was established or the agency where the official works.
H.R. 371, Presidential Conflicts of Interest Act of 2017 (115 th Cong.) (Senate: S. 65 )
Lawrence Norden and Daniel I. Weiner, “Tax Returns Aren’t Enough” (2017), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/tax-returns-arent-enough .
Daniel I. Weiner, “The White House Isn’t Doing Its Staff Any Favors By Not Setting Limits on Who Can Pay Their Legal Fees” (2017), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/white-house-isnt-doing-its-staff-any-favors-not-setting-limits-who-can .

This subtitle would require transparency for White House ethics waivers. Recent presidents, including President Trump, have issued executive orders prohibiting members of the executive branch from, among other things, working on matters involving previous clients or colleagues and serving as registered lobbyists for a set amount of time after leaving government service. However, the White House can issue waivers that exempt officials from these rules. This subtitle would require these waivers to be transmitted to OGE and direct OGE to make copies of the waivers available to the public online, as well as issue a report to Congress. This requirement would also apply retroactively to waivers issued since January 2017.

H.R. 391, White House Ethics Transparency Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.)
H.R. 1612, Nonpartisan Bill For the People Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.) , Title VII, Subtitle C

The subtitle would strengthen ethics enforcement in the executive branch and make other changes. Under the Ethics in Government Act of 1978 , OGE is the primary agency responsible for administering executive branch ethics rules. OGE can promulgate regulations, but it has extremely limited investigative and enforcement power. Trump Administration officials have questioned whether the agency’s rules even apply to White House staff. OGE also exercises little direct control over agency ethics officials, who typically report to political appointees. And the agency lacks many of the hallmarks of a truly independent watchdog — most notably, there are no statutory limits on the president’s ability to remove OGE’s director before the end of their term. This subtitle would address these issues to bring OGE more in line with other independent watchdog agencies. It would also tighten certain other rules governing official travel for high-level appointees.

limit the president’s authority to remove OGE’s director before the expiration of their term and empower the director to submit their own budget proposals to Congress;
conduct formal investigations of suspected ethics violations, including through the issuance of subpoenas; and
review and approve conflict of interest and similar determinations by agency ethics officials, as well as all waivers of conflict of interest rules;
clarify that OGE ethics regulations and other guidance are binding on all federal employees, including White House staff;
prohibit the use of appropriated federal funds for senior government officials’ travel expenses in violation of specified regulations; and
require the secretary of defense to submit reports to the House Armed Services Committee every 90 days, detailing the direct and indirect costs of all presidential travel and senior executive travel on military aircraft.
H.R. 745, Executive Branch Comprehensive Ethics Enforcement Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.)
H.R. 1463, Taxpayers DIME Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.)
H.R. 1612, Nonpartisan Bill For the People Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.) , Title VII, Subtitle D

This subtitle would require more disclosure of political donations and fundraising by cabinet members and other senior appointees, which can give rise to conflicts of interest. It would require these officials to disclose all campaign contributions they make or solicit from others, including donations to “dark money” groups that otherwise keep their donors secret.

H.R. 812, Conflicts from Political Fundraising Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.) (Senate: S. 232 )
H.R. 1612, Nonpartisan Bill for the People Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.) , Title VII, Subtitle E

The subtitle would address ethics for presidential transition teams. Transition teams play a critical role in formulating policy for a new presidential administration, but their members are not federal employees and are not bound by federal ethics rules. This subtitle would require presidents-elect to adopt and enforce ethics rules for their transition teams, including rules prohibiting conflicts of interest and requiring transition team members to disclose their recent employers and sources of compensation.

S. 394, Presidential Transition Enhancement Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.)
H.R. 964, Transition Team Ethics Improvement Act (116 th Cong.) (Senate: S. 338)
H.R. 1612, Nonpartisan Bill for the People Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.) , Title VII, Subtitle F

This subtitle would require all senior executive branch appointees to take an ethics pledge. Every president since John F. Kennedy has issued an executive order imposing additional ethics requirements on high-level appointees beyond those required by federal statute. Presidents Clinton, Obama, and Trump each signed executive orders requiring officials to pledge to abide by certain standards, including not accepting lobbyist gifts and adhering to a two-year waiting period before lobbying themselves. This subtitle would codify the executive order used in the Obama administration.

H.R. 209, Ethics in Public Service Act (116 th Cong.)
H.R. 1523, To amend the Ethics in Government Act of 1978 to require Federal political appointees to sign a binding ethics pledge, and for other purposes (116 th Cong.)
H.R. 1612, Nonpartisan Bill for the People Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.) , Title VII, Subtitle G

This subtitle would restrict travel on private aircraft by cabinet members and other senior appointees. In recent years, media investigations have revealed senior executive branch officials’ use of taxpayer funds for luxury private jet travel . This subtitle would prohibit the use of federal funds for such travel except where no commercial flights are available.

H.R. 706, Restoring the Public Trust Act (116 th Cong.) , Title I, Subtitle B
H.R. 3876, SWAMP FLYERS Act (115 th Cong.)

This subtitle would provide that if any of the other provisions of Title VIII are found unconstitutional, the remainder of the title would not be affected by the holding.

Title IX — Congressional Ethics Reform

This title addresses legislative branch ethics.

Subtitle A — Requiring Members of Congress to Reimburse Treasury for Amounts Paid as Settlements and Awards Under Congressional Accountability Act of 1995

Subtitle b — conflicts of interests, subtitle c — campaign finance and lobbying disclosure, subtitle d — access to congressionally mandated reports, subtitle e — reports on outside compensation earned by congressional employees.

This subtitle addresses workplace discrimination claims against members of Congress. Between 1997 and 2017, the Office of Congressional Workplace Rights (formerly the Office of Compliance) used more than $17 million of taxpayer funds to settle harassment claims raised by federal employees against members of Congress. In response, in 2018, Congress passed the Congressional Accountability Act of 1995 Reform Act , which requires members of Congress to reimburse the Treasury for any awards or settlements paid in connection to claims of workplace harassment. This subtitle would expand the reimbursement requirement to include all employment discrimination claims.

H.R. 5464, To amend the Congressional Accountability Act of 1995 to require Members of Congress to reimburse the Treasury for amounts paid as settlements and awards under such Act in all cases of employment discrimination acts committed personally by Members, to require the General Counsel of the Office of Congressional Workplace Rights to conduct an investigation of all workplace discrimination claims filed by covered employees under such Act, and for other purposes (116 th Cong.)
H.R. 4503, Empowering Victims of Sexual Misconduct Act (115 th Cong.)
H.R. 4484, Victims’ Voice and Transparency Act (115 th Cong.)
H.R. 4540, To amend the Congressional Accountability Act of 1995 to require Members of Congress to reimburse the Treasury for amounts paid as awards and settlements under the Congressional Accountability Act of 1995 in connection with violations of such Act which were committed personally by the Members, to prohibit the imposition of nondisclosure agreements as a condition of the payment of an award or settlement in connection with a violation of such Act, and for other purposes (115 th Cong.)

This subtitle would strengthen conflict of interest rules for members of Congress. Like the president, members of Congress are exempt from many federal ethics laws, including the prohibition on financial conflicts of interest . Members of the House (but not the Senate ) are also allowed to serve on for-profit corporate boards. To address such gaps, this subtitle would:

amend House rules to prohibit House members from serving on the boards of for-profit companies; and
bar members of the House and Senate and their staff from working to advance legislation with the primary purpose of furthering their personal financial interests or those of their immediate family.
H.Res. 157, Restoring Integrity in Democracy Resolution (116 th Cong.)
H.R. 1612, Nonpartisan Bill for the People Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.) , Title VIII, Subtitle B

This subtitle would increase transparency requirements for campaign spending by registered lobbyists. Campaign spending is a common way for lobbyists to influence elected leaders. This subtitle aims to provide voters with more information about the interests that support particular candidates by:

requiring candidates to disclose whether a particular donor is a registered lobbyist in the candidate’s FEC filings; and
requiring those who make independent campaign expenditures to disclose if they are a registered lobbyist in their own FEC filings.
H.R. 842, CLEAR Act (116 th Cong.) (Senate: S. 547 )

This subtitle would enhance access to the thousands of reports to Congress that cabinet departments and bodies submit every year, by requiring the Government Publishing Office (GPO) to make them available on a searchable, public online portal. It would also limit the ability of agencies to alter or remove finished reports.

H.R. 736, Access to Congressionally Mandated Reports Act (116 th Cong.) (Senate: S. 195 )
H.R. 1612, Nonpartisan Bill for the People Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.) , Title IX, Subtitle D
H.R.4504, Transparency in Government Act of 2017 (115 th Cong.) , Title II, Subtitle B
Preet Bharara, Christine Todd Whitman, et al., Proposals for Reform Volume II , National Task Force on Rule of Law & Democracy (2019), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/policy-solutions/proposals-reform-volume-ii-national-task-force-rule-law-democracy .

This subtitle would require reporting of outside compensation for congressional staff. Both public and private organizations are permitted to sponsor congressional fellows to work on the staff of members or committees, so long as they do not work on matters of direct or indirect benefit to the sponsoring organization. To help ensure compliance with this restriction and other ethical standards, this subtitle would require the supervisor for any employee who receives compensation from outside the federal government to submit a quarterly report to the House or Senate ethics committee detailing the source, total amount, and rate of the employee’s outside compensation.

H.Con.Res. 62, Requiring the Supervisors of Employees of Congressional Offices to Submit Reports on the Outside Compensation Earned by Such Employees, And for Other Purposes (116 th Cong.)

This subtitle would provide that if any of the other provisions of Title IX are found unconstitutional, the remainder of the title would not be affected by the holding.

Title X — Presidential and Vice Presidential Tax Transparency

This title would require sitting presidents, vice presidents, and major-party candidates for those offices to disclose their tax returns. From 1973 to 2016, every sitting president, vice president, and major party nominee for those offices disclosed at least some personal tax information to the public. While tax returns do not reveal everything about a candidate or officeholder’s personal finances, they can shed some light on potential conflicts of interest and confirm that the individual is paying their fair share. In 2016, President Trump became the first major party nominee since the 1970s to disclose no personal tax information, a practice he continued once elected. This title seeks to restore and codify the longstanding norm of tax return disclosure. It would, among other things, require disclosure of personal income tax returns and the returns of any businesses of which the filer is the sole or principal owner, going back ten years.

H.R. 273, Presidential Tax Transparency Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.)
S. 20, Presidential Tax Transparency Act (116 th Cong.)
H.R. 1612, Nonpartisan Bill for the People Act of 2019 (116 th Cong.) , Title IX
Tim Lau and Rudy Mehrbani, The Debate Over Trump’s Tax Returns (2019), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/debate-over-trumps-tax-returns .
Daniel I. Weiner and Lawrence Norden, Presidential Transparency: Beyond Tax Returns (2017), https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/presidential-transparency-beyond-tax-returns .

How to Detect and Guard Against Deceptive AI-Generated Election Information

Time-tested factchecking practices will help limit the effectiveness and spread of misleading election information.

Capitol building in background and "Black Lives Matter" sign held up in the foreground

Records Show DC and Federal Law Enforcement Sharing Surveillance Info on Racial Justice Protests

Officers tracked social media posts about racial justice protests with no evidence of violence, threatening First Amendment rights.

How Could Trump’s New York Hush Money Trial End?

Opposing originalism, trump’s use of campaign funds to pay legal bills, can we trust the jury in trump's manhattan trial, the election year risks of ai, informed citizens are democracy’s best defense.

Find a Lawyer
Ask a Lawyer
Research the Law
Law Schools
Laws & Regs
Newsletters
Justia Connect
Pro Membership
Basic Membership
Justia Lawyer Directory
Platinum Placements
Gold Placements
Justia Elevate
Justia Amplify
PPC Management
Google Business Profile
Social Media
Justia Onward Blog

2021 Montana Code Annotated

Title 1. General Laws and Definitions
Title 2. Government Structure and Administration
Title 3. Judiciary, Courts
Title 4. Reserved
Title 5. Legislative Branch
Title 6. Reserved
Title 7. Local Government
Titles 8 and 9. Reserved
Title 10. Military Affairs and Disaster and Emergency Services
Titles 11 and 12. Reserved
Title 13. Elections
Title 14. Reserved
Title 15. Taxation
Title 16. Alcohol, Tobacco, and Marijuana
Title 17. State Finance
Title 18. Public Contracts
Title 19. Public Retirement Systems
Title 20. Education
Title 21. Reserved
Title 22. Libraries, Arts, and Antiquities
Title 23. Parks, Recreation, Sports, and Gambling
Title 24. Reserved
Title 25. Civil Procedure
Title 26. Evidence
Title 27. Civil Liability, Remedies, and Limitations
Title 28. Contracts and Other Obligations
Title 29. Reserved
Title 30. Trade and Commerce
Title 31. Credit Transactions and Relationships
Title 32. Financial Institutions
Title 33. Insurance and Insurance Companies
Title 34. Reserved
Title 35. Corporations, Partnerships, and Associations
Title 36. Reserved
Title 37. Professions and Occupations
Title 38. Reserved
Title 39. Labor
Title 40. Family Law
Title 41. Minors
Title 42. Adoption
Title 43. Reserved
Title 44. Law Enforcement
Title 45. Crimes
Title 46. Criminal Procedure
Title 47. Access to Legal Services
Title 48. Reserved
Title 49. Human Rights
Title 50. Health and Safety
Title 51. Reserved
Title 52. Family Services
Title 53. Social Services and Institutions
Titles 54. - 59. Reserved
Title 60. Highways and Transportation
Title 61. Motor Vehicles
Titles 62. - 66. Reserved
Title 67. Aeronautics
Title 68. Reserved
Title 69. Public Utilities and Carriers
Title 70. Property
Title 71. Mortgages, Pledges, and Liens
Title 72. Estates, Trusts, and Fiduciary Relationships
Titles 73 and 74. Reserved
Title 75. Environmental Protection
Title 76. Land Resources and Use
Title 77. State Lands
Titles 78 and 79. Reserved
Title 80. Agriculture
Title 81. Livestock
Title 82. Minerals, Oil, and Gas
Titles 83 and 84. Reserved
Title 85. Water Use
Title 86. Reserved
Title 87. Fish and Wildlife
Titles 88 and 89. Reserved
Title 90. Planning, Research, and Development
Titles 91. - 99. Reserved

Get free summaries of new opinions delivered to your inbox!

Bankruptcy Lawyers
Business Lawyers
Criminal Lawyers
Employment Lawyers
Estate Planning Lawyers
Family Lawyers
Personal Injury Lawyers
Estate Planning
Personal Injury
Business Formation
Business Operations
Intellectual Property
International Trade
Real Estate
Financial Aid
Course Outlines
Law Journals
US Constitution
Regulations
Supreme Court
Circuit Courts
District Courts
Dockets & Filings
State Constitutions
State Codes
State Case Law
Legal Blogs
Business Forms
Product Recalls
Justia Connect Membership
Justia Premium Placements
Justia Elevate (SEO, Websites)
Justia Amplify (PPC, GBP)
Testimonials

United States Sentencing Commission

Drug Conversion Calculator
Drug Quantity Calculator

Sentencing Table

Tutorial Video
Organizational Guidelines
The Commission promulgates guidelines that judges consult when sentencing federal offenders. When the guidelines are amended, a subsequent Guidelines Manual is published.
In this section, you will find the Commission’s comprehensive archive of yearly amendments and Guidelines Manuals dating back to 1987.
By Geography
By Guideline
Prison Impact Reports
Retroactivity Reports
Compassionate Release
Research Notes
Tutorial Videos
Reports At A Glance
Reports To Congress
Quick Facts
List of Publications

RESEARCH & DATA MISSION

The Commission collects, analyzes, and disseminates a broad array of information on federal crime and sentencing practices.
In this section, you will find a comprehensive collection of research and data reports published on sentencing issues and other areas of federal crime.
Meetings & Hearings
Federal Register Notices
Public Comment
Amendments In Brief
Data Briefings on Proposed Amendments
The Commission establishes sentencing policies and practices for the federal courts. Each year, the Commission reviews and refines these policies in light of congressional action, decisions from courts of appeals, sentencing-related research, and input from the criminal justice community.
In this section, you can follow the Commission’s work through the amendment cycle as priorities are set, research is performed, testimony is heard, and amendments are adopted.
The Commission serves as an information resource for Congress, the executive branch, the courts, criminal justice practitioners, the academic community, and the public.
In this section, you will find resources to assist you in understanding and applying the federal sentencing guidelines.
Bureau of Prisons Issues
Categorical Approach
Criminal History
Multiple Counts/Grouping
Relevant Conduct
See All Topics
Decision Trees
See All Product Types
Training Sessions Archive
Request Customized Training
CLE Information
Supreme Court Cases
Case Law Update
Problem-Solving Court Resources
Glossary of Sentencing Terms
HelpLine Question?
Former Commissioners
Organization
Advisory Groups
Press Releases
Submissions & Speeches
Commission Chats Podcast
The U.S. Sentencing Commission is an independent agency in the judicial branch that was created as part of the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984. Commissioners are nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate. The Attorney General, or the Attorney General’s designee, and the Chair of the U.S. Parole Commission serve as ex officio , nonvoting members of the Commission.
In this section, learn about the Commission’s mission, structure, and ongoing work.
Acquitted Conduct
Alternatives to Incarceration
Career Offenders
First Step Act of 2018
Mandatory Minimums
Prison Issues
Problem-Solving Courts
Retroactivity
Youthful Individuals

2021 Guidelines Manual Annotated

A message from the acting chair.

"As many of you know, since early 2019, the United States Sentencing Commission has been operating without the quorum of four voting members required by statute to promulgate amendments to the sentencing guidelines, policy statements, and commentary... The Commission has received feedback indicating that hard copies of the 2018 Guidelines Manual are significantly worn and that there is a limited supply of new copies available. In addition, the Commission has identified the need to update Appendix B, the accompanying volume to the Guidelines Manual that compiles the principal statutory provisions governing sentencing, the Commission, and the drafting of sentencing guidelines. Congress has amended several of the statutory provisions contained in Appendix B since the Commission released the 2018 Guidelines Manual . As acting chair of the Commission, I am pleased to transmit this edition of the Guidelines Manual ..."

The 2021 edition contains:

a reprint of the guidelines, policy statements, and commentary contained in the 2018 Guidelines Manual ;
an updated version of Appendix B (containing the principal statutory provisions governing sentencing, the Commission, and the drafting of sentencing guidelines as of August 1, 2021 ); and,
a reprint of the 2018 version of the Supplement to Appendix C.

The 2021 Guidelines Manual is also available on the Guidelines App , a mobile-friendly web-based app that features additional tools to assist in understanding and applying the federal sentencing guidelines.

Guidelines Manual Annotated

CHAPTER ONE - Introduction, Authority, and General Application Principles

Part A - Introduction and Authority

Introduction and Authority

Part B - General Application Principles

§1B1.1. Application Instructions §1B1.2. Applicable Guidelines §1B1.3. Relevant Conduct (Factors that Determine the Guideline Range) §1B1.4. Information to be Used in Imposing Sentence (Selecting a Point Within the Guideline Range or Departing from the Guidelines) §1B1.5. Interpretation of References to Other Offense Guidelines §1B1.6. Structure of the Guidelines §1B1.7. Significance of Commentary §1B1.8. Use of Certain Information §1B1.9. Class B or C Misdemeanors and Infractions §1B1.10. Reduction in Term of Imprisonment as a Result of Amended Guideline Range (Policy Statement) §1B1.11. Use of Guidelines Manual in Effect on Date of Sentencing (Policy Statement) §1B1.12. Persons Sentenced Under the Federal Juvenile Delinquency Act (Policy Statement) §1B1.13. Reduction in Term of Imprisonment Under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A) (Policy Statement)

CHAPTER TWO - Offense Conduct

Part A - Offenses Against the Person

Homicide §2A1.1. First Degree Murder §2A1.2. Second Degree Murder §2A1.3. Voluntary Manslaughter §2A1.4. Involuntary Manslaughter §2A1.5. Conspiracy or Solicitation to Commit Murder
Assault §2A2.1. Assault with Intent to Commit Murder; Attempted Murder §2A2.2. Aggravated Assault §2A2.3. Assault §2A2.4. Obstructing or Impeding Officers
Criminal Sexual Abuse and Offenses Related to Registration as a Sex Offender §2A3.1. Criminal Sexual Abuse; Attempt to Commit Criminal Sexual Abuse §2A3.2. Criminal Sexual Abuse of a Minor Under the Age of Sixteen Years (Statutory Rape) or Attempt to Commit Such Acts §2A3.3. Criminal Sexual Abuse of a Ward or Attempt to Commit Such Acts §2A3.4. Abusive Sexual Contact or Attempt to Commit Abusive Sexual Contact §2A3.5. Failure to Register as a Sex Offender §2A3.6. Aggravated Offenses Relating to Registration as a Sex Offender
Kidnapping, Abduction, or Unlawful Restraint §2A4.1. Kidnapping, Abduction, Unlawful Restraint §2A4.2. Demanding or Receiving Ransom Money
Air Piracy and Offenses Against Mass Transportation Systems §2A5.1. Aircraft Piracy or Attempted Aircraft Piracy §2A5.2. Interference with Flight Crew Member or Flight Attendant; Interference with Dispatch, Navigation, Operation, or Maintenance of Mass Transportation Vehicle §2A5.3. Committing Certain Crimes Aboard Aircraft
Threatening or Harassing Communications, Hoaxes, Stalking, and Domestic Violence §2A6.1. Threatening or Harassing Communications; Hoaxes; False Liens §2A6.2. Stalking or Domestic Violence

Part B - Basic Economic Offenses

Theft, Embezzlement, Receipt of Stolen Property, Property Destruction and Offenses Involving Fraud or Deceit §2B1.1. Larceny, Embezzlement, and Other Forms of Theft; Offenses Involving Stolen Property; Property Damage or Destruction; Fraud and Deceit; Forgery; Offenses Involving Altered or Counterfeit Instruments Other than Counterfeit Bearer Obligation of the United States §2B1.2. [Deleted] §2B1.3. [Deleted] §2B1.4. Insider Trading §2B1.5. Theft of, Damage to, or Destruction of, Cultural Heritage Resources; Unlawful Sale, Purchase, Exchange, Transportation or Receipt of Cultural Heritage Resources §2B1.6. Aggravated Identity Theft
Burglary and Trespass §2B2.1. Burglary of a Residence or a Structure Other than a Residence §2B2.2. [Deleted] §2B2.3. Trespass
Robbery, Extortion, and Blackmail §2B3.1. Robbery §2B3.2. Extortion by Force or Threat of Injury or Serious Damage §2B3.3. Blackmail and Similar Forms of Extortion
Commercial Bribery and Kickbacks §2B4.1. Bribery in Procurement of Bank Loan and Other Commercial Bribery
Counterfeiting and Infringement of Copyright or Trademark §2B5.1. Offenses Involving Counterfeit Bearer Obligations of the United States §2B5.2. [Deleted] §2B5.3. Criminal Infringement of Copyright or Trademark §2B5.4. [Deleted]
Motor Vehicle Identification Numbers §2B6.1. Altering or Removing Motor Vehicle Identification Numbers, or Trafficking in Motor Vehicles or Parts with Altered or Obliterated Identification Numbers

Part C - Offenses Involving Public Officials and Violation of Federal Election Campaign Laws

§2C1.1. Offering, Giving, Soliciting, or Receiving a Bribe; Extortion Under Color of Official Right; Fraud Involving the Deprivation of the Intangible Right to Honest Services of Public Officials; Conspiracy to Defraud by Interference with Governmental Functions §2C1.2. Offering, Giving, Soliciting, or Receiving a Gratuity §2C1.3. Conflict of Interest; Payment or Receipt of Unauthorized Compensation §2C1.4. [Deleted] §2C1.5. Payments to Obtain Public Office §2C1.6. [Deleted] §2C1.7. [Deleted] §2C1.8. Making, Receiving, or Failing to Report a Contribution, Donation, or Expenditure in Violation of the Federal Election Campaign Act; Fraudulently Misrepresenting Campaign Authority; Soliciting or Receiving a Donation in Connection with an Election While on Certain Federal Property

Part D - Offenses Involving Drugs and Narco-Terrorism

Unlawful Manufacturing, Importing, Exporting, Trafficking, or Possession; Continuing Criminal Enterprise §2D1.1. Unlawful Manufacturing, Importing, Exporting, or Trafficking (Including Possession with Intent to Commit These Offenses); Attempt or Conspiracy §2D1.2. Drug Offenses Occurring Near Protected Locations or Involving Underage or Pregnant Individuals; Attempt or Conspiracy §2D1.3. [Deleted] §2D1.4. [Deleted] §2D1.5. Continuing Criminal Enterprise; Attempt or Conspiracy §2D1.6. Use of Communication Facility in Committing Drug Offense; Attempt or Conspiracy §2D1.7. Unlawful Sale or Transportation of Drug Paraphernalia; Attempt or Conspiracy §2D1.8. Renting or Managing a Drug Establishment; Attempt or Conspiracy §2D1.9. Placing or Maintaining Dangerous Devices on Federal Property to Protect the Unlawful Production of Controlled Substances; Attempt or Conspiracy §2D1.10. Endangering Human Life While Illegally Manufacturing a Controlled Substance; Attempt or Conspiracy §2D1.11. Unlawfully Distributing, Importing, Exporting or Possessing a Listed Chemical; Attempt or Conspiracy §2D1.12. Unlawful Possession, Manufacture, Distribution, Transportation, Exportation, or Importation of Prohibited Flask, Equipment, Chemical, Product, or Material; Attempt or Conspiracy §2D1.13. Structuring Chemical Transactions or Creating a Chemical Mixture to Evade Reporting or Recordkeeping Requirements; Presenting False or Fraudulent Identification to Obtain a Listed Chemical; Attempt or Conspiracy §2D1.14. Narco-Terrorism
Unlawful Possession §2D2.1. Unlawful Possession; Attempt or Conspiracy §2D2.2. Acquiring a Controlled Substance by Forgery, Fraud, Deception, or Subterfuge; Attempt or Conspiracy §2D2.3. Operating or Directing the Operation of a Common Carrier Under the Influence of Alcohol or Drugs
Regulatory Violations §2D3.1. Regulatory Offenses Involving Registration Numbers; Unlawful Advertising Relating to Schedule I Substances; Attempt or Conspiracy §2D3.2. Regulatory Offenses Involving Controlled Substances or Listed Chemicals; Attempt or Conspiracy §2D3.3. [Deleted] §2D3.4. [Deleted] §2D3.5. [Deleted]

PARTS E - K

Part E - Offenses Involving Criminal Enterprises and Racketeering

Racketeering §2E1.1. Unlawful Conduct Relating to Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations §2E1.2. Interstate or Foreign Travel or Transportation in Aid of a Racketeering Enterprise §2E1.3. Violent Crimes in Aid of Racketeering Activity §2E1.4. Use of Interstate Commerce Facilities in the Commission of Murder-For-Hire §2E1.5. [Deleted]
Extortionate Extension of Credit §2E2.1. Making or Financing an Extortionate Extension of Credit; Collecting an Extension of Credit by Extortionate Means
Gambling §2E3.1.Gambling Offenses; Animal Fighting Offenses §2E3.2. [Deleted] §2E3.3. [Deleted]
Trafficking in Contraband Cigarettes and Smokeless Tobacco §2E4.1. Unlawful Conduct Relating to Contraband Cigarettes and Smokeless Tobacco
Labor Racketeering §2E5.1. Offering, Accepting, or Soliciting a Bribe or Gratuity Affecting the Operation of an Employee Welfare or Pension Benefit Plan; Prohibited Payments or Lending of Money by Employer or Agent to Employees, Representatives, or Labor Organizations §2E5.2. [Deleted] §2E5.3. False Statements and Concealment of Facts in Relation to Documents Required by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act; Failure to Maintain and Falsification of Records Required by the Labor Management Reporting and Disclosure Act; Destruction and Failure to Maintain Corporate Audit Records §2E5.4. [Deleted] §2E5.5. [Deleted] §2E5.6. [Deleted]

Part F - [Deleted]

§2F1.1. [Deleted] §2F1.2. [Deleted]

Part G - Offenses Involving Commercial Sex Acts, Sexual Exploitation of Minors, and Obscenity

Promoting a Commercial Sex Act or Prohibited Sexual Conduct §2G1.1. Promoting a Commercial Sex Act or Prohibited Sexual Conduct with an Individual Other than a Minor §2G1.2. [Deleted] §2G1.3. Promoting a Commercial Sex Act or Prohibited Sexual Conduct with a Minor; Transportation of Minors to Engage in a Commercial Sex Act or Prohibited Sexual Conduct; Travel to Engage in Commercial Sex Act or Prohibited Sexual Conduct with a Minor; Sex Trafficking of Children; Use of Interstate Facilities to Transport Information about a Minor
Sexual Exploitation of a Minor §2G2.1. Sexually Exploiting a Minor by Production of Sexually Explicit Visual or Printed Material; Custodian Permitting Minor to Engage in Sexually Explicit Conduct; Advertisement for Minors to Engage in Production §2G2.2.Trafficking in Material Involving the Sexual Exploitation of a Minor; Receiving, Transporting, Shipping, or Advertising Material Involving the Sexual Exploitation of a Minor; Possessing Material Involving the Sexual Exploitation of a Minor with Intent to Traffic, Possessing Material Involving the Sexual Exploitation of a Minor §2G2.3. Selling or Buying of Children for Use in the Production of Pornography §2G2.4. [Deleted] §2G2.5. Recordkeeping Offenses Involving the Production of Sexually Explicit Materials; Failure to Provide Required Marks in Commercial Electronic Email §2G2.6. Child Exploitation Enterprises
Obscenity §2G3.1. Importing, Mailing, or Transporting Obscene Matter; Transferring Obscene Matter to a Minor; Misleading Domain Names §2G3.2. Obscene Telephone Communications for a Commercial Purpose; Broadcasting Obscene Material

Part H - Offenses Involving Individual Rights

Civil Rights §2H1.1. Offenses Involving Individual Rights §2H1.2. [Deleted] §2H1.3. [Deleted] §2H1.4. [Deleted] §2H1.5. [Deleted]
Political Rights §2H2.1. Obstructing an Election or Registration
Privacy and Eavesdropping §2H3.1. Interception of Communications; Eavesdropping; Disclosure of Certain Private or Protected Information §2H3.2. Manufacturing, Distributing, Advertising, or Possessing an Eavesdropping Device §2H3.3. Obstructing Correspondence
Peonage, Involuntary Servitude, and Slave Trade §2H4.1. Peonage, Involuntary Servitude, and Slave Trade §2H4.2. Willful Violations of the Migrant and Seasonal Agricultural Worker Protection Act

Part I - [Not Used]

Part J - Offenses Involving the Administration of Justice

§2J1.1. Contempt §2J1.2. Obstruction of Justice §2J1.3. Perjury or Subornation of Perjury; Bribery of Witness §2J1.4. Impersonation §2J1.5. Failure to Appear by Material Witness §2J1.6. Failure to Appear by Defendant §2J1.7. [Deleted] §2J1.8. [Deleted] §2J1.9. Payment to Witness

Part K - Offenses Involving Public Safety

Explosives and Arson §2K1.1. Failure to Report Theft of Explosive Materials; Improper Storage of Explosive Materials §2K1.2. [Deleted] §2K1.3. Unlawful Receipt, Possession, or Transportation of Explosive Materials; Prohibited Transactions Involving Explosive Materials §2K1.4. Arson; Property Damage by Use of Explosives §2K1.5. Possessing Dangerous Weapons or Materials While Boarding or Aboard an Aircraft §2K1.6. Licensee Recordkeeping Violations Involving Explosive Materials §2K1.7. [Deleted]
Firearms §2K2.1. Unlawful Receipt, Possession, or Transportation of Firearms or Ammunition; Prohibited Transactions Involving Firearms or Ammunition §2K2.2. [Deleted] §2K2.3. [Deleted] §2K2.4. Use of Firearm, Armor-Piercing Ammunition, or Explosive During or in Relation to Certain Crimes §2K2.5. Possession of Firearm or Dangerous Weapon in Federal Facility; Possession or Discharge of Firearm in School Zone §2K2.6. Possessing, Purchasing, or Owning Body Armor by Violent Felons
Mailing Injurious Articles §2K3.1. [Deleted] §2K3.2. Feloniously Mailing Injurious Articles

PARTS L - X

Part L - Offenses Involving Immigration, Naturalization, and Passports

Immigration §2L1.1. Smuggling, Transporting, or Harboring an Unlawful Alien §2L1.2.Unlawfully Entering or Remaining in the United States §2L1.3.[Deleted]
Naturalization and Passports §2L2.1. Trafficking in a Document Relating to Naturalization, Citizenship, or Legal Resident Status, or a United States Passport; False Statement in Respect to the Citizenship or Immigration Status of Another; Fraudulent Marriage to Assist Alien to Evade Immigration Law §2L2.2. Fraudulently Acquiring Documents Relating to Naturalization, Citizenship, or Legal Resident Status for Own Use; False Personation or Fraudulent Marriage by Alien to Evade Immigration Law; Fraudulently Acquiring or Improperly Using a United States Passport §2L2.3. [Deleted] §2L2.4. [Deleted] §2L2.5. Failure to Surrender Canceled Naturalization Certificate

Part M - Offenses Involving National Defense and Weapons of Mass Destruction

Treason §2M1.1. Treason
Sabotage §2M2.1. Destruction of, or Production of Defective, War Material, Premises, or Utilities §2M2.2. [Deleted] §2M2.3. Destruction of, or Production of Defective, National Defense Material, Premises, or Utilities §2M2.4. [Deleted]
Espionage and Related Offenses §2M3.1. Gathering or Transmitting National Defense Information to Aid a Foreign Government §2M3.2. Gathering National Defense Information §2M3.3.Transmitting National Defense Information; Disclosure of Classified Cryptographic Information; Unauthorized Disclosure to a Foreign Government or a Communist Organization of Classified Information by Government Employee; Unauthorized Receipt of Classified Information §2M3.4. Losing National Defense Information §2M3.5. Tampering with Restricted Data Concerning Atomic Energy §2M3.6. [Deleted] §2M3.7. [Deleted] §2M3.8. [Deleted] §2M3.9. Disclosure of Information Identifying a Covert Agent
Evasion of Military Service §2M4.1. Failure to Register and Evasion of Military Service
Prohibited Financial Transactions and Exports, and Providing Material Support to Designated Foreign Terrorist Organizations §2M5.1. Evasion of Export Controls; Financial Transactions with Countries Supporting International Terrorism §2M5.2. Exportation of Arms, Munitions, or Military Equipment or Services Without Required Validated Export License §2M5.3 Providing Material Support or Resources to Designated Foreign Terrorist Organizations or Specially Designated Global Terrorists, or For a Terrorist Purpose
Nuclear, Biological, and Chemical Weapons and Materials, and Other Weapons of Mass Destruction §2M6.1. Unlawful Activity Involving Nuclear Material, Weapons, or Facilities, Biological Agents, Toxins, or Delivery Systems, Chemical Weapons, or Other Weapons of Mass Destruction; Attempt or Conspiracy §2M6.2. Violation of Other Federal Atomic Energy Agency Statutes, Rules, and Regulations

Part N - Offenses Involving Food, Drugs, Agricultural Products, and Odometer Laws

Tampering with Consumer Products §2N1.1. Tampering or Attempting to Tamper Involving Risk of Death or Bodily Injury §2N1.2. Providing False Information or Threatening to Tamper with Consumer Products §2N1.3. Tampering With Intent to Injure Business
Food, Drugs, and Agricultural Products §2N2.1. Violations of Statutes and Regulations Dealing With Any Food, Drug, Biological Product, Device, Cosmetic, or Agricultural Product
Odometer Laws and Regulations §2N3.1. Odometer Laws and Regulations

Part O - [Not Used]

Part P - Offenses Involving Prisons and Correctional Facilities

§2P1.1. Escape, Instigating or Assisting Escape §2P1.2. Providing or Possessing Contraband in Prison §2P1.3. Engaging In, Inciting or Attempting to Incite a Riot Involving Persons in a Facility for Official Detention §2P1.4. [Deleted]

Part Q - Offenses Involving the Environment

Environment §2Q1.1. Knowing Endangerment Resulting From Mishandling Hazardous or Toxic Substances, Pesticides or Other Pollutants §2Q1.2. Mishandling of Hazardous or Toxic Substances or Pesticides; Recordkeeping, Tampering, and Falsification; Unlawfully Transporting Hazardous Materials in Commerce §2Q1.3. Mishandling of Other Environmental Pollutants; Recordkeeping, Tampering, and Falsification §2Q1.4. Tampering or Attempted Tampering with a Public Water System; Threatening to Tamper with a Public Water System §2Q1.5. [Deleted] §2Q1.6. Hazardous or Injurious Devices on Federal Lands
Conservation and Wildlife §2Q2.1. Offenses Involving Fish, Wildlife, and Plants §2Q2.2. [Deleted]

Part R - Antitrust Offenses

§2R1.1. Bid-Rigging, Price-Fixing or Market-Allocation Agreements Among Competitors

Part S - Money Laundering and Monetary Transaction Reporting

§2S1.1. Laundering of Monetary Instruments; Engaging in Monetary Transactions in Property Derived from Unlawful Activity §2S1.2. [Deleted] §2S1.3. Structuring Transactions to Evade Reporting Requirements; Failure to Report Cash or Monetary Transactions; Failure to File Currency and Monetary Instrument Report; Knowingly Filing False Reports; Bulk Cash Smuggling; Establishing or Maintaining Prohibited Accounts §2S1.4. [Deleted]

Part T - Offenses Involving Taxation

Income Taxes, Employment Taxes, Estate Taxes, Gift Taxes, and Excise Taxes (Other Than Alcohol, Tobacco, and Customs Taxes) §2T1.1. Tax Evasion; Willful Failure to File Return, Supply Information, or Pay Tax; Fraudulent or False Returns, Statements, or Other Documents §2T1.2. [Deleted] §2T1.3. [Deleted] §2T1.4. Aiding, Assisting, Procuring, Counseling, or Advising Tax Fraud §2T1.5. [Deleted] §2T1.6. Failing to Collect or Truthfully Account for and Pay Over Tax §2T1.7. Failing to Deposit Collected Taxes in Trust Account as Required After Notice §2T1.8. Offenses Relating to Withholding Statements §2T1.9. Conspiracy to Impede, Impair, Obstruct, or Defeat Tax
Alcohol and Tobacco Taxes §2T2.1. Non-Payment of Taxes §2T2.2. Regulatory Offenses
Customs Taxes §2T3.1. Evading Import Duties or Restrictions (Smuggling); Receiving or Trafficking in Smuggled Property §2T3.2. [Deleted]
Tax Table §2T4.1. Tax Table

Part U - [Not Used]

Part V - [Not Used]

Part W - [Not Used]

Part X - Other Offenses

Conspiracies, Attempts, Solicitations §2X1.1. Attempt, Solicitation, or Conspiracy (Not Covered by a Specific Offense Guideline)
Aiding and Abetting §2X2.1. Aiding and Abetting
Accessory After the Fact §2X3.1. Accessory After the Fact
Misprision of Felony §2X4.1. Misprision of Felony
All Other Offenses §2X5.1. Other Felony Offenses §2X5.2. Class A Misdemeanors (Not Covered by Another Specific Offense Guideline)
Offenses Involving Use of a Minor in a Crime of Violence §2X6.1. Use of a Minor in a Crime of Violence
Offenses Involving Border Tunnels and Submersible and Semi-Submersible Vessels §2X7.1. Border Tunnels and Subterranean Passages §2X7.2. Submersible and Semi-Submersible Vessels

Part Y - [Not Used]

Part Z - [Not Used]

CHAPTER THREE - Adjustments

Part A - Victim-Related Adjustments

§3A1.1. Hate Crime Motivation or Vulnerable Victim §3A1.2. Official Victim §3A1.3. Restraint of Victim §3A1.4. Terrorism §3A1.5. Serious Human Rights Offense

Part B - Role in the Offense

§3B1.1. Aggravating Role §3B1.2. Mitigating Role §3B1.3. Abuse of Position of Trust or Use of Special Skill §3B1.4. Using a Minor To Commit a Crime §3B1.5. Use of Body Armor in Drug Trafficking Crimes and Crimes of Violence

Part C - Obstruction and Related Adjustments

§3C1.1. Obstructing or Impeding the Administration of Justice §3C1.2. Reckless Endangerment During Flight §3C1.3. Commission of Offense While on Release §3C1.4. False Registration of Domain Name

Part D - Multiple Counts

§3D1.1. Procedure for Determining Offense Level on Multiple Counts §3D1.2. Groups of Closely Related Counts §3D1.3. Offense Level Applicable to Each Group of Closely Related Counts §3D1.4. Determining the Combined Offense Level §3D1.5. Determining the Total Punishment

Part E - Acceptance of Responsibility

§3E1.1. Acceptance of Responsibility

CHAPTER FOUR - Criminal History and Criminal Livelihood

Part A - Criminal History

§4A1.1. Criminal History Category §4A1.2. Definitions and Instructions for Computing Criminal History §4A1.3. Departures Based on Inadequacy of Criminal History Category (Policy Statement)

Part B - Career Offenders and Criminal Livelihood

§4B1.1. Career Offender §4B1.2. Definitions of Terms Used in Section 4B1.1 §4B1.3. Criminal Livelihood §4B1.4. Armed Career Criminal §4B1.5. Repeat and Dangerous Sex Offender Against Minors

CHAPTER FIVE - Determining the Sentence

Part B - Probation

§5B1.1. Imposition of a Term of Probation §5B1.2. Term of Probation §5B1.3. Conditions of Probation §5B1.4. [Deleted]

Part C - Imprisonment

§5C1.1. Imposition of a Term of Imprisonment §5C1.2. Limitation on Applicability of Statutory Minimum Sentences in Certain Cases

Part D - Supervised Release

§5D1.1. Imposition of a Term of Supervised Release §5D1.2. Term of Supervised Release §5D1.3. Conditions of Supervised Release

Part E - Restitution, Fines, Assessments, Forfeitures

§5E1.1. Restitution §5E1.2. Fines for Individual Defendants §5E1.3. Special Assessments §5E1.4. Forfeiture §5E1.5. Costs of Prosecution (Policy Statement)

Part F - Sentencing Options

§5F1.1. Community Confinement §5F1.2. Home Detention §5F1.3. Community Service §5F1.4. Order of Notice to Victims §5F1.5. Occupational Restrictions §5F1.6. Denial of Federal Benefits to Drug Traffickers and Possessors §5F1.7. Shock Incarceration Program (Policy Statement) §5F1.8. Intermittent Confinement

Part G - Implementing the Total Sentence of Imprisonment

§5G1.1. Sentencing on a Single Count of Conviction §5G1.2. Sentencing on Multiple Counts of Conviction §5G1.3. Imposition of a Sentence on a Defendant Subject to an Undischarged Term of Imprisonment or Anticipated State Term of Imprisonment

Part H - Specific Offender Characteristics

§5H1.1. Age (Policy Statement) §5H1.2. Education and Vocational Skills (Policy Statement) §5H1.3. Mental and Emotional Conditions (Policy Statement) §5H1.4. Physical Condition, Including Drug or Alcohol Dependence or Abuse; Gambling Addiction (Policy Statement) §5H1.5. Employment Record (Policy Statement) §5H1.6. Family Ties and Responsibilities (Policy Statement) §5H1.7. Role in the Offense (Policy Statement) §5H1.8. Criminal History (Policy Statement) §5H1.9. Dependence upon Criminal Activity for a Livelihood (Policy Statement) §5H1.10. Race, Sex, National Origin, Creed, Religion, and Socio-Economic Status (Policy Statement) §5H1.11. Military, Civic, Charitable, or Public Service; Employment-Related Contributions; Record of Prior Good Works (Policy Statement) §5H1.12. Lack of Guidance as a Youth and Similar Circumstances (Policy Statement)

Part J - Relief From Disability

§5J1.1. Relief from Disability Pertaining to Convicted Persons Prohibited from Holding Certain Positions (Policy Statement)

Part K - Departures

Substantial Assistance to Authorities §5K1.1. Substantial Assistance to Authorities (Policy Statement) §5K1.2. Refusal to Assist (Policy Statement)
Other Grounds for Departure §5K2.0. Grounds for Departure (Policy Statement) §5K2.1. Death (Policy Statement) §5K2.2. Physical Injury (Policy Statement) §5K2.3. Extreme Psychological Injury (Policy Statement) §5K2.4. Abduction or Unlawful Restraint (Policy Statement) §5K2.5. Property Damage or Loss (Policy Statement) §5K2.6. Weapons and Dangerous Instrumentalities (Policy Statement) §5K2.7. Disruption of Governmental Function (Policy Statement) §5K2.8. Extreme Conduct (Policy Statement) §5K2.9. Criminal Purpose (Policy Statement) §5K2.10. Victim's Conduct (Policy Statement) §5K2.11. Lesser Harms (Policy Statement) §5K2.12. Coercion and Duress (Policy Statement) §5K2.13. Diminished Capacity (Policy Statement) §5K2.14. Public Welfare (Policy Statement) §5K2.15. [Deleted] §5K2.16. Voluntary Disclosure of Offense (Policy Statement) §5K2.17. Semiautomatic Firearms Capable of Accepting Large Capacity Magazine (Policy Statement) §5K2.18. Violent Street Gangs (Policy Statement) §5K2.19. [Deleted] §5K2.20. Aberrant Behavior (Policy Statement) §5K2.21. Dismissed and Uncharged Conduct (Policy Statement) §5K2.22. Specific Offender Characteristics as Grounds for Downward Departure in Child Crimes and Sexual Offenses (Policy Statement) §5K2.23. Discharged Terms of Imprisonment (Policy Statement) §5K2.24.Commission of Offense While Wearing or Displaying Unauthorized or Counterfeit Insignia or Uniform (Policy Statement)
Early Disposition Programs §5K3.1. Early Disposition Programs (Policy Statement)

CHAPTER SIX - Sentencing Procedures, Plea Agreements and Crime Victims' Rights

Part A - Sentencing Procedures

§6A1.1. Presentence Report (Policy Statement) §6A1.2. Disclosure of Presentence Report; Issues in Dispute (Policy Statement) §6A1.3. Resolution of Disputed Factors (Policy Statement) §6A1.4. Notice of Possible Departure (Policy Statement) §6A1.5. Crime Victims' Rights (Policy Statement)

Part B - Plea Agreements

§6B1.1. Plea Agreement Procedure (Policy Statement) §6B1.2. Standards for Acceptance of Plea Agreements (Policy Statement) §6B1.3. Procedure Upon Rejection of a Plea Agreement (Policy Statement) §6B1.4. Stipulations (Policy Statement)

CHAPTER SEVEN - Violations of Probation and Supervised Release

Part A - Introduction to Chapter Seven

Resolution of Major Issues
The Basic Approach
A Concluding Note

§§7A1.1 - 7A1.4. [Deleted]

Part B - Probation and Supervised Release Violations

§7B1.1. Classification of Violations (Policy Statement) §7B1.2. Reporting of Violations of Probation and Supervised Release (Policy Statement) §7B1.3. Revocation of Probation or Supervised Release (Policy Statement) §7B1.4. Term of Imprisonment (Policy Statement) §7B1.5. No Credit for Time Under Supervision (Policy Statement)

CHAPTER EIGHT - Sentencing of Organizations

Part A - General Application Principles

§8A1.1. Applicability of Chapter Eight §8A1.2. Application Instructions - Organizations

Part B - Remedying Harm from Criminal Conduct, and Effective Compliance and Ethics Program

Remedying Harm from Criminal Conduct §8B1.1. Restitution - Organizations §8B1.2. Remedial Orders - Organizations (Policy Statement) §8B1.3. Community Service - Organizations (Policy Statement) §8B1.4. Order of Notice to Victims - Organizations
Effective Compliance and Ethics Program §8B2.1. Effective Compliance and Ethics Program

Part C - Fines

Determining the Fine - Criminal Purpose Organizations §8C1.1. Determining the Fine - Criminal Purpose Organizations
Determining the Fine - Other Organizations §8C2.1. Applicability of Fine Guidelines §8C2.2. Preliminary Determination of Inability to Pay Fine §8C2.3. Offense Level §8C2.4. Base Fine §8C2.5. Culpability Score §8C2.6. Minimum and Maximum Multipliers §8C2.7. Guideline Fine Range - Organizations §8C2.8. Determining the Fine Within the Range (Policy Statement) §8C2.9. Disgorgement §8C2.10. Determining the Fine for Other Counts
Implementing the Sentence of a Fine §8C3.1. Imposing a Fine §8C3.2. Payment of the Fine - Organizations §8C3.3. Reduction of Fine Based on Inability to Pay §8C3.4. Fines Paid by Owners of Closely Held Organizations
Departures from the Guideline Fine Range §8C4.1. Substantial Assistance to Authorities - Organizations (Policy Statement) §8C4.2. Risk of Death or Bodily Injury (Policy Statement) §8C4.3. Threat to National Security (Policy Statement) §8C4.4. Threat to the Environment (Policy Statement) §8C4.5. Threat to a Market (Policy Statement) §8C4.6. Official Corruption (Policy Statement) §8C4.7. Public Entity (Policy Statement) §8C4.8. Members or Beneficiaries of the Organization as Victims (Policy Statement) §8C4.9. Remedial Costs that Greatly Exceed Gain (Policy Statement) §8C4.10. Mandatory Programs to Prevent and Detect Violations of Law (Policy Statement) §8C4.11. Exceptional Organizational Culpability (Policy Statement)

Part D - Organizational Probation

§8D1.1. Imposition of Probation - Organizations §8D1.2. Term of Probation - Organizations §8D1.3. Conditions of Probation - Organizations §8D1.4. Recommended Conditions of Probation - Organizations (Policy Statement) §8D1.5. [Deleted]

Part E - Special Assessments, Forfeitures, and Costs

§8E1.1. Special Assessments - Organizations §8E1.2. Forfeiture - Organizations §8E1.3. Assessment of Costs - Organizations

Part F - Violations of Probation - Organizations

§8F1.1. Violations of Conditions of Probation - Organizations (Policy Statement)

APPENDIX A - Statutory Index This index specifies the offense guideline section(s) in Chapter Two (Offense Conduct) applicable to the statute of conviction.

Index & Compilation of Departure Provisions

Index This index provides an alphabetical list of topics addressed in the Guidelines Manual and refers the reader to provisions that may be relevant to those topics.

List of Departure Provisions This list identifies provisions in the Guidelines Manual that indicate when a departure based on a specific ground may be warranted.

Compilation of Departure Provisions This compilation identifies provisions in the Guidelines Manual that indicate when a departure based on a specific ground may be warranted. The compilation identifies the guideline provision and specifies the ground for departure contained in that provision.

Appendices B & C

APPENDIX B - Selected Sentencing Statutes This appendix sets forth the principal statutory provisions governing sentencing, the Sentencing Commission, and the drafting of sentencing guidelines, as of August 1, 2021.

APPENDIX C (Volume I) - Amendments to the Guidelines Manual effective November 1, 1987, through November 1, 1997 (Amendments 1 through 575)

APPENDIX C (Volume II) - Amendments to the Guidelines Manual effective November 1, 1998, through November 5, 2003 (Amendments 576 through 662)

APPENDIX C (Volume III) - Amendments to the Guidelines Manual effective November 1, 2004, through November 1, 2011 (Amendments 663 through 760)

SUPPLEMENT to APPENDIX C - Amendments to the Guidelines Manual effective November 1, 2012, through November 1, 2018 (Amendments 761 through 813)

Even more »

Account Options

Try the new Google Books
Advanced Book Search

Get this book in print

Barnes&Noble.com
Books-A-Million
Find in a library
All sellers »

Selected pages

Other editions - View all

Common terms and phrases, about the author (2021).

Merve Emre is an associate professor of English at the University of Oxford and the author of several books, including The Personality Brokers.

Virginia Woolf (1882-1941) was the world-renowned author of Mrs. Dalloway, To the Lighthouse, and The Waves, among other works.

Bibliographic information

Biden’s speech at the Holocaust remembrance ceremony, annotated

By Zachary B. Wolf and Annette Choi , CNN

Published May 7, 2024

President Joe Biden talked about the documented increase of antisemitism in the United States during the annual US Holocaust Memorial Museum’s Days of Remembrance ceremony at the US Capitol building. Every recent president has made remarks at least once at the event, but Biden’s remarks came as pro-Palestinian protests have disrupted classes and commencements at multiple US universities . At times, rhetoric at those protests has veered into antisemitism, offended Jewish students and sparked a fierce debate about free speech.

Biden talked in-depth about the Hamas terror attack against Israel on October 7, 2023, and the Israeli hostages that remain in captivity . He did not mention Israel’s heavy-handed response, which has not only destroyed much of Gaza and cost tens of thousands of lives but has also driven a wedge between Biden and many progressives, particularly on college campuses. See below for what he said , along with context from CNN.

Thank you. Thank you, thank you, thank you. Thank you, Stu Eizenstat, for that introduction, for your leadership of the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum . You are a true scholar and statesman and a dear friend.

Speaker Johnson , Leader Jeffries, members of Congress and especially the survivors of the Holocaust. If my mother were here, she’d look at you and say, “God love you all. God love you all.”

Abe Foxman and all other survivors who embody absolute courage and dignity and grace are here as well.

During these sacred days of remembrance we grieve, we give voice to the 6 million Jews who were systematically targeted and murdered by the Nazis and their collaborators during World War II. We honor the memory of victims, the pain of survivors, the bravery of heroes who stood up to Hitler's unspeakable evil. And we recommit to heading and heeding the lessons that one of the darkest chapters in human history to revitalize and realize the responsibility of never again.

The Days of Remembrance commemoration has been an annual event since 1982. Every US president since Bill Clinton has spoken at least once at a remembrance event.

House Speaker Mike Johnson spoke shortly before Biden and tried to compare the situation on college campuses today with that on college campuses in Germany in the 1930s.

Never again, simply translated for me, means never forget, never forget. Never forgetting means we must must keep telling the story, we must keep teaching the truth, we must keep teaching our children and our grandchildren. And the truth is we are at risk of people not knowing the truth.

That's why, growing up, my dad taught me and my siblings about the horrors of the Shoah at our family dinner table.

Shoah is the Hebrew term for the Holocaust.

That's why I visited Yad Vashem with my family as a senator, as vice president and as president. And that's why I took my grandchildren to Dachau , so they could see and bear witness to the perils of indifference, the complicity of silence in the face of evil that they knew was happening.

Biden visited Yad Vashem , Israel’s Holocaust remembrance site, in 2022 as president.

As vice president, he toured the Nazi concentration camp outside Munich in 2015 with his granddaughter during a trip for an annual security conference.

Germany, 1933, Hitler and his Nazi party rise to power by rekindling one of the world's oldest forms of prejudice and hate — antisemitism.

His rule didn't begin with mass murder. It started slowly across economic, political, social and cultural life — propaganda demonizing Jews, boycotts of Jewish businesses, synagogues defaced with swastikas, harassment of Jews in the street and in the schools, antisemitic demonstrations, pogroms, organized riots.

With the indifference of the world, Hitler knew he could expand his reign of terror by eliminating Jews from Germany, to annihilate Jews across Europe through genocide the Nazis called the final solution. Concentration camps, gas chambers, mass shootings. By the time the war ended, 6 million Jews, one out of every three Jews in the entire world, were murdered.

This ancient hatred of Jews didn't begin with the Holocaust. It didn't end with the Holocaust either, or after, even after our victory in World War II. This hatred continues to lie deep in the hearts of too many people in the world and requires our continued vigilance and outspokenness.

The Holocaust survivor Irene Butter wrote for CNN Opinion in 2021 about Adolf Hitler’s rise and echoes of Nazism in the January 6, 2021, Capitol attack.

That hatred was brought to life on October 7th in 2023. On the sacred Jewish holiday, the terrorist group Hamas unleashed the deadliest day of the Jewish people since the Holocaust.

Read mo re about Hamas .

Driven by ancient desire to wipe out the Jewish people off the face of the Earth, over 1,200 innocent people — babies, parents, grandparents — slaughtered in their kibbutz, massacred at a music festival, brutally raped, mutilated and sexually assaulted .

Evidence of sexual violence has been documented. Here’s the account of one Israeli woman who has spoken publicly about her experience.

Thousands more carrying wounds, bullets and shrapnel from the memory of that terrible day they endured. Hundreds taken hostage, including survivors of the Shoah.

Now here we are, not 75 years later but just seven-and-a-half months later and people are already forgetting, are already forgetting that Hamas unleashed this terror. That it was Hamas that brutalized Israelis. It was Hamas who took and continues to hold hostages. I have not forgotten, nor have you, and we will not forget.

On May 7, 1945, the German High Command agreed to an unconditional surrender in World War II, 79 years ago.

And as Jews around the world still cope with the atrocities and trauma of that day and its aftermath, we've seen a ferocious surge of anti s emitism in America and around the world.

In late October, FBI Director Christopher Wray said reports of antisemitism in the US were reaching “ historic ” levels.

Vicious propaganda on social media, Jews forced to keep their — hide their kippahs under baseball hats, tuck their Jewish stars into their shirts.

On college campuses, Jewish students blocked, harassed, attacked while walking to class . Antisemitism, antisemitic posters , slogans calling for the annihilation of Israel, the world's only Jewish state.

Many Jewish students have described feeling intimidated and attacked on campuses. Others have said they support the protests , citing the situation in Gaza.

Last month, the dean of the University of California Berkeley Law School described antisemitic posters that targeted him.

Too many people denying, downplaying, rationalizing, ignoring the horrors of the Holocaust and October 7th, including Hamas' appalling use of sexual violence to torture and terrorize Jews. It's absolutely despicable and it must stop.

Silence. Silence and denial can hide much but it can erase nothing.

Some injustices are so heinous, so horrific, so grievous they cannot be married – buried, no matter how hard people try.

In my view, a major lesson of the Holocaust is, as mentioned earlier, is it not, was not inevitable.

We know hate never goes away. It only hides. And given a little oxygen, it comes out from under the rocks.

We also know what stops hate. One thing: All of us. The late Rabbi Jonathan Sacks described antisemitism as a virus that has survived and mutated over time.

Together, we cannot continue to let that happen. We have to remember our basic principle as a nation. We have an obligation. We have an obligation to learn the lessons of history so we don't surrender our future to the horrors of the past. We must give hate no safe harbor against anyone. Anyone.

From the very founding, our very founding, Jewish Americans , who represented only about 2% of the US population , have helped lead the cause of freedom for everyone in our nation. From that experience we know scapegoating and demonizing any minority is a threat to every minority and the very foundation of our democracy.

As of 2020, Jewish Americans made up about 2.4% of the US population, according to the Pew Research Center , or about 5.8 million people.

So moments like this we have to put these principles that we're talking about into action.

I understand people have strong beliefs and deep convictions about the world .

In America we respect and protect the fundamental right to free speech, to debate and disagree, to protest peacefully and make our voices heard . I understand. That's America.

The complaint of many protesters is that Israel’s response to the terror attack has claimed more than 30,000 lives and destroyed much of Gaza .

But there is no place on any campus in America, any place in America, for antisemitism or hate speech or threats of violence of any kind.

Whether against Jews or anyone else, violent attacks, destroying property is not peaceful protest. It's against the law and we are not a lawless country. We're a civil society. We uphold the rule of law and no one should have to hide or be brave just to be themselves.

To the Jewish community, I want you to know I see your fear, your hurt and your pain.

Let me reassure you as your president, you're not alone. You belong. You always have and you always will.

And my commitment to the safety of the Jewish people, the security of Israel and its right to exist as an independent Jewish state is ironclad, even when we disagree.

My administration is working around the clock to free remaining hostages, just as we have freed hostages already, and will not rest until we bring them all home.

My administration, with our second gentleman's leadership, has launched our nation's first national strategy to counter antisemitism. That's mobilizing the full force of the federal government to protect Jewish communities.

But we know this is not the work of government alone or Jews alone. That's why I’m calling on all Americans to stand united against antisemitism and hate in all its forms.

My dear friend — and he became a friend — the late Elie Wiesel said, quote, “One person of integrity can make a difference.”

Elie Wiesel , the Holocaust survivor, writer and activist, died in 2016.

We have to remember that, now more than ever.

Here in Emancipation Hall in the US Capitol, among the towering statues of history is a bronze bust of Raoul Wallenberg . Born in Sweden as a Lutheran, he was a businessman and a diplomat. While stationed in Hungary during World War II, he used diplomatic cover to hide and rescue about 100,000 Jews over a six-month period.

Read more about Wallenberg , the Holocaust hero and Swedish diplomat who was formally declared dead in 2016, 71 years after he vanished.

Among them was a 16-year-old Jewish boy who escaped a Nazi labor camp. After the war ended, that boy received a scholarship from the Hillel Foundation to study in America. He came to New York City penniless but determined to turn his pain into purpose. Along with his wife, also a Holocaust survivor, he became a renowned economist and foreign policy thinker, eventually making his way to this very Capitol on the staff of a first-term senator.

That Jewish refugee was Tom Lantos and that senator was me. Tom and his wife and Annette and their family became dear friends to me and my family. Tom would go on to become the only Holocaust survivor ever elected to Congress, where he became a leading voice on civil rights and human rights around the world. Tom never met Raoul, who was taken prisoner by the Soviets, never to be heard from again.

Read more about Lantos , the longtime congressman and Holocaust survivor who died in 2008. Lantos worked for Biden early in his career.

But through Tom's efforts, Raoul’s bust is here in the Capitol. He was also given honorary US citizenship, only the second person ever after Winston Churchill. The Holocaust Museum here in Washington is located in a road in Raoul’s name.

The story of the power of a single person to put aside our differences, to see our common humanity, to stand up to hate and its ancient story of resilience from immense pain, persecution, to find hope, purpose and meaning in life, we try to live and share with one another. That story endures.

Let me close with this. I know these days of remembrance fall on difficult times. We all do well to remember these days also fall during the month we celebrate Jewish American heritage, a heritage that stretches from our earliest days to enrich every single part of American life today.

There are important topics Biden did not address. He referenced the October 7 attacks on Israel but not Israel’s controversial response, which has drawn furious protests. He failed to mention Gaza, where Israel’s military campaign has killed so many, and which has led the World Food Programme to warn of a “full-blown famine .”

A great American — a great Jewish American named Tom Lantos — used the phrase “the veneer of civilization is paper thin.” We are its guardians, and we can never rest.

My fellow Americans, we must, we must be those guardians. We must never rest. We must rise Against hate, meet across the divide, see our common humanity. And God bless the victims and survivors of the Shoah.

May the resilient hearts, the courageous spirit and the eternal flame of faith of the Jewish people forever shine their light on America and around the world, pray God.

Thank you all.

——————————————— ATTACHMENTS

Form 990 Annotated

Form 990 Instructions Annotated

Form 990-PF Annotated

Form 990-PF Instructions Annotated

The information contained herein is general in nature and is not intended, and should not be construed, as legal, accounting or tax advice or opinion provided by Ernst & Young LLP to the reader. The reader also is cautioned that this material may not be applicable to, or suitable for, the reader's specific circumstances or needs, and may require consideration of non-tax and other tax factors if any action is to be contemplated. The reader should contact his or her Ernst & Young LLP or other tax professional prior to taking any action based upon this information. Ernst & Young LLP assumes no obligation to inform the reader of any changes in tax laws or other factors that could affect the information contained herein.

All rights reserved. No part of this document may be reproduced, retransmitted or otherwise redistributed in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including by photocopying, facsimile transmission, recording, rekeying, or using any information storage and retrieval system, without written permission from Ernst & Young LLP.

EY US Tax News Update Master Agreement | EY Privacy Statement

JavaScript seems to be disabled in your browser. You must have JavaScript enabled in your browser to utilize the functionality of this website.

My Wishlist

You have no items in your shopping cart.

Browse Books

Accounting Technology
Auditing / Forensic Accounting
Financial Accounting
Financial Reporting / IFRS / GAAP
Managerial Accounting
Corporate Finance
Estate Planning
Financial / Capital Market
Financial Engineering
Financial Planning
Financial Risk Management
Financial Technology
Fund Raising
Investment / Trading
Islamic Finance
Personal Finance
Change Management
Compensation & Benefits
Conflict Resolution
Employee Engagement
Health & Safety
HR Management
Industrial Relations
Organisational Development
Performance Management
Recruitment
Administrative / Constitutional Law
Antitrust / Competition Law
Arbitration / Mediation / Litigation
Banking / Finance
Bankruptcy / Insolvency
Business / Commercial Law
Civil Procedure
Commercial Fraud
Common Law Library
Company Law
Company Secretarial
Comparative Law
Conflict of Laws
Construction / Building Law
Consumer Law
Contract Law
Conveyancing / Tenancy / Land
Corporate Governance
Criminal Law
Discrimination Law
Ecclesiastical Law
Education Law
Employment / Labour Law
Environmental / Energy Law
Equity & Trusts
European Union Law
Human Rights
Immigration
Information Technology Law
Insurance Law
Intellectual Property / Patent / Copyright
International Law
Islamic Law
Law Dictionary
Legal History
Legal Profession
Media / Entertainment Law
Medical Law
Mental Health Law
Mergers & Acquisitions
Money Laundering
Planning Law
Police / Public Order Law
Reference Resources
Restitution
Social Security & Welfare Law
Tort / Personal Injury
Transportation Law
Wills / Probate / Trusts
International
New Zealand
South Africa
CCH Master Tax Guides Series
Transfer Pricing
ACCA Series (BPP)
ACCA Series (Kaplan)
Bar Manual Series
CLP Law Series
Complete Law Series
Concentrate Law Series
Course Notes Law Series
CPA Australia Series
Foundations in Accountancy (FIA)
Great Debate in Law Series
Key Facts/Cases Law Series
Law Cards Series
Law Express Series
Law in Context Series
LPC Law Series
Master Guides (HKCA)
Nutshells/Nutcases Series
Q&A Series (Routledge)
Unlocking Law Series
Wolters Kluwer Online Resources
Tax & Accounting Practical Toolkit
Lawyer's Corner
Accountant's Corner
New Releases
Coming Soon

You have no items to compare.

Accounting >
Financial Reporting / IFRS / GAAP >

The Annotated Issued IFRS® Standards—Standards issued at 1 January 2021 (The Annotated Red Book)

Author: IASB (International Accounting Standards Board)
Publisher: IFRS Foundation
ISBN: 9781911629948
Published In: April 2021
Format: Paperback (3 volumes)
Jurisdiction: International ? Disclaimer: Countri(es) stated herein are used as reference only

Click to Preview

New edition is available now .

Add to Wishlist
| Add to Compare
Description

This is the official printed edition of the authoritative pronouncements of the International Accounting Standards Board as issued at 1 January 2021, with extensive cross-references and other annotations. This product is a printed bound volume. New in this edition: • Revised version of the Constitution and Due Process Handbook of the IFRS Foundation. • Amendments to 13 Standards issued in Amendments to IFRS 17, Classification of Liabilities as Current or Non-current, Classification of Liabilities as Current or Non-current—Deferral of Effective Date, Covid-10-Related Rent Concessions, Extension of the Temporary Exemption from Applying IFRS 9, Interest Rate Benchmark Reform— Phase 2, Onerous Contracts—Costs of Fulfilling a Contract, Property, Plant and Equipment: Proceeds before Intended Use and Reference to the Conceptual Framework . • Amendments to four Standards issued in Annual Improvements to IFRS Standards 2018–2020 . Agenda decisions published since 1 January 2020 have been added as annotations to IFRS 7, IFRS 15, IFRS 16, IAS 1, IAS 7, IAS 12, IAS 21, IAS 29, and IAS 38. This edition is presented in three parts: • Part A (Issued Standards) contains the IFRS Standards, including IAS® Standards, IFRIC® Interpretations and SIC® Interpretations, together with the Conceptual Framework for Financial Reporting. • Part B (Accompanying Guidance) contains the illustrative examples and implementation guidance that accompany the Standards, together with IFRS practice statements. • Part C (Bases for Conclusions) contains the bases for conclusions that accompany the Standards, the Conceptual Framework for Financial Reporting and the IFRS practice statements. This edition contains some Standards and changes to Standards with an effective date after 1 January 2021.

You may also be interested in these books:

The Hong Kong Company Secretary's Handbook: Practice and Procedure (11th Edition)

List Price: HKD 535.00

HKD 518.95 Save HKD 16.05 (3%)

Hong Kong Tax & Accounting Practical Toolkit (Basic Package)

List Price: HKD 2,064.00

HKD 2,002.08 Save HKD 61.92 (3%)

China Master Tax Guide 2021 (14th Edition)

List Price: HKD 1,680.00

HKD 1,629.60 Save HKD 50.40 (3%)

Hong Kong Company Law & Compliance Practical Toolkit (Basic Package)

List Price: HKD 1,380.00

HKD 1,338.60 Save HKD 41.40 (3%)

Hong Kong Directors' Manual, 5th Edition

List Price: HKD 1,500.00

HKD 1,455.00 Save HKD 45.00 (3%)

Hong Kong Listed Companies: Law and Practice, 2nd Edition

List Price: HKD 1,980.00

HKD 1,920.60 Save HKD 59.40 (3%)

List Price: HKD 680.00

HKD 659.60 Save HKD 20.40 (3%)

Wiley IFRS 2023: Interpretation and Application of IFRS Standards

List Price: HKD 1,250.00

HKD 1,212.50 Save HKD 37.50 (3%)

Hong Kong Company Secretary Checklist, 2nd Edition

What Our Customers Say?

Ordering from Professional Bookshop is fantastic, quick delivery great products, great customer service Siti L.
This is a great bookstore and have had no problems with them and all my orders have come on time and in good condition. Yang X.
Everything is perfect. Fast delivery. I highly recommend this website to all my friends and colleagues. Thanks Hoi Man L.
So thankful I am receiving all my books, thank you to all for a great service and excellent products Clinton K.
Professional Bookshop is amazing! I've been a loyal customer for over 5 years. Returns are easy to request, book or delivery complaints are taken seriously and the customer service team is friendly and patient. Mick D.
I wanted to informed you that the customer service is excellent. They were so polite and nice. I would continue to buy books from Professional Bookshop. Jingsong C.
Fast and quick service. Easy transaction method, arrived sooner than expected. Excellent packaging and the books received are in perfect condition! Thank you very much! I love the book and its quality. Saori B.
I can order any accounting books from worldwide from Professional Bookshop. Love this website and save my time to search from internet. Lingxiao R.
It is just so easy to find what you are always looking for and sometimes you can even find it up to 80% off what you would in the normal store. Graeme R.
I love shopping on Professional Bookshop! They have a wide range of accounting book with competent prices. Free shipping in Hong Kong is also really handy! Fergus Y.
Professional Bookshop is a great bookstore, I must say. Buying books in Professional Bookshop is so easy, great and reliable. It is highly recommendable. Deborah D.
A great site to shop accounting books and everything and with discountable prices. It’s my first choice whenever i want to shop something. Most trusted site. Zeng Z.
I found the books I needed and at a very low price. I am very happy and will definitely use it in the future Brian W.
I have been using Professional Bookshop for a while now. I am very impressed with customer service and delivery. When I need to have a return it is done very diligently. Olivia L.
Professional Bookshop is my default go to for finding the best prices and reading details of law books before buying. Detailed book description is very helpful. Tracy W.
I've been using Professional Bookshop since 2011 and they actually great, I always received great service and my book arrives on time. Lisa C.

Privacy Policy
Search Terms
Advanced Search

video title

Yekaterinburg
Novosibirsk
Vladivostok

Tours to Russia
Practicalities
Russia in Lists

Rusmania • Deep into Russia

Out of the Centre

Savvino-storozhevsky monastery and museum.

Zvenigorod's most famous sight is the Savvino-Storozhevsky Monastery, which was founded in 1398 by the monk Savva from the Troitse-Sergieva Lavra, at the invitation and with the support of Prince Yury Dmitrievich of Zvenigorod. Savva was later canonised as St Sabbas (Savva) of Storozhev. The monastery late flourished under the reign of Tsar Alexis, who chose the monastery as his family church and often went on pilgrimage there and made lots of donations to it. Most of the monastery’s buildings date from this time. The monastery is heavily fortified with thick walls and six towers, the most impressive of which is the Krasny Tower which also serves as the eastern entrance. The monastery was closed in 1918 and only reopened in 1995. In 1998 Patriarch Alexius II took part in a service to return the relics of St Sabbas to the monastery. Today the monastery has the status of a stauropegic monastery, which is second in status to a lavra. In addition to being a working monastery, it also holds the Zvenigorod Historical, Architectural and Art Museum.

Belfry and Neighbouring Churches

Located near the main entrance is the monastery's belfry which is perhaps the calling card of the monastery due to its uniqueness. It was built in the 1650s and the St Sergius of Radonezh’s Church was opened on the middle tier in the mid-17th century, although it was originally dedicated to the Trinity. The belfry's 35-tonne Great Bladgovestny Bell fell in 1941 and was only restored and returned in 2003. Attached to the belfry is a large refectory and the Transfiguration Church, both of which were built on the orders of Tsar Alexis in the 1650s.

To the left of the belfry is another, smaller, refectory which is attached to the Trinity Gate-Church, which was also constructed in the 1650s on the orders of Tsar Alexis who made it his own family church. The church is elaborately decorated with colourful trims and underneath the archway is a beautiful 19th century fresco.

Nativity of Virgin Mary Cathedral

The Nativity of Virgin Mary Cathedral is the oldest building in the monastery and among the oldest buildings in the Moscow Region. It was built between 1404 and 1405 during the lifetime of St Sabbas and using the funds of Prince Yury of Zvenigorod. The white-stone cathedral is a standard four-pillar design with a single golden dome. After the death of St Sabbas he was interred in the cathedral and a new altar dedicated to him was added.

Under the reign of Tsar Alexis the cathedral was decorated with frescoes by Stepan Ryazanets, some of which remain today. Tsar Alexis also presented the cathedral with a five-tier iconostasis, the top row of icons have been preserved.

Tsaritsa's Chambers

The Nativity of Virgin Mary Cathedral is located between the Tsaritsa's Chambers of the left and the Palace of Tsar Alexis on the right. The Tsaritsa's Chambers were built in the mid-17th century for the wife of Tsar Alexey - Tsaritsa Maria Ilinichna Miloskavskaya. The design of the building is influenced by the ancient Russian architectural style. Is prettier than the Tsar's chambers opposite, being red in colour with elaborately decorated window frames and entrance.

At present the Tsaritsa's Chambers houses the Zvenigorod Historical, Architectural and Art Museum. Among its displays is an accurate recreation of the interior of a noble lady's chambers including furniture, decorations and a decorated tiled oven, and an exhibition on the history of Zvenigorod and the monastery.

Palace of Tsar Alexis

The Palace of Tsar Alexis was built in the 1650s and is now one of the best surviving examples of non-religious architecture of that era. It was built especially for Tsar Alexis who often visited the monastery on religious pilgrimages. Its most striking feature is its pretty row of nine chimney spouts which resemble towers.

Plan your next trip to Russia

Ready-to-book tours.

Your holiday in Russia starts here. Choose and book your tour to Russia.

REQUEST A CUSTOMISED TRIP

Looking for something unique? Create the trip of your dreams with the help of our experts.

IMAGES

PH 162
Annotated Bibliography and Reflection.docx
Amazon
[DOWNLOAD] "Love's Labour's Lost (Annotated by Henry N. Hudson with an
Read President Biden’s Full Inaugural Address, Annotated
Annotated Example

VIDEO

2021 Annotated Bibliography--Statement of Scope
The Will
GCU HIS450 2021 January Week 3 Assignment Annotated Bibliography Latest
Felix the Annotated Cat in Egypt
Will Catlett 'A Thousand and One'

COMMENTS

The Annotated Will 2021
January 26, 2021 . SKU CLE21-00105 . Table of Contents . TAB 1 The Annotated Will 2021 ..... 1 - 1 to 1 - 116 . TAB 2 Testimonium Clauses & Affidavits of Execution for ... The Annotated Will 2021 . Title: Table of Contents (Jan 26) Author: Christina Thal Subject: Table of Contents Created Date:
The Annotated Will 2021
Remote or virtual commissioning is the practice of a person administering an oath or declaration of a deponent or declarant without being in their physical presence.1 Effective August 1, 2020, Ontario legislation permits remote commissioning, provided that certain conditions are met. I. Outlining the conditions lawyer and paralegal ...
The Annotated Will 2021
The Annotated Will 2021 . Will Planning Questionnaire. January 26, 2021 . 0 . Law So~iety . of Ontario . Barreau . de I 'Ontario . WILL PLANNING QUESTIONNAIRE . The information you are about to provide will be the basis for your discussions with your
The Annotated Will 2021
TAB 6. The Annotated Will 2021 . Retainer Letter. January 26, 2021 . 0 . Law So~iety . of Ontario . Barreau . de I 'Ontario
What Is an Annotated Bibliography?
Published on March 9, 2021 by Jack Caulfield . Revised on August 23, 2022. An annotated bibliography is a list of source references that includes a short descriptive text (an annotation) for each source. It may be assigned as part of the research process for a paper, or as an individual assignment to gather and read relevant sources on a topic.
Annotated Guide to the For the People Act of 2021
The For the People Act of 2021 (H.R. 1) passed the House of Representatives on March 3, 2021. footnote1_huz81sw 1 This guide currently reflects the version of the bill that passed the House of Representatives in March. The Senate version of the bill, which has been designated S. 1 and tracks closely to the House's language, was introduced on March 17, 2021.
Montana Code Annotated 2021
TITLE 1. GENERAL LAWS AND DEFINITIONS. CHAPTER 11. PUBLICATION AND UPDATING OF THE CODE CODE COMMISSIONER. Part 1. General Provisions. 1-11-101 Definitions. 1-11-102 Name -- citation -- correct form. 1-11-103 Effect of Montana Code Annotated -- official version.
Tennessee Code (2021)
2021 Tennessee Code. Title 1 - Code and Statutes. Title 2 - Elections. Title 3 - Legislature. Title 4 - State Government. Title 5 - Counties. Title 6 - Cities and Towns. Title 7 - Consolidated Governments and Local Governmental Functions and Entities. Title 8 - Public Officers and Employees.
2021 Montana Code Annotated
Justia › US Law › US Codes and Statutes › Montana Code Annotated › 2021 Montana Code Annotated ... 2022 2021 (you are here) 2020 2019 Other previous versions. View our newest version here. 2021 Montana Code Annotated. Title 1. General Laws and Definitions; Title 2. Government Structure and Administration; Title 3. Judiciary, Courts ...
2021 Guidelines Manual Annotated
2021 Guidelines Manual Annotated. A Message from the Acting Chair. "As many of you know, since early 2019, the United States Sentencing Commission has been operating without the quorum of four voting members required by statute to promulgate amendments to the sentencing guidelines, policy statements, and commentary...
Lexis Law Link
Tennessee Code - Lexis Law Link. At the bottom of this page is a link to the LEXIS Law Publishing Web Site. The site is not operated by, nor is it under the control of, The Tennessee Administrative Office of the Courts. This link is provided solely as a service, and any inquires regarding the usage of, or problems with, the LEXIS Law Publishing ...
The Annotated Mrs. Dalloway (The Annotated Books)
The Annotated Mrs. Dalloway includes: • The most complete and accurate representation of the original text • Extensive annotations exploring Woolf's personal and writing lives • 150 photographs and illustrations of Woolf, important manuscript pages, and paintings from the Bloomsbury Group, many never seen before • An original map of ...
The Annotated Mrs. Dalloway (The Annotated Books)
In this visually powerful annotated edition, acclaimed Oxford don and literary critic Merve Emre gives us an authoritative version of this landmark novel, supporting it with generous commentary that reveals Woolf's aesthetic and political ambitions—in Mrs. Dalloway and beyond—as never before. ... Liveright Publishing, Aug 31, 2021 ...
Biden's speech at the Holocaust remembrance ceremony, annotated
The Holocaust survivor Irene Butter wrote for CNN Opinion in 2021 about Adolf Hitler's rise and echoes of Nazism in the January 6, 2021, Capitol attack. That hatred was brought to life on ...
PDF Tennessee Code Annotated
Please note: (1) Tennessee Code Annotated section designations assigned to 2021 acts by the General Assembly may have been changed by the Tennessee Code Commission pursuant to § 1-1-108; and (2) under Tenn. Const., art. II, § 24, laws requiring the expenditure of state funds may be null and void unless first-year funding is approved in the ...
EY-annotated Form 990 highlights changes to 2021 Forms 990 and 990-PF
The annotated forms and instructions show what changes the IRS has made for tax year 2021. These documents (attached to this Alert) highlight and explain changes from tax year 2020. The annotated Form 990 includes a Table of Contents from which a reader can hyperlink to the form and to specific schedules and instructions.
PDF TENNESSEE CODE ANNOTATED
Code Annotated. The 2021 Replacement Volumes contain all legislation aff ecting them and do not have 2021 Supplement pamphlets. You may now recycle the 20 20 Supplement pamphlets and the replaced volumes or retain them for historical reference. Former . volume 6 (2015), Titles 30 to 35 . was split into new volumes: 6 (2021), Titles 30 to 33 ...
The Annotated IFRS® Standards Issued 2021. (3 volumes)
This is the official printed edition of the authoritative pronouncements of the International Accounting Standards Board as issued at 1 January 2021, with extensive cross-references and other annotations. New in this edition: Revised version of the Constitution and Due Process Handbook of the IFRS Foundation.
The Annotated Issued IFRS® Standards—Standards issued at 1 January 2021
This is the official printed edition of the authoritative pronouncements of the International Accounting Standards Board as issued at 1 January 2021, with extensive cross-references and other annotations. This product is a printed bound volume.
File:Location of Sergiyev Posad Region (Moscow Oblast).svg
What links here; Upload file; Special pages; Printable version; Page information
The flag of Elektrostal, Moscow Oblast, Russia which I bought there
For artists, writers, gamemasters, musicians, programmers, philosophers and scientists alike! The creation of new worlds and new universes has long been a key element of speculative fiction, from the fantasy works of Tolkien and Le Guin, to the science-fiction universes of Delany and Asimov, to the tabletop realm of Gygax and Barker, and beyond.
All Info
All Info for H.R.4763 - 118th Congress (2023-2024): Financial Innovation and Technology for the 21st Century Act
Savvino-Storozhevsky Monastery and Museum
Zvenigorod's most famous sight is the Savvino-Storozhevsky Monastery, which was founded in 1398 by the monk Savva from the Troitse-Sergieva Lavra, at the invitation and with the support of Prince Yury Dmitrievich of Zvenigorod. Savva was later canonised as St Sabbas (Savva) of Storozhev. The monastery late flourished under the reign of Tsar ...
Definition of The Strategic Directions for Regional Economic
Dmitriy V. Mikheev, Karina A. Telyants, Elena N. Klochkova, Olga V. Ledneva; Affiliations Dmitriy V. Mikheev