[House Report 118-395]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


118th Congress }                                               {   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 2d Session    }                                               {  118-395

======================================================================



 
 AMERICAN CONFIDENCE IN ELECTIONS: DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CITIZEN VOTER 
                                  ACT

                                _______
                                

 February 23, 2024.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on 
            the State of the Union and ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

 Mr. Steil, from the Committee on House Administration, submitted the 
                               following

                              R E P O R T

                             together with

                            DISSENTING VIEWS

                        [To accompany H.R. 4396]

    The Committee on House Administration, to whom was referred 
the bill (H.R. 4396) to amend the Help America Vote Act of 2002 
to prohibit noncitizen voting in District of Columbia 
elections, and for other purposes, having considered the same, 
reports favorably thereon without amendment and recommends that 
the bill do pass.

                                CONTENTS

                                                                   Page
Purpose and Summary..............................................     2
Background and Need for Legislation..............................     2
Committee Action.................................................     9
Committee Consideration..........................................    11
Committee Votes..................................................    11
Statement of Constitutional Authority............................    11
Committee Oversight Findings.....................................    12
Statement of Budget Authority and Related Items..................    12
Congressional Budget Office Estimate.............................    12
Performance Goals and Objectives.................................    12
Duplication of Federal Programs..................................    13
Advisory on Earmarks.............................................    13
Federal Mandates Statement.......................................    13
Advisory Committee Statement.....................................    13
Applicability to Legislative Branch..............................    13
Section-by-Section Analysis......................................    13
Changes in Existing Law as Reported..............................    13
Dissenting Views.................................................    16

                          Purpose and Summary

    H.R. 4396, the American Confidence in Elections: District 
of Columbia Citizen Voter Act, introduced by Representative 
Mike Bost (IL-12) and co-sponsored by Representatives Nancy 
Mace (SC-01) and Randy Weber, Sr. (TX-14), prohibits voting by 
noncitizens in any election held within the District of 
Columbia, including elections for Federal office, and any 
ballot initiative or referendum, effectively repealing D.C.'s 
Local Resident Voting Rights Amendment Act of 2022. In 2022, 
the District of Columbia enacted this bill, which authorized 
noncitizens who have resided in the District of Columbia for at 
least thirty days and are at eighteen years of age or older, to 
vote in local elections. The Constitution gives Congress 
complete control over and responsibility for the District of 
Columbia, and this legislation ensures that to vote in D.C. 
elections, a voter must be a citizen of the United States.

                  Background and Need for Legislation


                               BACKGROUND

    Article I, Section 4 of the United States Constitution\1\ 
(``the Elections Clause'') explains that the States have the 
primary authority to set election law and to administer 
elections, the ``times, places, and manner of holding 
elections, which includes voter registration.'' Conversely, the 
Constitution grants the Congress a purely secondary role to 
alter or create election laws only in the extreme cases of 
invasion, legislative neglect, or obstinate refusal to pass 
election laws.\2\ As do other aspects of our federal system, 
this division of sovereignty continues to serve to protect one 
of Americans' most precious freedoms, the right to vote.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\U.S. Const. art. I, Sec. 4, cl. 1 (``[t]he Times, Places and 
Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be 
prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress 
may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations . . .'').
    \2\Although the text of the Elections Clause, read literally and 
without the benefit of context, might suggest Congress has unlimited 
authority in this space, an examination of an examination of history, 
precedent, the Framers' words, debates concerning ratification, the 
Supreme Court, and the Constitution itself provide that this is not the 
case. See Report: The Elections Clause: States' Primary Constitutional 
Authority Over Elections, Comm. on H. Admin. (Republicans) (Aug. 12, 
2021), https://republicanscha.house.gov/sites/
republicans.cha.house.gov/files/
documents/
Report_The%20Elections%20Clause_States%20Primary%20Constitutional%20
Authority%20over%20Elections%20%28Aug %2011%202021%29.pdf.
    \3\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The federal Constitution contains several voting rights 
amendments, all of which only protect ``the right of citizens 
of the United States'' in the voting process.\4\ To enforce 
those rights, federal law makes it unlawful for non-citizens to 
vote in federal elections.\5\ Similarly, federal law prohibits 
foreign nationals\6\ from contributing or donating in 
connection with a federal, state, or local election,\7\ making 
a contribution or donation to a committee of a political 
party,\8\ or making an expenditure (including an independent 
expenditure) or disbursement for an electioneering 
communication.\9\ Although the Supreme Court of the United 
States has never been presented with the question whether the 
foreign national prohibition violates the First Amendment, it 
has previously affirmed a three-judge court's decision, 
authored by then-Judge Kavanaugh, which upheld the foreign 
national prohibition with respect to foreign nationals who 
wanted to make contributions to federal and State 
candidates.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \4\See U.S. Const. Amend. XV, Sec. 1 ``The right of citizens of the 
United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United 
States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition 
of servitude.''; U.S. Const. Amend. XIX, Sec. 1 ``The right of citizens 
of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the 
United States or by any State on account of sex.''; U.S. Const. Amend. 
XXIV, Sec. 1 ``The right of citizens of the United States to vote in 
any primary or other election for President or Vice President, for 
electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or 
Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the 
United States or any State by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or 
other tax.''; U.S. Const. Amend. XXVI, Sec. 1 ``The right of citizens 
of the United States, who are eighteen years of age or older, to vote 
shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on 
account of age.''
    \5\See 18 U.S.C. Sec. 611. Each of the voting rights amendments 
listed in the previous footnote provide the authority for Congress to 
enforce the amendment by appropriate legislation. In South Carolina v. 
Katzenbach, the Supreme Court held that Congress has the power to act 
under this authority as it would any of its powers under Article I, 
Section 8 as articulated in McCulloch v. Maryland.; See South Carolina 
v. Katzenbach, 383, U.S. 301, 326-27 (1966). Allowing non-citizens to 
cast ballots in American elections weakens our electoral system, 
directly and indirectly impacts Federal policy and funding decisions 
and candidate choice through the election of State and local officials, 
dilutes the value of citizenship, and sows distrust in our elections 
system; Even if a State has the sovereign authority, no State should 
permit non-citizens to cast ballots in State or local elections.; See 
U.S. Const. Amend. XIV; U.S. Const. Amend. XV; U.S. Const. Amend. XIX; 
U.S. Const. Amend. XXIV; U.S. Const. Amend. XXVI.
    \6\Federal law defines foreign national as an individual who is not 
a citizen of the United States and not lawfully admitted for permanent 
residence under 8 U.S.C. Sec. 1101(a)(20) or a foreign principal, as 
defined in 22 U.S.C. Sec. 611(b).
    \7\52 U.S.C. Sec. 30121(a)(1)(A).
    \8\Id. at Sec. 30121(a)(1)(B).
    \9\Id. at Sec. 30121(a)(1)(C). Federal law defines an 
electioneering communication as ``any broadcast, cable, or satellite 
communication which--refers to a clearly identified candidate for 
Federal office; is made within--60 days before a general, special, or 
runoff election for the office sought by the candidate; or 30 days 
before a primary or preference election, or a convention or caucus of a 
political party that has authority to nominate a candidate, for the 
office sought by the candidate; and in the case of a communication 
which refers to a candidate for an office other than President or Vice 
President, is targeted to the relevant electorate.''; Id. at 
Sec. 30104(f)(3).
    \10\See Bluman v. FEC, 800 F. Supp. 2d 281, 288 (D.D.C. 2011), 
aff'd, 565 U.S. 1104 (2012). Importantly, the three-judge decision did 
not rely on Congress' power under the Elections Clause of Article I, 
Section 4 to justify the foreign national spending prohibition. On 
November 30, 2023, the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on House 
Administration passed H.R. 3229, Stop Foreign Funds in Elections Act 
out of committee. That legislation prohibits foreign nationals from 
making a contribution or donation of money or other thing of value, or 
to make an express or implied promise to make a contribution or 
donation to a State or local ballot initiative, referendum, or recall 
election. Like the decision referenced above, the Committee does not 
believe H.R. 3229 would be enacted pursuant to the Elections Clause. 
Cf. Report: The Elections Clause: States' Primary Constitutional 
Authority Over Elections, Comm. on H. Admin. (Republicans) (Aug. 12, 
2021), https://republicanscha.house.gov/sites/
republicans.cha.house.gov/
files/documents/
Report_The%20Elections%20Clause_States%20Primary%20Constitutional%20
Authority%20over%20Elections%20%28Aug%2011%202021%29.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    While the Elections Clause provides States the primary 
authority over election administration, it and other 
constitutional provisions also provide States the power to 
establish voter qualifications. Specifically, ``Article I, 
Sec. 2, cl. 1, provides that electors in each State for the 
House of Representatives `shall have the Qualifications 
requisite for Electors of the most numerous Branch of the State 
Legislature,' and the Seventeenth Amendment adopts the same 
criterion for senatorial elections.''\11\ Similarly, Article II 
gives State legislatures the power to appoint presidential 
electors\12\ and every State has delegated this responsibility 
to its voters.\13\ States can establish voter qualifications 
for voters voting in a presidential election that do not run 
afoul of other constitutional commands.\14\ These explicit 
constitutional commands make clear that States are given the 
authority to establish voter qualifications, not Congress; a 
principle the Supreme Court has reaffirmed twice in the past 
decade.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \11\Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council of Ariz., Inc, 133 S.Ct. 2247, 
2258 (2013).
    \12\U.S. Const. Art. II, Sec. 1, cl. 2 ``Each state shall appoint, 
in such manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a number of 
electors . . .''; See also Bush v. Gore, 531 U.S. 98, 104 (2000) (``The 
individual citizen has no federal constitutional right to vote for 
electors for the President of the United States unless and until the 
state legislature chooses a statewide election as the means to 
implement its power to appoint members of the electoral college.'')
    \13\See Chiafalo v. Washington, 140 S.Ct. 2316, 2328 (2020) 
(``State election laws evolved to reinforce that development, ensuring 
that a State's electors would vote the same way as its citizens. As 
noted earlier, state legislatures early dropped out of the picture; by 
the mid-1800s, ordinary voters chose electors.'')
    \14\See Williams v. Rhodes, 393 U.S. 23, 28-29 (1968) (``State laws 
enacted pursuant to Art. II, Sec. 1, of the Constitution to regulate 
the selection of electors must meet the requirements of the Equal 
Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.''); See also Bush v. 
Gore, 531, U.S. 98, 104-05 (``The right to vote is protected in more 
than the initial allocation of the franchise. Equal protection applies 
as well to the manner of its exercise. Having once granted the right to 
vote on equal terms, the State may not, by later arbitrary and 
disparate treatment, value one person's vote over that of another.'')
    \15\See Inter Tribal Council of Ariz., Inc, 133 S.Ct. at 2258; 
Husted v. A. Phillip Randolph Institute, 138 S. Ct. 1833, 1846 (2018) 
(``The Constitution gives States the authority to set the 
qualifications for voting in congressional elections, Art. I, Sec.  2, 
cl. 1; Amdt. 17, as well as the authority to set the ``Times, Places 
and Manner'' to conduct such elections in the absence of contrary 
congressional direction, Art. I, Sec. 4, cl. 1.'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Every State has used its constitutional authority to 
establish voter qualifications often consisting of age, 
residency, and citizenship requirements.\16\ Several States 
have enshrined U.S. citizenship in their state constitution as 
a qualification for voters to vote in State elections.\17\ The 
Constitution permits States to enforce their U.S. citizenship 
qualification in different ways. Some States require applicants 
to provide documentary proof of citizenship\18\ while others 
only require the applicant to swear or affirm they are a 
citizen of the United States.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \16\See Kramer v. Union Free School District 395 U.S. 621, 625 
(1969) (`` . . . States have the power to impose reasonable 
citizenship, age, and residency requirements on the availability of the 
ballot.''); See also Carrington v. Rash, 380 U.S. 89, 91 (1965) 
(``There can be no doubt either of the historic function of the States 
to establish, on a nondiscriminatory basis, and in accordance with the 
Constitution, other qualifications for the exercise of the 
franchise.'')
    \17\See Laws permitting noncitizens to vote in the United States, 
Ballotpedia, available at https://ballotpedia.org/
Laws_permitting_noncitizens_to_vote_in_the_United_States.
    \18\See, e.g. A.R.S. Sec. 16-121.01; MS Code Sec. 23-15-15.
    \19\See MINN. STAT. 201.071 (2023) (explaining that an applicant 
must certify they are a citizen of the United States when they register 
to vote, but no documentary proof of citizenship is required.) See also 
National Mail Voter Registration Form, U.S. Election Assistance 
Commission (Dec. 29, 2023), https://www.eac.gov/voters/national-mail-
voter-registration-form (the National Mail Voter Registration Form only 
requires applicants registering to vote in a federal election to swear 
or affirm they are a United States citizen.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Under the Constitution, the District of Columbia (``D.C.'') 
is not a sovereign State; rather, it serves as the federal 
capital district entirely under congressional control.\20\ And 
unlike the primacy that States enjoy under the Elections 
Clause, the voter qualification clauses in Article I, Section 2 
and the Seventeenth Amendment, the Constitution is clear that 
Congress can ``exercise exclusive legislation in all cases 
whatsoever, over such District . . . ''\21\ The Supreme Court 
has interpreted this language broadly. Under it, Congressional 
`` . . . power is plenary. Not only may statutes of Congress of 
otherwise nationwide application be applied to the District of 
Columbia, but Congress may also exercise all the police and 
regulatory powers which a state legislature or municipal 
government would have in legislating for state or local 
purposes'', legislating in the first instance for D.C.\22\ 
While under the delegation of authority given to its city 
government by Congress, D.C. can pass election and voter 
qualification laws in the first instance, everything it does is 
subject to being overridden by Congress. This understanding is 
buttressed by the language in the Twenty-Third Amendment, 
providing D.C. the ability to appoint presidential electors, 
but `` . . . in such manner that Congress may direct.''\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \20\U.S. Const. art. I, Sec. 8, cl. 17 ``The Congress shall have 
Power . . . [t]o exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases 
whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, 
by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become 
the Seat of Government of the United States . . .''; See also U.S. 
Const. amend. XXIII (this amendment was adopted to give the District of 
Columbia representation in the Electoral College because it is not a 
State under the Electors Clause of Article II, Sec. 1, cl. 2); See also 
Bolling v. Sharpe, 347 U.S. 497, 498-99 (1954) (holding that the 
Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause did not apply to the 
District of Columbia because it is not a State.).
    \21\U.S. Const. art. I, Sec. 8, cl. 17.
    \22\Palmore v. United States, 411 U.S. 389, 397-98 (1973).
    \23\U.S. Const. amend. XXIII.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Before D.C. enacted the Local Resident Voting Rights 
Amendment Act of 2022, voters in D.C. local elections were 
required to be citizens of the United States. But the Act 
changed voter qualifications, giving all noncitizens the 
ability to cast a ballot in local races, so long as the voter 
is at least eighteen years of age and has resided in D.C. for 
thirty days.\24\ This change also allowed noncitizens to be 
elected to the positions of Mayor, Chair or member of the 
Council, Attorney General, Member of the State Board of 
Education, or Advisory Neighborhood Commissioner.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \24\Local Resident Voting Rights Amendment Act of 2022, D.C. Law 
24-242, 69 DCR 14601 (2023).
    \25\The Local Resident Voting Rights Amendment Act of 2022 removed 
the requirement that a voter needed to be a citizen of the United 
States to vote in a District of Columbia local election. As such, 
noncitizens are now ``qualified electors'' for local elections in the 
District of Columbia. See D.C. Code Sec. 1-1001.02(2)(B). Each of the 
positions listed require, at least, for the candidate to a ``qualified 
elector'', but none require the candidate to be a citizen of the United 
States. See Id. at Sec. 1-204.21; Id. at Sec. 1-1001.08.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Estimates as to the number of non-citizens of voting age 
living in the D.C. range from 21,000 to 50,000, potentially 
half of whom are illegal aliens.\26\ As such, there are more 
than enough non-citizens of voting age living in D.C. to impact 
election outcomes in some wards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \26\Jason Richwine, Over 42,000 Non-Citizens, Including Perhaps 
20,000 Illegal Immigrants, Could Vote in D.C. Elections, Center for 
Immigration Studies (Feb. 4, 2023), https://cis.org/Richwine/Over-
42000-NonCitizens-Including-Perhaps-20000-Illegal-Immigrants-Could-
Vote- DC-Elections.; See also The Editorial Board, D.C. is considering 
legislation to let noncitizens vote. That's a bad idea., The Washington 
Post (Oct. 17, 2022), https://www.washingtonpost.com/ opinions/2022/10/
17/ dc-voting-noncitizens-legislation/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The National Voter Registration Act (``NVRA'') was signed 
into law by President Bill Clinton in 1993 ``to establish 
procedures that will increase the number of eligible citizens 
who register to vote in elections for Federal office; . . . 
protect the integrity of the electoral process; and . . . 
ensure that accurate and current voter registration rolls are 
maintained.''\27\ The legislation is commonly referred to as 
the ``motor voter'' law because it requires States to provide 
individuals with voter registration materials when they apply 
for a driver's license.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \27\52 U.S.C. Sec. 20501(b).
    \28\Id. at Sec. 20503(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    D.C. allows noncitizens to receive driver's licenses or 
non-driver identification cards.\29\ This means that in D.C., 
before the enactment of the Local Resident Voting Rights 
Amendment of 2022, there was always the possibility that, due 
to human error in the process at the counter or in the computer 
system, noncitizens could be given voter registration forms and 
might unlawfully register to vote in at least some of these 
situations. This is not a hypothetical as Pennsylvania admitted 
that just a few years ago it had inadvertently allowed over 
10,000 noncitizens to register to vote via a similar 
process,\30\ and Texas has had similar problems with nearly 
100,000 registrations.\31\ But now that noncitizens can vote in 
local elections in D.C., they can register to vote when they 
get a driver's license or non-driver identification card.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \29\Driver License for Non-US Citizens, District of Columbia 
Department of Motor Vehicles, https://dmv.dc.gov/service/driver-
license-for-non-us-citizens.
    \30\Rowan Scarborough, Stephen Dinan, Pennsylvania admits to 11,000 
noncitizens registered to vote, Washington Times (Jan. 30, 2019), 
https://www.washingtontimes.com/ news/2019/jan/30/pennsylvania- 11000-
non-citizens-registered-vote/.; See also Pam Fessler, Some Noncitizens 
Do Wind Up Registered To Vote, But Usually Not On Purpose, National 
Public Radio (Feb. 26, 2019), https://www.npr.org/2019/02/26/697848417/
some-noncitizens-do-wind-up-registered-to-vote-but-usually-not-on-
purpose.
    \31\Alexa Ura, Texas' renewed voter citizenship review is still 
flagging citizens as ``possible non-U.S. citizens'', The Texas Tribune 
(Dec. 17, 2021), https://www.texastribune.org/2021/12/17/texas-voter-
roll-review/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The NVRA allows States\32\ to remove registered individuals 
from its voter rolls if the registrant requests it, if State 
law prohibits those individuals from exercising the franchise 
by reason of criminal conviction or mental incapacity, or if 
the State carries out a general program to remove voters that 
have died or moved.\33\ With the exceptions provided for in the 
preceding sentence, a State, within 90 days prior of a primary 
or general election for federal office cannot undertake a 
program with the purpose of systematically removing ineligible 
voters from its voter rolls.\34\ In addition, the NVRA also 
imposes strict guidelines the State must follow in carrying out 
a program to remove voters that have moved.\35\ Although the 
NVRA does not explicitly provide for the removal of noncitizens 
from the voter rolls, the United States Court of Appeals for 
the Eleventh Circuit has held it is a lawful removal basis.\36\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \32\The National Voter Registration Act's definition of State 
includes the District of Columbia. See 52 U.S.C. Sec. 20502(4).
    \33\Id. at Sec. Sec. 20507(a)(3)-(4).
    \34\Id. at Sec. 20507(c)(2)(A).
    \35\Id. at Sec. 20507(b)-(e).
    \36\Arcia v. Florida Secretary of State, 772 F. 3d 1335, 1348 (11th 
Cir. 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    While the NVRA provides several permissible grounds for 
removing voters from the voter rolls, D.C.'s recent history 
shows it has taken little to no action in keeping its voter 
rolls clean. During the 2020 and 2022 Federal and local D.C. 
elections, D.C. chose to mail every registered voter a ballot. 
In the 2020 general election, the Board of Elections (``the 
Board'') mailed 421,791 ballots, and 48,018 of them were 
undeliverable--more than 11 percent.\37\ This rate was more 
than eight times the national average.\38\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \37\Martin Austermuhle, Audit finds high number of D.C. mail 
ballots returned as `undeliverable' in 2020, NPR (Nov. 17, 2021), 
https://www.npr.org/local/305/2021/11/17/1056487637/audit-finds-high-
number-of-d-c-mail-ballots-returned-as-undeliverable-in-2020.
    \38\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In 2022, the Board mailed every registered voter a ballot 
for the midterm primary election. In that election, the Board 
mailed 402,323 ballots, and 65,398 ballots, or about 16 
percent, were undeliverable.\39\ This is an increase of 17,380 
in undeliverable ballots between the 2020 general election and 
the 2022 primary election. Despite the Board's previous failed 
attempts to administer an effective mail-in ballot system 
during the 2020 general election and 2022 primary election, it 
mailed every registered voter a ballot for the November 2022 
general election. The Board mailed 508,543 ballots, and 87,921 
were undeliverable.\40\ The rate of undeliverable ballots 
mailed out for the general election in 2022 was 17 percent, an 
increase of about six basis points from the 2020 election. In 
addition, D.C. mailed over 500 voters an incorrect ballot.\41\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \39\Martin Austermuhle, Tens Of Thousands Of D.C. Mail Ballots Were 
Returned As `Undeliverable' In Recent Elections, DCist (Dec. 12, 2022, 
12:16 PM), https://dcist.com/story/ 22/12/12/large-numbers- dc-mail-
ballots-returned-undeliverable/.
    \40\Id.
    \41\Julie Zauzmer Weil, D.C. Mailed Incorrect Ballots to More than 
500 Voters, The Washington Post (Oct. 24, 2022), https://
www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2022/10/24/dc-mailed-incorrect-
ballots/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    D.C.'s Local Resident Voting Rights Amendment Act of 2022 
became law on February 23, 2023.\42\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \42\Maggie More, DC's Noncitizen Voting Bill Might Not Become Law 
After All, NBC Washington (Feb. 28, 2023), https://
www.nbcwashington.com/ news/local/dcs-noncitizen- voting-bill-might-
not- become-law-after-all/3289043/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Under the federal D.C. Home Rule Act, Congress has a 30-day 
review period for any legislation intended to become law and to 
decide whether the legislation should go into effect.\43\ On 
February 9, 2023, the U.S. House of Representatives favorably 
voted on the disapproval resolution.\44\ But because the U.S. 
Senate has yet to act on the House's disapproval resolution at 
the time of printing, noncitizens are currently allowed to vote 
in D.C. local elections.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \43\Pub. L. 93-198, 87 Stat. 774. The District of Columbia Home 
Rule Act simply provides one avenue for Congress to override 
legislation enacted in the District. It does not prohibit Congress from 
acting in other ways, under its constitutional authority, to legislate 
directly over the District, including repealing local laws.
    \44\Disapproving the action of the District of Columbia Council in 
approving the Local Resident Voting Rights Amendment Act of 2022, H.J. 
Res. 24, 118th Cong. Sec. 1 (2023).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In the 117th Congress, former Ranking Member on the 
Committee on House Administration, Representative Rodney Davis 
(IL-13), introduced H.R. 8528, the American Confidence in 
Elections Act.\45\ That legislation included the same 
prohibition on noncitizen voting in local elections in D.C as 
does H.R. 4396, sponsored by Representative Bost.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \45\American Confidence in Elections Act, H.R. 8528, 117th Cong. 
Sec. 2 (2022).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In the 118th Congress, Representative Bryan Steil (WI-01), 
introduced H.R. 4563, an updated version of the American 
Confidence in Elections Act\46\ (``ACE Act''), which includes 
Representative Bost's H.R. 4396 in its entirety.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \46\American Confidence in Elections Act, H.R. 4562, 118th Cong. 
Sec. 1 (2023).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          NEED FOR LEGISLATION

    Representative Bost's American Confidence in Elections: 
District of Columbia Citizen Voter Act prohibits noncitizen 
voting in any election that takes place in D.C., including 
elections for Federal office, and any ballot initiative or 
referendum. This legislation overturns the Local Resident 
Voting Rights Amendment Act of 2022.\47\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \47\Supra note 25.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Congress has a responsibility to exercise its 
constitutional authority over D.C. to enact common-sense 
election reforms that give voters confidence in the capital 
city's elections. The nation's seat of government should 
administer the best elections in the country, serving as an 
example of seamless democracy. As of the publication of this 
report, it does not.
    The framers of the Constitution's voting rights amendments 
only protected the ``right of citizens of the United States'' 
in the voting process because they understood that citizenship 
was a necessary prerequisite to participating in our democracy. 
The oath that every naturalized citizen must take requires them 
to give up all prior allegiances to any other nation, swear 
allegiance to the United States, serve the United States when 
called on, and to `` . . . support and defend the Constitution 
and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, 
foreign and domestic . . .''\48\ The naturalization oath is a 
good example that naturalized citizens are able, willing, and 
ready to support and defend the United States. They have 
established sufficient ties to the United States to enjoy all 
the rights and privileges of citizenship, including the right 
to participate in American democracy.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \48\Naturalization Oath of Allegiance to the United States of 
America, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (July 5, 2020), 
https://www.uscis.gov/citizenship/learn-about-citizenship/the- 
naturalization-interview-and-test/naturalization-oath-of-allegiance-to-
the-united-states-of- 
america#::text=%22I%20hereby%20declare%2C%20on%20oath,the%20United%20St
ates%20of% 20America.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In contrast, noncitizens have not established sufficient 
ties to the United States to enable them to participate in 
American democracy. The process to become a citizen of the 
United States can be challenging, but the United States 
welcomed almost one million citizens in fiscal year 2023, and 
almost eight million citizens over the last decade.\49\ 
Allowing noncitizens to participate in our elections would 
dilute the constitutional right of citizens to vote. It would 
also cheapen the meaning of U.S. citizenship and allow 
individuals without sufficient ties to the United States to 
determine the future of D.C. when they will likely not remain 
in D.C. to see the consequences or effects. As estimates 
predict between 20,000 and 50,000 noncitizens will be allowed 
to vote in D.C., there are several races where the votes these 
noncitizens cast might be outcome determinative. That result is 
not fair to the millions of naturalized citizens that earned 
their right to vote.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \49\Naturalization Statistics, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration 
Services (Jan. 12, 2024), https://
www.uscis.gov/citizenship-resource-center/naturalization-
statistics#::text=USCIS%20welcomed
%20878%2C500%20new%20citizens,naturalizations%20over%20the%20past%20deca
de.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The practical problems with D.C. allowing noncitizens to 
vote in local elections are overwhelming. As described above, 
D.C. will likely need to provide noncitizens with voter 
registration forms when they get a driver's license or non-
driver identification card. D.C. will need to be diligent to 
ensure that noncitizen voters are separated from citizen voters 
who can vote in D.C. local and Federal elections. This will 
likely require two separate voter lists, which D.C. estimated 
would cost at least three million dollars.\50\ With two voter 
lists, there is always the real possibility that a noncitizen 
voter ends up on the wrong list, receives the wrong ballot, and 
unlawfully casts a ballot in a Federal election.\51\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \50\The Editorial Board, D.C. is considering legislation to let 
noncitizens vote. That's a bad idea., The Washington Post (Oct. 17, 
2022), https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/10/17/dc-voting-
noncitizens-legislation/.
    \51\18 U.S.C. Sec. 611.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Unfortunately, D.C.'s history with outdated voter rolls 
also increases the possibility that noncitizens receive an 
incorrect ballot. D.C. chose to mail every registered voter a 
ballot in the 2020 general and 2022 midterm elections. In 2020, 
11 percent of ballots were sent to undeliverable addresses, and 
that number increased to 17 percent in 2022. D.C. does not have 
a history of cleaning its voter rolls, and it is not clear it 
attempted to do so between the 2020 and 2022 elections. Now 
that D.C. will need to create two different ballots for voters 
within the same ward, precinct, and advisory neighborhood 
commission district, one that includes only local D.C. 
elections and one that includes local D.C. elections and 
federal elections, there is a high possibility that ballots are 
sent to the wrong voters. In 2022, D.C. sent over 500 ballots 
to the wrong ward.\52\ With two voter lists and two different 
ballots for voters in the same ward, there is high likelihood 
that human error will result in noncitizen voters receiving 
mailed ballots that feature federal races.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \52\Julie Zauzmer Weil, D.C. mailed incorrect ballots to more than 
500 voters, Washington Post, (Oct. 24, 2022), https://
www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/ 2022/10/24/dc-mailed- incorrect-
ballots/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Finally, because D.C. is our nation's capital city, the 
Local Resident Voting Rights Amendment Act of 2022 could truly 
create some absurd results. The Chairman of the Committee on 
House Administration, Representative Bryan Steil (WI-01), 
argued that the law would allow Russian citizens who work in 
the Russian Embassy and live in D.C. for 30 days to vote for 
Mayor of D.C.\53\ While Committee Democrats called this 
interpretation crazy, the Washington Post Editorial Board 
agreed with Chairman Steil. When arguing against D.C. adopting 
the Local Resident Voting Rights Amendment Act of 2022, the 
Editorial Board argued, ``[t]here's nothing in this measure to 
prevent employees at embassies of governments that are openly 
hostile to the United States from casting ballots. Or foreign 
students who are studying abroad in Washington for a 
semester.''\54\ These truly absurd results will become reality 
if Congress does not act to overturn the Local Resident Voting 
Rights Amendment Act of 2022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \53\Ricardo Torres, Fact Check: Steil's claim on immigrants voting 
in local DC elections is ``Mostly True'' but not unprecedented in U.S., 
Milwaukee Journal Sentinel (Nov. 28, 2023), https://www.jsonline.com/
story/news/politics/politifactwisconsin/2023/11/28/steils-claim-on-
immigrants-voting-in-local-dc-elections-is-mostly-true/71720121007/#.
    \54\The Editorial Board, D.C. is considering legislation to let 
noncitizens vote. That's a bad idea., The Washington Post (Oct. 17, 
2022), https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/10/17/dc-voting-
noncitizens-legislation/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In their dissenting views, Committee Democrats do not 
defend the substance of the Local Resident Voting Rights 
Amendment Act of 2022. Instead, they defend the notion of 
popular sovereignty under the belief that D.C. voters should 
decide what happens in D.C., not Congress. This is a 
particularly strange view coming from Committee Democrats who 
pushed H.R. 1, the For the People Act\55\ in the previous two 
Congresses, a bill that overrode thousands of State election 
laws and mandated election procedures all across the country. 
As explained above, the Constitution gives States the primary 
authority over election administration while also granting 
Congress complete control over D.C. Therefore, it is 
appropriate for Congress to treat the District of Columbia 
differently than the sovereign States.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \55\For the People Act, H.R. 1, 116th Cong. Sec. 1 (2019); For the 
People Act, H.R. 1, 117th Cong. Sec. 1 (2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Committee Democrats also argue that Committee Republicans, 
through the ACE Act, ``are trying to mandate'' election 
procedures on every city, county, and State.\56\ The ACE Act 
does not mandate any election law or procedure in any State as 
the Elections Clause\57\ does not allow that result. The ACE 
Act mandates several election procedures in D.C. because the 
Constitution authorizes direct congressional action and demands 
congressional attention.\58\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \56\Dissenting Views at 1.
    \57\U.S. Const. art. I, Sec. 4, cl. 1.
    \58\See U.S. Const. art. I, Sec. 8, cl. 17.; See also Palmore, 411 
U.S. at 397-98.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                            Committee Action


                       INTRODUCTION AND REFERRAL

    On June 30, 2023, Representative Mike Bost (IL-12), joined 
by Representatives Nancy Mace (SC-01) and Randy Weber, Sr. (TX-
14), introduced H.R. 4396, the American Confidence in 
Elections: District of Columbia Citizen Voter Act. The bill was 
referred to the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on 
House Administration.

                                HEARINGS

    For the purposes of clause 3(c)(6)(A) of House rule XIII, 
in the 118th Congress, the Committee held three full committee 
hearings and one subcommittee hearing to develop H.R. 4396.
          1. On April 27, 2023, the Committee held a full 
        committee hearing titled, ``American Confidence in 
        Elections: State Tools to Promote Voter Confidence.'' 
        The hearing focused on Title I of H.R. 4563, the 
        American Confidence in Elections Act, what tools States 
        need to boost voter integrity and strengthen voter 
        confidence, and how the federal government can provide 
        States with access to the information needed to 
        accomplish these goals. Witnesses included the 
        Honorable Ken Cuccinelli, Chairman, Election 
        Transparency Initiative, the Honorable Hans von 
        Spakovsky, Manager, Election Law Reform Initiative and 
        Senior Legal Fellow, the Heritage Foundation, the 
        Honorable Mac Warner, West Virginia Secretary of State, 
        the Honorable Donald Palmer, Commissioner, U.S. 
        Election Assistance Commission, and Mr. Joseph Paul 
        Gloria, Chief Executive Officer for Operations, 
        Election Center.\59\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \59\American Confidence in Elections: State Tools to Promote Voter 
Confidence: Hearing Before the H. Comm. On Admin., 118th Cong. (2023).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
          2. On May 24, 2023, the Committee on House 
        Administration Subcommittee on Elections held a 
        subcommittee hearing titled, ``American Confidence in 
        Elections: Ensuring Every Eligible American has the 
        Opportunity to Vote--and for their Vote to Count 
        According to Law.'' The hearing highlighted the strong 
        election integrity reforms that have passed throughout 
        several States and how important it is for States to 
        learn from other States' successes in the election 
        arena. Witnesses included: Mr. Joseph Burns, Lawyer, 
        Law Office of Joseph T. Burns, PLLC, Ms. Lisa Dixon, 
        Executive Director, Lawyers Democracy Fund (now the 
        Center for Election Confidence), Mr. Thor Hearne, 
        Founding Partner, True North Law, LLC, The Honorable 
        Scot Turner, Executive Director, Eternal Vigilance 
        Action Inc., and Mr. Deuel Ross, Deputy Director of 
        Litigation, NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, 
        Inc.\60\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \60\American Confidence in Elections: Ensuring Every Eligible 
American has the Opportunity to Vote--and for their Vote to Count 
According to Law: Hearing Before the Subcomm. On Elections of the H. 
Comm. On Admin., 118th Cong. (2023).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
          3. On June 7, 2023, the Committee held a joint 
        committee hearing with the Committee on Oversight and 
        Accountability titled, ``American Confidence in 
        Elections: The Path to Election Integrity in the 
        District of Columbia.'' The hearing focused on election 
        administration problems in the District of Columbia and 
        the national importance of implementing necessary 
        reforms in the nation's capital city. Witnesses 
        included: The Honorable Ken Cuccinelli, Chairman, 
        Election Transparency Initiative, Mr. Charles Spies, 
        Member, Dickinson Wright, PLLC, Ms. Monica Evans, 
        Executive Director, D.C. Board of Elections, and Ms. 
        Wendy R. Weiser, Vice President, Democracy, Brennan 
        Center for Justice.\61\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \61\American Confidence in Elections: The Path to Election 
Integrity in the District of Columbia: Hearing Before the H. Comm. On 
Admin. and the H. Comm. On Oversight and Accountability, 118th Cong. 
(2023).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
          4. On July 10, 2023, the Committee held a full 
        committee field hearing titled, ``American Confidence 
        in Elections: The Path to Election Integrity Across 
        America.'' The hearing outlined the newly introduced 
        H.R. 4563, the American Confidence in Elections Act, 
        and highlighted the successes of S.B. 202 (Georgia), 
        2021. Witnesses included the Honorable Hans von 
        Spakovsky, Manager, Election Law Reform Initiative and 
        Senior Legal Fellow, the Heritage Foundation, Dr. 
        Kathleen Ruth, former Vice Chair, Fulton County, 
        Georgia, Board of Registration and Elections, Mrs. 
        Vernetta Keith Nuriddin, Elections Consultant, City of 
        Milton, Georgia, and Ms. Cathy Woolard, Chair, Fulton 
        County, Georgia, Board of Registration and 
        Elections.\62\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \62\American Confidence in Elections: The Path to Election 
Integrity Across America: Hearing Before the H. Comm. On Admin., 118th 
Cong. (2023).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                        Committee Consideration

    On November 30, 2023, the U.S. House Committee on House 
Administration met in open session and ordered the bill, H.R. 
4396, American Confidence in Elections: District of Columbia 
Citizen Voter Act, reported favorably to the House of 
Representatives, by a record vote of six to three, a quorum 
being present.

                            Committee Votes

    In compliance with clause 3(b) of House rule XIII, the 
following vote occurred during the Committee's consideration of 
H.R. 4396:
          1. Vote to report H.R. 3162 favorably to the House of 
        Representatives, passed by a record vote of 6 ayes and 
        3 noes. Ayes: Steil, B., Loudermilk, B., Murphy, G., 
        Bice, S., Carey, M., Lee, L. Noes: Morelle, J., Sewell, 
        T., Torres, N.

                 Statement of Constitutional Authority

    Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant 
to the following:
           Article I, Section 8, Clause 4--``To 
        establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, . . . 
        throughout the United States;''\63\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \63\U.S. Const. art. I, Sec. 8, cl. 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Article I, Section 8, Clause 17--``To 
        exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, 
        over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as 
        may, by Cession of particular States, and the 
        Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of Government 
        of the United States; . . . ''\64\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \64\U.S. Const. art. I, Sec. 8, cl. 17. See also Palmore v. United 
States, 411 U.S. 389, 397-98 (1973).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Article IV, Section 4--``The United States 
        shall guarantee to every State in this Union a 
        Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each 
        of them against Invasion; . . .''\65\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \65\U.S. Const. art. IV, Sec. 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Article I, Section 8, Clause 18--``To make 
        all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for 
        carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all 
        other Powers vested by this Constitution in the 
        Government of the United States, or in any Department 
        or Officer thereof.''\66\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \66\U.S. Const. Art. I, Sec. 8, cl. 18.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
           The Fifteenth, Nineteenth, Twenty-Fourth, 
        and Twenty-sixth Amendments--``The right of citizens of 
        the United States to vote . . .''\67\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \67\See U.S. Const. Amend. XV; U.S. Const. Amend. XIX; U.S. Const. 
Amend. XXIV; U.S. Const. Amend. XXVI.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
           The Twenty Third Amendment--``The District 
        constituting the seat of Government of the United 
        States shall appoint in such manner as Congress may 
        direct . . .''.\68\ This amendment allows American 
        citizens residing in the District of Columbia to vote 
        for presidential electors, who in turn vote in the 
        Electoral College for President and Vice President, and 
        reaffirms congressional authority over the District of 
        Columbia provided for under Article I, Section 8, 
        Clause 17.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \68\U.S. Const. Amend. XXIII.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                      Committee Oversight Findings

    In compliance with clause 3(c)(1) of House rule XIII, the 
Committee advises that the findings and recommendations of the 
Committee, based on oversight activities under clause 2(b)(1) 
of rule X of the Rules of the House of Representatives, are 
incorporated in the descriptive portions of this report.

            Statement of Budget Authority and Related Items

    Pursuant to clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives and section 308(a)(I) of the 
Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the Committee provides the 
following opinion and estimate with respect to new budget 
authority, entitlement authority, and tax expenditures. The 
Committee believes that there will be no additional costs 
attributable to H.R. 4396.

                  Congressional Budget Office Estimate

    With respect to the requirement of clause 3(c)(3) of rule 
XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, a cost 
estimate provided by the Congressional Budget Office pursuant 
to section 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 was not 
made available to the Committee in time for the filing of this 
report. The Chairman of the Committee shall cause such an 
estimate to be printed in the Congressional Record if it is 
received by the Committee.

                    Performance Goals and Objectives

    The performance goals and objectives of H.R. 4396 are to 
prohibit noncitizens from voting in any election in the 
District of Columbia, including any election for Federal 
office, and any ballot initiative or referendum, in order to 
protect the right of U.S. citizens to vote in the District.

                    Duplication of Federal Programs

    Pursuant to clause 3(c)(5) of House rule XIII, no provision 
of H.R. 4396 establishes or reauthorizes a program of the 
federal government known to be duplicative of another federal 
program.

                          Advisory on Earmarks

    In accordance with clause 9 of House rule XXI, H.R. 4396 
does not contain any congressional earmarks, limited tax 
benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined in clauses 
9(d), 9(e), or 9(f) of House rule XXI.

                       Federal Mandates Statement

    An estimate of federal mandates prepared by the Director of 
the Congressional Budget Office pursuant to section 423 of the 
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act was not made available to the 
Committee in time for the filing of this report. The Chairman 
of the Committee shall cause such an estimate to be printed in 
the Congressional Record if it is received by the Committee.

                      Advisory Committee Statement

    H.R. 4396 does not establish or authorize any new advisory 
committees.

                  Applicability to Legislative Branch

    The Committee finds that the legislation does not relate to 
the terms and conditions of employment or access to public 
services or accommodations within the meaning of section 
102(b)(3) of the Congressional Accountability Act.

                      Section-by-Section Analysis


Section 1. Short title

    The section provides the short title of the bill, the 
American Confidence in Elections: District of Columbia Citizen 
Voter Act.

Section 2. Ban on noncitizens voting in District of Columbia elections

    Section 2(a) adds a new section into the Help America Vote 
Act of 2002, codified at 52 U.S.C. Sec. 21081.
    Under this new section, the legislation prohibits 
noncitizens from voting in elections in the District of 
Columbia unless the voter is a citizen. It also defines the 
District of Columbia election to cover any election for public 
office in the District, including elections for Federal office, 
and any ballot initiative or referendum.

         Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported

    In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of 
the House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by 
the bill, as reported, are shown as follows (existing law 
proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new 
matter is printed in italics, and existing law in which no 
change is proposed is shown in roman):

                     HELP AMERICA VOTE ACT OF 2002


SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.

  (a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Help America 
Vote Act of 2002''.
  (b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents of this Act is 
as follows:

Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.
     * * * * * * *

    TITLE III--UNIFORM AND NONDISCRIMINATORY ELECTION TECHNOLOGY AND 
                       ADMINISTRATION REQUIREMENTS

                        Subtitle A--Requirements

     * * * * * * *
Sec. 304. Ban on noncitizen voting in District of Columbia elections.
Sec. [304] 305. Minimum requirements.
Sec. [305] 306. Methods of implementation left to discretion of State.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


   TITLE III--UNIFORM AND NONDISCRIMINATORY ELECTION TECHNOLOGY AND 
                      ADMINISTRATION REQUIREMENTS

Subtitle A--Requirements

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SEC. 304. BAN ON NONCITIZEN VOTING IN DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ELECTIONS.

  (a) In General.--No individual may vote in a District of 
Columbia election unless the individual is a citizen of the 
United States.
  (b) District of Columbia Election Defined.--In this section, 
the term ``District of Columbia election'' means any election 
for public office in the District of Columbia, including an 
election for Federal office, and any ballot initiative or 
referendum.

SEC. [304.]  305. MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS.

  The requirements established by this title are minimum 
requirements and nothing in this title shall be construed to 
prevent a State from establishing election technology and 
administration requirements that are more strict than the 
requirements established under this title so long as such State 
requirements are not inconsistent with the Federal requirements 
under this title or any law described in section 906.

SEC. [305.]  306. METHODS OF IMPLEMENTATION LEFT TO DISCRETION OF 
                    STATE.

  The specific choices on the methods of complying with the 
requirements of this title shall be left to the discretion of 
the State.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                         TITLE IV--ENFORCEMENT

SEC. 401. ACTIONS BY THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR DECLARATORY AND 
                    INJUNCTIVE RELIEF.

  The Attorney General may bring a civil action against any 
State or jurisdiction in an appropriate United States District 
Court for such declaratory and injunctive relief (including a 
temporary restraining order, a permanent or temporary 
injunction, or other order) as may be necessary to carry out 
the uniform and nondiscriminatory election technology and 
administration requirements under sections 301, 302, [and 303] 
303, and 304.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                            DISSENTING VIEWS

    Committee Democrats believe in popular sovereignty for the 
residents of Washington, D.C. House Republicans, however, are 
unenthusiastic about equality under the law for the people of 
the District of Columbia. H.R. 4396 would override the express 
will of D.C. voters, denying them the political self-
determination promised by Home Rule.
    House Republicans are focused on non-citizen voting in the 
District of Columbia because they are trying to distract 
Americans from the unpopular, restrictive, antivoter policies 
Republicans are trying to mandate--not only for the capital, 
but for every city, county, and state in our nation through 
their extreme and partisan ACE Act.
    Further, the Republican Conference is trying to draw 
attention away from the fact that this Congress has been an 
unmitigated disaster for their majority. Congressman Chip Roy, 
of Texas, recently noted that he knows of not one ``material, 
meaningful, significant thing the Republican majority has 
done.'' Regrettably, this measure continues the pattern of 
inaction noted by Representative Roy.

                                         Joseph D. Morelle,
                 Ranking Member, Committee on House Administration.