[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.