H.R. 160 (119th)Bill Overview

Restoring Faith in Elections Act

Government Operations and Politics|Citizenship and naturalizationCivil actions and liability
Cosponsors
Support
Republican
Introduced
Jan 3, 2025
Discussions
Bill Text
Current stageCommittee

Referred to the Committee on House Administration, and in addition to the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, i…

Introduced
Committee
Floor
President
Law
Congressional Activities
01 · The brief
Plain-English summaryWhat this bill actually does

The Restoring Faith in Elections Act sets federal rules for mail-in ballots, standardizes result reporting, requires automatic voter registration (AVR) through government agencies, mandates parity and uniform administration across jurisdictions, and creates a CISA-run National Deconfliction Voting Database. It also requires pre-election maintenance of voter rolls, prescribes motor-vehicle attestation about residency for voter purposes, and authorizes grants to help States implement AVR and related IT upgrades.

Why people may split

Progressives emphasize AVR access; conservative fears automatic registration risks.

Watch point

Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a detailed substantive policy proposal with strong statutory specificity and careful integration into existing election law, and with significant administrative components assigned to federal and state actors.

The Restoring Faith in Elections Act sets federal rules for mail-in ballots, standardizes result reporting, requires automatic voter registration (AVR) through government agencies, mandates parity and uniform administration across jurisdictions, and creates a CISA-run National Deconfliction Voting Database.

It also requires pre-election maintenance of voter rolls, prescribes motor-vehicle attestation about residency for voter purposes, and authorizes grants to help States implement AVR and related IT upgrades.

Passage25/100

Comprehensive, contentious federal election overhaul with fiscal and federalism implications faces significant legislative and legal obstacles despite some technocratic elements.

CredibilityPartially aligned

Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a detailed substantive policy proposal with strong statutory specificity and careful integration into existing election law, and with significant administrative components assigned to federal and state actors.

Contention68/100

Progressives emphasize AVR access; conservative fears automatic registration risks.

02 · What it does

Who stands to gain, and who may push back.

Likely benefits vs burdens50% / 50%
Likely helpedFederal agencies · States

These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.

Likely helped
  • Potential benefitIncreases voter registrations via automatic registration across contributing agencies.
  • Potential benefitStandardizes mail-in ballot procedures and deadlines, aiming to make processing more uniform and timely.
  • Potential benefitAccelerates reporting and counting, requiring ballots counted and reported within 24 hours.
Likely burdened
  • Federal agenciesExpands federal authority over state election administration, potentially triggering legal and jurisdictional disputes.
  • StatesCentralized CISA database raises privacy and cybersecurity risks from storing statewide voter records.
  • Potential burdenNew criminal penalties and limits on third-party ballot possession may restrict assistance to disabled or remote voters.
03 · Why people split

Why the argument around this bill splits.

Progressives emphasize AVR access; conservative fears automatic registration risks.
Progressive85%

Generally supportive of modernization and expanded registration access via automatic voter registration, grants, and NIST privacy standards.

Concerned about provisions that could restrict valid mail-in voting (signature verification, receipt deadlines, criminal penalties for ballot possession) and possible privacy risks from a national clearinghouse.

Leans supportive
Centrist70%

Favorable toward policies that increase consistency, reduce duplicate registrations, and improve reporting speed, while cautious about federal mandates, implementation capacity, and unintended impacts.

Wants clearer operational detail, adequate funding, and phased implementation to avoid disenfranchisement or chaos.

Leans supportive
Conservative40%

Supportive of many integrity-focused measures: stricter mail-in standards, limits on third-party ballot possession, parity rules, and a deconfliction database to prevent double registrations.

Skeptical or opposed to mandatory automatic registration and a CISA-controlled national clearinghouse as federal overreach.

Split reaction
04 · Can it pass?

The path through Congress.

Introduced

Reached or meaningfully advanced

Committee

Reached or meaningfully advanced

Floor

Still ahead

President

Still ahead

Law

Still ahead

Passage likelihood25/100

Comprehensive, contentious federal election overhaul with fiscal and federalism implications faces significant legislative and legal obstacles despite some technocratic elements.

Scope and complexity
86%
Scopesweeping
86%
Complexityhigh
Why this could stall
  • Estimated federal and state implementation costs and offsets
  • Litigation risk over federal preemption and data transfers
05 · Recent votes

Recent votes on the bill.

No vote history yet

The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.

06 · Go deeper

Go deeper than the headline read.

Included on this page

Progressives emphasize AVR access; conservative fears automatic registration risks.

Comprehensive, contentious federal election overhaul with fiscal and federalism implications faces significant legislative and legal obstac…

Unlocked analysis

Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a detailed substantive policy proposal with strong statutory specificity and careful integration into existing election law, and with significant administrative co…

Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.

Perspective breakdownsPassage barriersLegislative design reviewStakeholder impact map
Open full analysis