PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Congressional Research Service
No official summary is available in the imported record yet.
People & committees
Rep. McGovern, James P. [D-MA-2] · D–MA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We also preserved the text version used in the PlainBill explanation below.
Source last updated: Oct 5, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.J.Res.119 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.J.Res.119 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.J.Res.119 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.J.Res.119 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.
PlainBill explanation
Based on the full Introduced in House · 2025-09-10 text. This explanation has not received human editorial review. This overview describes the proposal’s major provisions; it does not establish what its real-world effects would be.
This resolution proposes a constitutional amendment limiting contributions and spending to influence federal elections. It would prohibit corporations and other legally created entities from financing those elections, allow political parties and candidates’ campaigns to spend amounts set by law, and require public funding for qualifying candidates. These changes would become part of the Constitution only after ratification by three-fourths of state legislatures.
That the following article is proposed as an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States:
In any calendar year, no person may spend or contribute more than one hundred dollars for the purpose of influencing any other person’s election for the office of Representative, Senator, President, or Vice President
No corporation or other entity created by law shall contribute or spend any amount for the purpose of influencing any election for the office of Representative, Senator, the President, or the Vice President; but a political party or candidate’s campaign may spend the amounts prescribed by law.
To provide public funding for all candidates who qualify for any primary, general, or special election ballot for Representative, Senator, President, or Vice President
Section 1 would prohibit the federal government from restricting citizens’ right to vote in elections with the enforceable campaign-finance limits established by the amendment. It states democratic self-government, political equality, and government and election integrity as its purposes.
1. To advance democratic self-government and political equality, and to protect the integrity of government and the electoral process, the right of citizens of the United States to vote in elections in which campaign contributions and spending are subject to enforceable limits as set forth in this article, shall not be abridged by the United States.
Section 2 would impose two calendar-year limits: $100 on a person’s spending or contributions to influence another person’s election to the listed federal offices, and $1,000 in total for covered election spending and contributions, including spending on the person’s own election. Congress could set lower limits and periodically increase the stated amounts only as required by changes in the value of money.
2. In any calendar year, no person may spend or contribute more than one hundred dollars for the purpose of influencing any other person’s election for the office of Representative, Senator, President, or Vice President; nor spend for the purpose of influencing elections, including such person’s own election, for the offices of Representative, Senator, President, or Vice President, or contribute to candidates for such offices, their campaigns, or political parties, more than an aggregate total of one thousand dollars; provided that Congress may by law prescribe lower limits and may periodically increase the amounts set forth in this section, but only to the extent required by changes in the value of money.
Section 3 would prohibit corporations and other legally created entities from contributing or spending any money to influence elections for Representative, Senator, President, or Vice President. It expressly allows political parties and candidates’ campaigns to spend amounts prescribed by law.
3. No corporation or other entity created by law shall contribute or spend any amount for the purpose of influencing any election for the office of Representative, Senator, the President, or the Vice President; but a political party or candidate’s campaign may spend the amounts prescribed by law.
Within 60 days after ratification, Congress would have to enact implementing legislation. That legislation would have to limit what candidates, their campaigns, and political parties may spend on candidacies for Representative, Senator, President, and Vice President.
4. Not later than sixty days after the ratification of this article, Congress shall enact legislation as follows: To limit the amounts that candidates, their campaigns for the offices of Representative, Senator, President, or Vice President, and political parties may spend on such candidacies.
The required legislation would provide public funding to every candidate who qualifies for a primary, general, or special election ballot for the listed federal offices in any state or the District of Columbia. Funding would equal at least 80% of the permitted spending amount. For presidential and vice-presidential candidates, Congress would determine how to allocate that amount based on the states or District where the candidate qualifies.
To provide public funding for all candidates who qualify for any primary, general, or special election ballot for Representative, Senator, President, or Vice President in any State or in the District constituting the seat of Government of the United States, equaling at least eighty percent of the amount that may be spent; but for candidates for President or Vice President, Congress shall prescribe by law the manner in which such amount shall be apportioned based on the States or District wherein such person qualifies.
The implementing legislation would require all unspent campaign funds to be transferred to the Treasury after each election without compensation. It would also enforce the amendment’s limits and prohibitions through civil and criminal penalties.
To require disposition to the Treasury of any unspent campaign funds after each election, without compensation. To enforce, with civil and criminal penalties, the limits and prohibitions in this article.
Starting one year after ratification, senators and representatives would be barred from receiving federal pay or other financial benefits during or for periods in office when the legislation required by section 4 was not in effect.
5. After one year from the ratification of this article, no Senator or Representative shall receive any compensation or other emoluments from the United States during or for any period of time in office in either House during which the legislation required by section 4 shall not have been in effect.
Section 6 would extend federal courts’ authority to all lawsuits brought by U.S. citizens under the amendment, including lawsuits brought directly to enforce its provisions.
6. The judicial power of the United States shall extend to all suits by citizens of the United States arising under this article, including suits brought directly under this article to enforce its provisions.
Section 7 would authorize states to adopt and enforce reasonable rules on raising and spending money to influence state or local elections. Those rules could include the amendment’s limits and prohibitions, but would not be restricted to them.
7. The States shall have power to implement and enforce reasonable regulations on the raising and spending of money by candidates and others to influence State or local elections, including but not limited to the limits and prohibitions in this article.
Section 8 states that the amendment would not give Congress or the states authority to restrict freedom of the press.
8. This article shall not be construed to grant Congress or the States the power to abridge the freedom of the press.
The supplied official-actions snapshot, updated October 5, 2026, records introduction in the House and referral to the House Judiciary Committee on September 10, 2025.
Source snapshot updated 2026-10-05T15:48:40Z. 2025-09-10: Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary. 2025-09-10: Introduced in House
A closer look
Reviewed version: Introduced in House · 2025-09-10. These findings describe provisions and who may benefit; they are not judgments of waste, corruption, or motive.
This review covers the supplied bill text. “None identified” does not rule out provisions in later versions or accompanying reports and disclosures.
Provisions outside the bill’s main subject, or policy changes attached to appropriations.
None identified in the reviewed text
No unrelated provision or policy rider was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version and does not establish absence in other versions or accompanying materials.
Spending directed to particular recipients or places outside ordinary competitive or formula-based allocation.
None identified in the reviewed text
No earmark was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version; formal earmark status cannot be established without relevant accompanying materials.
Narrow exceptions, exemptions, or preferential treatment that warrant a closer look.
Findings to examine
The supplied introduced text contains an express spending exception within its central campaign-finance policy. Identifying the exception is not a judgment about its justification.
Political parties and candidates’ campaigns receive an express exception allowing spending in amounts prescribed by law, while the same provision prohibits corporations and other legally created entities from making contributions or spending any amount to influence the listed federal elections.
3. No corporation or other entity created by law shall contribute or spend any amount for the purpose of influencing any election for the office of Representative, Senator, the President, or the Vice President; but a political party or candidate’s campaign may spend the amounts prescribed by law.
Full text preserved for this analysis. Legislative record snapshot: Oct 5, 2026. How PlainBill uses AI