PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on House Administration.
Congressional Research Service
No official summary is available in the imported record yet.
People & committees
Rep. Stauber, Pete [R-MN-8] · R–MN
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 House Administration.
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.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Oct 14, 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.R.10637 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.R.10637 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.R.10637 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.R.10637 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 · 2026-09-28 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.
The proposed bill would require states that allow voter registration based on another person's confirmation to report how often that process is used for federal elections. Reports would follow each regularly scheduled federal general election and could not include personally identifying information. The Election Assistance Commission would make each report public for 22 months after receiving it.
Each State that permits an individual to register to vote in an election for Federal office with the attestation of a voter voucher shall, after each regularly scheduled general election for Federal office, submit to the Election Assistance Commission a report
The report required in subsection (a) may not contain personally identifying information
The Election Assistance Commission shall make each report required in subsection (a) publicly available for a period of 22 months from the date such report was received by the Commission.
The bill would be called the Voter Vouching Transparency Act. A “voter voucher” means a person authorized by state law who confirms another person's identity or residence so that person can register to vote in that state.
This Act may be cited as the Voter Vouching Transparency Act.
the term voter voucher means an individual who— (1) is authorized under State law to attest to the identity or residence of another individual for purposes of voter registration; and (2) attests to the identity or residence of another individual for the purpose of registering the other individual to vote in such State.
States permitting this registration method would have to report after each regularly scheduled federal general election. Each report would cover the period between that election and the previous regularly scheduled federal general election.
Each State that permits an individual to register to vote in an election for Federal office with the attestation of a voter voucher shall, after each regularly scheduled general election for Federal office, submit to the Election Assistance Commission a report that includes, with respect to the period between such general election and the previous regularly scheduled general election for Federal office, the following:
Reports would have to count people registered through vouching, people who vouched for others, and the number of people each voucher vouched for.
(1) The total number of individuals who registered to vote in an election for Federal office with the attestation of a voter voucher. (2) The total number of individuals who served as voter vouchers. (3) The number of individuals vouched for by each voter voucher.
Reports would also have to count attempted registrations through vouching that the state did not accept. They would break that count down by reason only to the extent the state keeps records of those reasons.
(4) The total number of attempted registrations to vote in an election for Federal office with the attestation of a voter voucher that were not accepted by the State, disaggregated by the reason for the nonacceptance, to the extent that the State maintains records of such reasons.
Reports could not contain personally identifying information. The bill expressly lists names, street addresses, voter identification numbers, phone numbers, signatures, and dates of birth.
The report required in subsection (a) may not contain personally identifying information, including— (1) names; (2) street addresses; (3) voter identification numbers; (4) phone numbers; (5) signatures; and (6) dates of birth.
If practicable, the Election Assistance Commission would have to let states submit these reports through its Election Administration and Voting Survey.
The Election Assistance Commission shall, if practicable, permit the report required in subsection (a) to be submitted through the Election Administration and Voting Survey administered by the Commission.
The Election Assistance Commission would have to make each report publicly available for 22 months starting on the date it receives the report.
The Election Assistance Commission shall make each report required in subsection (a) publicly available for a period of 22 months from the date such report was received by the Commission.
The supplied actions snapshot, updated October 14, 2026, records introduction in the House and referral to the House Committee on House Administration on September 28, 2026.
Source snapshot updated 2026-10-14T18:58:05Z. 2026-09-28: Referred to the House Committee on House Administration. 2026-09-28: Introduced in House
A closer look
Reviewed version: Introduced in House · 2026-09-28. 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 change attached to appropriations 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 congressionally directed spending for particular recipients or places was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version; accompanying earmark disclosures and committee materials were not supplied.
Narrow exceptions, exemptions, or preferential treatment that warrant a closer look.
None identified in the reviewed text
No materially narrow preferential benefit, special exemption, or carve-out 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.
Full text preserved for this analysis. Legislative record snapshot: Oct 14, 2026. How PlainBill uses AI