PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 21, 2025
Protecting Our Local Elections Act or the POLE Act
This bill prohibits a state from receiving federal election administration funds if the state does not permit localities to hold elections for local office in odd-numbered years.
People & committees
Rep. Garbarino, Andrew R. [R-NY-2] · R–NY
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: Nov 11, 2025. 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.1467 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.1467 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.1467 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.1467 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 · 2025-02-21 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 introduced bill would block federal funding for administering federal, state, or local elections in states without a law allowing local governments to hold local elections in odd-numbered years. The condition concerns state permission; it would not require local governments to actually hold elections in those years. The restriction would apply beginning in fiscal year 2027, affecting election administration funding throughout states that do not meet the condition.
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no Federal funds may be provided under this Act or any other Act to administer an election for Federal, State, or local office held in a State which does not have in effect a law which permits units of local government in the State to hold elections for local office in odd-numbered years.
The amendments made by this section shall apply with respect to fiscal year 2027 and each succeeding fiscal year.
The bill's short title would be the Protecting Our Local Elections Act, or POLE Act.
This Act may be cited as the Protecting Our Local Elections Act or the POLE Act.
The proposed findings argue that odd-year local elections increase attention to local issues and help voters make informed decisions, while holding all elections in even-numbered years crowds ballots. These are assertions in the bill, not demonstrated effects established by the supplied evidence.
Congress finds the following: (1) Holding local elections for public office in odd-numbered years provides greater focus on local candidates and issues. (2) Local elections held in odd-numbered years allow voters to make more informed decisions about their local representation. (3) Holding all elections in even-numbered years diminishes the attention given to community matters. (4) Holding all elections in even-numbered years overcrowds the ballot, hindering the decision-making process for voters.
The bill would express Congress's view that local governments should be allowed to hold local elections in odd-numbered years and that local governance provides the most effective representation. This statement expresses a position rather than directly ordering local governments to change election dates.
It is the sense of Congress that— (1) units of local governments should have the authority to conduct elections for local office in odd-numbered years; (2) local elections held in odd-numbered years ensure that local candidates and issues receive greater attention and allow voters to make well-informed choices; and (3) the most effective form of representation is attained through local governance.
The bill would add section 907 to the Help America Vote Act of 2002. Its funding prohibition would override conflicting laws and cover federal election-administration funds provided under any federal act, including funds for federal and state elections held in a state that fails the local-election permission requirement.
Title IX of the Help America Vote Act of 2002 (52 U.S.C. 21141 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following new section: 907.
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no Federal funds may be provided under this Act or any other Act to administer an election for Federal, State, or local office held in a State which does not have in effect a law which permits units of local government in the State to hold elections for local office in odd-numbered years.
The amendments would apply in fiscal year 2027 and every subsequent fiscal year, with no specified ending year.
The amendments made by this section shall apply with respect to fiscal year 2027 and each succeeding fiscal year.
The supplied official-actions snapshot, updated November 11, 2025, records introduction in the House and referral to the House Committee on House Administration on February 21, 2025.
Source snapshot updated 2025-11-11T09:05:17Z. 2025-02-21: Referred to the House Committee on House Administration. 2025-02-21: Introduced in House
A closer look
Reviewed version: Introduced in House · 2025-02-21. 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 was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version and does not establish the contents of 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 a particular recipient or place was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version and does not establish the absence of earmarks in other versions or accompanying materials.
Narrow exceptions, exemptions, or preferential treatment that warrant a closer look.
None identified in the reviewed text
No materially narrow carve-out, special exemption, or preferential benefit was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version and does not establish the contents of other versions or accompanying materials.
Full text preserved for this analysis. Legislative record snapshot: Nov 11, 2025. How PlainBill uses AI