PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 3, 2025
Citizen Legislature Anti-Corruption Reform of Elections Act or the CLEAN Elections Act
This bill establishes requirements for nonpartisan redistricting.
States must conduct congressional redistricting using a plan developed by a nonpartisan independent redistricting commission, beginning with the 2020 census.
A state may not use federal funds provided for election administration purposes unless it certifies to the Election Assistance Commission that it conducts redistricting for its state legislative districts using a plan developed by a nonpartisan independent redistricting commission.
People & committees
Rep. Fitzpatrick, Brian K. [R-PA-1] · R–PA
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.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Sep 19, 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.158 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.158 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.158 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.158 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 · 2025-01-03 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 CLEAN Elections Act would require states to use plans developed by independent commissions to redraw U.S. House voting districts. It would also condition states’ use of federal money provided directly for election administration on certifying that they use commission-developed plans to redraw state legislative districts. These requirements would change who develops district maps.
This Act may be cited as the Citizen Legislature Anti-Corruption Reform of Elections Act or the CLEAN Elections Act.
Each State shall conduct Congressional redistricting (beginning with the redistricting carried out pursuant to the decennial census conducted during 2020) in accordance with a redistricting plan developed by a nonpartisan independent redistricting commission.
a State may not use any funds provided by the Federal Government directly for election administration purposes unless the State certifies to the Election Assistance Commission that the State conducts redistricting for State legislative districts in the State (beginning with the first such redistricting carried out after the date of the enactment of this Act) in accordance with a redistricting plan developed by a nonpartisan independent redistricting commission.
The congressional district requirement would apply to every state, beginning with redistricting based on the 2020 census. The proposal expressly uses that census as its starting point.
Each State shall conduct Congressional redistricting (beginning with the redistricting carried out pursuant to the decennial census conducted during 2020) in accordance with a redistricting plan developed by a nonpartisan independent redistricting commission.
For state legislative districts, the proposal would prohibit a state from using federal funds provided directly for election administration unless it certifies compliance to the Election Assistance Commission. This condition would apply beginning with the first state legislative redistricting after enactment and would override conflicting legal provisions.
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a State may not use any funds provided by the Federal Government directly for election administration purposes unless the State certifies to the Election Assistance Commission that the State conducts redistricting for State legislative districts in the State (beginning with the first such redistricting carried out after the date of the enactment of this Act) in accordance with a redistricting plan developed by a nonpartisan independent redistricting commission.
To qualify as nonpartisan and independent under the proposal, a commission would need equal numbers of members affiliated with the state's two largest political parties. Party size would be measured by registered voters affiliated with a party, using the most recent statewide federal election for which that information is available.
For purposes of this section, a commission shall be considered to be a nonpartisan independent commission if— (1) the number of its members who are affiliated with the political party with the largest percentage of the registered voters in the State who are affiliated with a political party (as determined with respect to the most recent statewide election for Federal office held in the State for which such information is available) is equal to the number of its members who are affiliated with the political party with the second largest percentage of the registered voters in the State who are affiliated with a political party (as so determined)
No commission member could be an elected public official.
(2) none of its members is an elected public official.
The redistricting section defines its geographic coverage as the states.
In this section, the term State means each of the several States.
The supplied official-actions snapshot, updated September 19, 2026, records introduction in the House and referral to the House Committee on the Judiciary on January 3, 2025.
Source snapshot updated 2026-09-19T23:07:40Z. 2025-01-03: Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary. 2025-01-03: Introduced in House
A closer look
Reviewed version: Introduced in House · 2025-01-03. 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 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 does not establish absence 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 benefit, special exemption, or preferential carve-out was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion does not establish absence in other versions or accompanying materials.
Full text preserved for this analysis. Legislative record snapshot: Sep 19, 2026. How PlainBill uses AI