PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on House Administration, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Apr 9, 2025
Protecting Election Administration from Interference Act of 2025
This bill revises preservation and retention requirements for federal election records. It also revises criminal penalties related to election records and the voting process.
Under current law, election officials must, for a period of 22 months from the federal election, retain and preserve all election-related records and papers. This bill extends the requirement to electronic records and election equipment.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Next, the bill directs the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency to issue minimum standards and best practices for retaining and preserving records (including electronic records), papers, and election equipment, including protocols for observing their preservation, security, and transfer by the Department of Justice (DOJ) and a representative of each political party.
In addition, the bill revises the federal criminal offense related to election records or papers to include reckless disregard of election record requirements resulting in the theft, destruction, concealment, mutilation, or alteration of a record, paper, or election equipment.
Further, the bill allows DOJ to demand electronic records and election equipment be made available for inspection and generally prohibits DOJ from disclosing this information.
The bill allows DOJ and candidates for federal office to bring an action in a district court to compel compliance with election record requirements.
Finally, the bill extends criminal penalties related to voting interference to include intimidating, threatening, or coercing (or attempting to do so) an individual for processing or scanning ballots, tabulating, canvassing, or certifying voting results.
People & committees
Rep. Veasey, Marc A. [D-TX-33] · D–TX
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on House Administration, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on House Administration, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Jul 2, 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.2803 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.2803 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.2803 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.2803 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.