PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E1828-1829)
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Sep 28, 1996
Presidential Debate Reform Act - Amends the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to establish a Presidential Debate Commission one year before each general election for the offices of President and Vice President beginning with the general election held in 2000. Directs the Commission to establish: (1) one preliminary debate; (2) not more than two vice presidential debates; and (3) not less than two or more than four presidential debates. Authorizes appropriations to each Commission appointed such sums as may be necessary to carry out its activities with respect to the election involved. Amends the Internal Revenue Code to reduce the amount of Federal payments for a party's nominating convention for the following general election if the party's nominee for President or Vice President does not certify to the Presidential Debate Commission that the nominee will participate in all applicable Commission debates (other than a preliminary debate).
People & committees
Rep. McCollum, Bill [R-FL-8] · R–FL
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E1828-1829)
Referred to the House Committee on House Oversight.
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: Aug 21, 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.4310 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.4310 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.4310 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.4310 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.