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 · Jul 23, 2025
Fair Representation Act
This bill requires ranked-choice voting (a system in which voters rank candidates in order of preference) in certain federal elections and requires the use of multi-member districts in certain states. It also outlines criteria for congressional redistricting and generally prohibits mid-decade redistricting.
Specifically, the bill requires states to use ranked-choice voting in elections for Senators and Members of the House of Representatives. The Election Assistance Commission must make payments to states to implement ranked-choice voting.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
The bill generally requires (1) that states entitled to six or more Representatives establish districts such that three to five Representatives are elected from each district, and (2) that states entitled to fewer than six Representatives elect all Representatives on an at-large basis.
The bill also sets forth criteria for congressional redistricting, including by (1) requiring congressional districts to comply with the U.S. Constitution and the Voting Rights Act of 1965, and (2) prohibiting the use of a redistricting plan that was drawn with the intent (or has the effect of) materially favoring or disfavoring any political party.
The bill creates judicial remedies if a state fails to enact a final congressional redistricting plan. In particular, if a state fails to enact such a final plan by the applicable deadline, then a three-judge district court shall have the exclusive authority to develop and publish the congressional redistricting plan for the state.
The bill also includes a provision to prevent states from redistricting more than once following an apportionment (i.e., mid-decade redistricting).
People & committees
Rep. Beyer, Donald S. [D-VA-8] · D–VA
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 18, 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.4632 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.4632 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.4632 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.4632 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.