PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on the Constitution.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 4, 1997
Voting Rights of Former Offenders Act - Declares that the right of a U.S. citizen who is otherwise qualified to vote in any election for Federal office shall not be denied or abridged because he or she has committed a criminal offense unless such citizen is imprisoned in a correctional institution or facility at the time of such election. Specifies that nothing in this Act shall be construed to prohibit the States from establishing requirements for the holding of State or local elective office, nor from enacting any State law which affords the right to vote in any election for Federal office on terms less restrictive than those established by this Act. Subjects individuals who intentionally deny, or attempt to deny, any person any right secured by this Act to a fine and imprisonment of up to one year.
People & committees
Rep. Conyers, John, Jr. [D-MI-14] · D–MI
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on the Constitution.
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
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.568 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.568 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.568 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.568 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.