PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on House Administration.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 24, 2017
Protect Democracy From Criminal Corporations Act
This bill amends the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to prohibit a corporation from making a disbursement of funds in connection with a campaign for election for federal, state, or local office for six years after the corporation: (1) is finally convicted of conspiracy to commit an offense against, or to defraud, the United States or any other felony involving dishonesty or a breach of trust; or (2) enters into an agreement with the Department of Justice to resolve a charge regarding such an offense if the agreement includes a requirement that the corporation make a payment equal to or greater than $1 million.
People & committees
Rep. Ellison, Keith [D-MN-5] · D–MN
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 House Administration.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Aug 11, 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.658 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.658 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.658 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.658 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.