Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that it is not a violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment for a State to extend particular consideration to members of the uniformed services and overseas citizens to ensure that such individuals are able to exercise their rights to vote in elections for public office.
Referred to the Subcommittee on the Constitution.
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Sep 20, 2012
Affirms that it is U.S. policy to provide for the ability of members of the uniformed services to exercise their constitutional right to vote and acknowledges that particular consideration be given to them due to restrictions, uncertainties, and risks, such as deployment, that present a challenge in voting.
Recognizes the legislative and judicial precedent of granting particular consideration to members of the uniformed services and overseas citizens regarding absentee voting.
Affirms that while the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution protects against arbitrary classifications, and requires that similarly situated persons be treated equally, members of the uniformed services and overseas citizens are not similarly situated, and that the restrictions, uncertainties, and risks that members of the uniformed services face warrant consideration that is not arbitrary.
Referred to the Committee on House Administration, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, 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 House Administration, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, 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
Bill text & related measures
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: Feb 7, 2024. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Explore the bill from different angles
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.
Neutral evidence review
Objective
Analyze H.Res.799 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.
View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact
Progressive lens
Examine H.Res.799 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.
View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope
Conservative lens
Examine H.Res.799 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.
View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power
Liberty lens
Examine H.Res.799 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.