PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 49 · Public Law · Dec 28, 2012
(This measure has not been amended since it was reported to the Senate on September 13, 2012. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Hatch Act Modernization Act of 2012 - (Sec. 2) Allows a state or local officer or employee to be a candidate for partisan elective office unless the salary of such officer or employee is paid completely, directly or indirectly, by loans or grants made by the United States or a federal agency.
(Sec. 3) Redefines "state or local agency" for purposes of the Hatch Act to include the executive branch of the District of Columbia, or an agency or department thereof.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Extends the exemption from Hatch Act requirements for state or local officers or employees to individuals employed by an educational or research institution, establishment, agency or system supported in whole or in part by the District of Columbia.
Extends the exemption from the prohibition against running for elective office to the head of an executive department of the District of Columbia who is not classified under an applicable merit or civil-service system.
Extends to agencies of the District of Columbia provisions requiring the the Merit System Protection Board (MSPB) to withhold funds from agencies that reappoint employees removed for violating the Hatch Act within 18 months after removal.
Exempts individuals employed or holding office in the District of Columbia from provisions of the Hatch Act applicable to federal employees.
Makes federal employees living in the District of Columbia eligible to participate in local politics to the same extent as federal employees living in nearby areas of Maryland or Virginia.
(Sec. 4) Replaces existing penalty provisions for violations of the Hatch Act to make an offending employee subject to removal (currently, removal is mandatory), reduction in grade, debarment from federal employment for five years, suspension, reprimand, or a civil penalty of not more than $1,000.
(Sec. 5) Makes the new penalties imposed by this Act applicable to violations occurring before, on, or after the effective date of this Act, unless, before the effective date of this Act, the Special Counsel has presented a complaint for disciplinary action with respect to an alleged violation or the employee alleged to have committed the violation has entered into a signed settlement agreement with the Special Counsel.
People & committees
Sen. Akaka, Daniel K. [D-HI] · D–HI
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 112-230.
Became Public Law No: 112-230.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H7320)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H7320)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on S. 2170.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H7320-7323)
Mr. Farenthold moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
Referred to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.
Received in the House.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate with an amendment and an amendment to the Title by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S7307-7308; text as passed Senate: CR S7307-7308)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate with an amendment and an amendment to the Title by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S7307-7308; text as passed Senate: CR S7307-7308)
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 508.
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. Reported by Senator Lieberman with an amendment in the nature of a substitute and an amendment to the title. With written report No. 112-211.
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. Reported by Senator Lieberman with an amendment in the nature of a substitute and an amendment to the title. With written report No. 112-211.
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. Ordered to be reported with an amendment in the nature of a substitute favorably.
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs referred to Subcommittee on Oversight of Government Management, the Federal Workforce, and the District of Columbia.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. (text of measure as introduced: CR S1461-1462)
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S1461)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Dec 5, 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 S.2170 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 S.2170 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 S.2170 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 S.2170 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.