PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Rules and Administration.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Nov 15, 2012
Louis L. Redding Fair, Accurate, Secure, and Timely Voting Act of 2012 or FAST Voting Act of 2012 - Directs the Attorney General to award grants, on a competitive basis, to enable states to: (1) invest in practices and technology designed to expedite voting at the polls, and (2) simplify voter registration. Requires the grant application to include a comprehensive and coherent plan for using funds to improve the applicant's performance on specified measures with respect to: (1) flexible registration opportunities, (2) early voting, (3) assistance to non-English speaking voters, and (4) other related matters. Requires each grantee to establish performance measures and targets, approved by the Attorney General, that track its progress in implementing its plan and expediting voting at the polls or simplifying voter registration, as applicable.
People & committees
Sen. Coons, Christopher A. [D-DE] · D–DE
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Rules and Administration.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S6857-6858)
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.3635 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.3635 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.3635 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.3635 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.