District of Columbia One Vote One Choice Act

Bill Number

H.R. 2562

Origin Chamber

House

Congress

119th Congress, Session 1

Policy Area

Government Operations and Politics

Status

Introduced

Latest Action

2025-04-01: Referred to the House Committee on House Administration.

Last Updated

2025-05-23T14:15:06Z

AI-Generated Summary

Purpose

This legislation aims to prevent the use of ranked choice voting—a system where voters rank candidates in order of preference, and votes are redistributed until a majority winner is determined—in elections held in the District of Columbia (DC). It seeks to ensure that DC elections use traditional "one vote, one choice" methods instead.

Key Provisions

• Prohibition on Ranked Choice Voting: Adds a new Section 305 to the Help America Vote Act of 2002 (HAVA), explicitly banning DC from implementing ranked choice voting in any DC election. This includes elections for public offices (local or federal), ballot initiatives, and referendums.
• Definition of DC Election: Broadly defines a "DC election" to cover all voting for public office in DC, as well as citizen-led ballot measures.
• Technical Updates: Redesignates existing sections in HAVA (sections 305 and 306 become 306 and 307), updates the enforcement section (Section 401) to include the new prohibition, and revises the table of contents for clarity.
• Short Title: The bill is named the "District of Columbia One Vote One Choice Act."

Significant Changes to Existing Law

• HAVA, originally passed in 2002 to improve election standards after the 2000 presidential election, does not currently address ranked choice voting or impose specific voting method restrictions on DC. This bill introduces a federal prohibition targeted solely at DC, expanding HAVA's scope to regulate local voting systems in the nation's capital.
• It adds enforcement mechanisms under HAVA, allowing federal oversight and potential legal action if DC violates the ban.

Potential Impacts

• On Government Agencies: The DC Board of Elections and local officials would be required to avoid ranked choice voting systems, potentially simplifying election administration but limiting options for modernizing voting processes. Federal agencies like the Election Assistance Commission could face increased responsibilities in monitoring DC compliance.
• On Citizens: DC residents (over 700,000 people) would be restricted from using ranked choice voting, which some view as reducing "wasted" votes and increasing candidate diversity. This could affect voter turnout or satisfaction in local and federal races, though it maintains traditional plurality voting.
• On International Relations: No direct impact, as the bill focuses on domestic U.S. elections.

Main Stakeholders Affected

• DC Government and Election Officials: Directly bound by the prohibition, potentially facing federal penalties for non-compliance.
• DC Voters and Residents: Lose the option to rank candidates, affecting how they participate in local, federal, and initiative-based elections.
• Federal Lawmakers and Oversight Bodies: Gain authority to enforce voting standards in DC, influencing national election policy.
• Advocacy Groups: Organizations supporting or opposing ranked choice voting (e.g., election reform advocates) may be impacted in their efforts to expand or restrict such systems.

Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications

• Legal: Strengthens federal control over DC elections under HAVA, which could lead to lawsuits if DC challenges the ban as an overreach. Enforcement ties into existing HAVA provisions allowing the Attorney General to sue for violations.
• Constitutional: Raises questions about DC's home rule authority under the District of Columbia Home Rule Act of 1973, which grants local self-governance but allows Congress to override DC laws. Critics might argue it infringes on DC's limited autonomy without full statehood representation in Congress.
• Political: Reflects partisan debates on voting methods, with ranked choice voting often supported by reformers for reducing polarization but opposed by some as complicating elections. As a DC-specific bill, it highlights ongoing tensions over the capital's status and federal intervention in local affairs.

This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.

Sponsor

Rep. Lawler, Michael [R-NY-17]

Cosponsors (2)

Rep. Tenney, Claudia [R-NY-24], Rep. Miller, Mary E. [R-IL-15]

Recent Actions

• 2025-04-01: Referred to the House Committee on House Administration.
• 2025-04-01: Introduced in House
• 2025-04-01: Introduced in House

Bill Versions

• District of Columbia One Vote One Choice Act — issued 2025-04-01 — PDF (3 pages)