HR-4823-119
Referred to the Committee on House Administration, and in addition to the Committees on the Judiciary, Oversight and Government Reform, Science, Space, and Technology, and Education and Workforce, 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.
Sponsored by Claudia Tenney (R-NY)
What it does
This bill would prohibit federal agencies from using federal funds to partner with nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) to conduct voter registration or voter mobilization activities on agency property or websites. It would also block agencies from spending funds to implement Executive Order 14019 — a Biden-era order directing agencies to promote voter registration — until each agency submits a report to Congress detailing its activities under that order. Additionally, the bill would amend the Higher Education Act to bar Federal Work-Study program participants from performing voter registration or voter mobilization activities, on or off campus.
Who benefits
Members of Congress who favor greater legislative oversight of executive branch election-related activities. State and local election officials who prefer that voter registration be administered through traditional state-run channels. Taxpayers who believe federal agency resources should not be directed toward voter outreach. Institutions of higher education that want clearer legal boundaries around permissible Federal Work-Study activities.
Who is hurt
Eligible voters who may have used agency-based registration opportunities — particularly clients of federal agencies such as public housing authorities, Medicaid offices, or VA facilities. Nongovernmental organizations that currently partner with federal agencies on voter outreach and would lose access to those partnerships and funding streams. Federal Work-Study students who currently perform voter registration as a community service activity and would lose that option. Lower-income and minority populations who research suggests are disproportionately reached through agency-based registration programs. Colleges and universities that have built civic engagement programs around Federal Work-Study community service provisions.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that Executive Order 14019 exceeded the President's authority by directing agencies to conduct voter mobilization activities beyond what the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) explicitly authorizes, effectively turning federal agencies into partisan get-out-the-vote operations without congressional approval. They contend that voter registration is a function properly belonging to state governments and designated voter registration agencies under the NVRA, and that using federal agency infrastructure and NGO partnerships for mobilization activities blurs the line between neutral government services and political activity, undermining public trust in federal institutions.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that expanding voter registration access through federal agencies that already serve millions of eligible but unregistered Americans — such as VA hospitals, housing agencies, and benefits offices — is a straightforward extension of the NVRA's original intent to reduce registration barriers. They contend that the bill would eliminate a cost-effective, nonpartisan mechanism for reaching eligible citizens who are already interacting with the government, and that restricting Federal Work-Study civic engagement activities removes a proven pathway for students to fulfill community service requirements while strengthening democratic participation.
Constitutional context
The bill's core mechanism — using the appropriations power to restrict executive agency activity — is a well-established congressional tool under Article I. The bill also directly addresses the scope of presidential authority under Article II: it declares that Executive Order 14019 has no force or effect to the extent it conflicts with Section 7 of the NVRA, raising a separation of powers question about whether the President may direct agencies to conduct voter outreach beyond what Congress has explicitly authorized. Post-Loper Bright (2024), courts would independently assess whether agency actions under EO 14019 were within statutory authority, without deferring to the executive branch's interpretation.
Checks and balances
Congress gains authority over executive branch voter outreach activities by restricting agency spending and requiring disclosure reports; the executive branch loses discretion to direct agencies to conduct voter mobilization through NGO partnerships without explicit congressional authorization.
Historical precedent
Congress has previously used appropriations riders to restrict executive branch activities it views as exceeding statutory authority, though no directly analogous legislation targeting agency-based voter registration programs has been enacted.