Congressional Civics Act of 2026
HB7431, the Congressional Civics Act of 2026, would create a civics examination for Members of Congress. The bill directs Congress to establish and administer a 25-question test drawn from a bank of 100 approved questions covering U.S. history, the Constitution, civil rights, federalism, separation of powers, and the structure and functions of the legislative, executive, and judicial branches. Under the bill, a person elected or appointed to Congress could not be seated until successfully completing the exam, and failure to pass within two weeks after election or appointment would create a vacancy.
The bill also creates an interim version of the same requirement for committee assignments in each House until the constitutional amendment referenced in the bill takes effect. It sets out a process for members to submit proposed questions and answers, for committees to report the exam, for each chamber to approve it, and for the approved questions and answers to be published publicly. The exam would be administered by the Clerk of the House and the Secretary of the Senate, made available online at no cost to any U.S. citizen, and limited to three attempts per calendar year.
If enacted, the bill would add a new qualification-related process for seating Members of Congress and, temporarily, for committee assignments, affecting House and Senate rules and procedures. It would require the House Administration Committee and Senate Rules and Administration Committee to develop and update the exam each census term, and it would create public records and certification mechanisms for successful completion. The bill also references a proposed constitutional amendment and makes the permanent seating requirement contingent on ratification of that amendment, while the interim committee-assignment requirement would apply to the 120th Congress and later until the amendment-based provision takes effect.
The available context shows no recorded committee debate or votes, so there is no documented floor or committee sentiment in the materials provided. Based on the bill text alone, the measure appears to be framed as a civic-competence and institutional-accountability proposal, suggesting support from sponsors who favor testing lawmakers’ knowledge of constitutional government. Because no opposition statements are included, the overall sentiment cannot be measured beyond the bill’s formal, reform-oriented presentation.
The main points of contention likely concern whether Congress should impose a knowledge test on its own members, whether such a requirement is constitutionally permissible, and whether it could be used as a barrier to office or committee participation. The bill’s vacancy provision for failure to pass within two weeks of election or appointment is especially significant, as it could affect duly elected or appointed officials. Another likely issue is who controls the question bank, passing threshold, and administration of the exam, since those details could influence fairness, partisan balance, and enforceability. No specific objections or supporters are recorded in the provided transcripts or votes.