Establishing the Select Committee on Electoral Reform.
Summary
H. Res. 20 would create a temporary House Select Committee on Electoral Reform to study how members of Congress are elected and to evaluate possible changes to the federal electoral system. The resolution cites low public approval of Congress and growing interest in reforms such as proportional representation, ranked-choice voting, open primaries, fusion voting, cumulative voting, and independent redistricting commissions. It also directs the committee to examine whether Congress should change the size of the House and to consider barriers to state experimentation, including the federal requirement that House members be elected from single-member districts.
The committee would be composed of 14 House members, with seven appointed after consultation with the minority leader, and would be led by co-chairs designated by the Speaker and minority leader. It would hold hearings, gather testimony from experts, current and former members of Congress, state and local officials, and foreign officials, and then issue a report with recommendations within one year of its first meeting. The resolution gives the committee some procedural authorities typical of House committees, but it expressly gives the panel no legislative jurisdiction and no power to take legislative action on bills or resolutions.
Impact
If adopted, the resolution would not directly change election law or congressional apportionment, but it would create a formal House mechanism to study potential reforms and produce recommendations. Its main legal and institutional effect would be to establish a temporary committee with authority to conduct hearings, gather evidence, and review federal barriers such as the Uniform Congressional District Act’s single-member-district requirement. The resolution could influence future legislation affecting congressional districting, voting methods, primary systems, redistricting commissions, and possibly the size of the House of Representatives.
Sentiment
The bill appears generally favorable toward electoral reform and reflects concern that current congressional structures contribute to public dissatisfaction and weak responsiveness. Because there are no recorded votes or committee transcripts in the provided context, there is no direct evidence of opposition or support from debate. The resolution’s framing suggests an exploratory, reform-oriented approach rather than an immediate partisan change, and it is presented as a study measure rather than a binding overhaul.
Contention
The main points of contention likely concern the scope and direction of the reforms the committee would study. Potentially divisive issues include proportional representation, ranked-choice voting, open primaries, fusion voting, independent redistricting commissions, and any change to the long-standing single-member-district system required by federal law. Another likely point of disagreement is whether Congress should consider changing the size of the House, which could affect representation and partisan balance. Supporters would likely emphasize experimentation and responsiveness, while critics may view the proposal as opening the door to major structural changes in congressional elections.
Changes the manner by which presidential electoral college electors are elected and create a system of grouping of municipalities of equal populations, one of each of Rhode Island's electoral votes.
Changes the manner by which presidential electoral college electors are elected and create a system of grouping of municipalities of equal populations, one of each of Rhode Island's electoral votes.