Raskin, Jamie [D-MD-8]
Democrat · MD · 11 bills sponsored
People’s White House Historic Preservation Act
# People's White House Historic Preservation Act (HR 6761) — Summary **What the Bill Would Do** This bill aims to preserve and protect the White House as a historic landmark. While the specific provisions aren't detailed in the available information, bills with this title typically focus on maintaining the building's historical integrity, protecting architectural features, and ensuring proper restoration standards. The bill would likely establish guidelines for any renovations or maintenance work done to the building and its grounds. **Who It Affects** The bill would primarily affect the White House administration and any federal agencies responsible for the building's maintenance and operations. It could also impact contractors or workers involved in renovation projects at the White House, and potentially visitors or the public who use the historic site. **Current Status** As of now, the bill is in committee, meaning it has been introduced but has not yet been debated or voted on by the full House of Representatives. The bill was sponsored by Representative Jamie Raskin (D-MD). Without additional legislative details available, it's unclear what specific preservation measures or restrictions the bill would implement.
Ranked Choice Voting Act
# Ranked Choice Voting Act Summary **What the Bill Would Do** The Ranked Choice Voting Act would change how voters select candidates in federal elections for the House of Representatives, Senate, and President. Instead of voting for one candidate, voters would rank candidates in order of preference (1st choice, 2nd choice, 3rd choice, etc.). If no candidate wins a majority of first-place votes, the candidate with the fewest votes is eliminated and their votes are redistributed based on voters' second-choice preferences. This process continues until one candidate reaches 50% of the votes. The bill would apply to all federal general elections nationwide. **Who It Affects and Key Impact** This would affect all U.S. voters in federal elections, as well as election administrators who would need to implement new voting systems and counting procedures. Supporters argue it could reduce the influence of extreme candidates, prevent "spoiler" effects from third-party candidates, and increase voter choice. Opponents raise concerns about implementation costs, voter confusion, and whether current voting equipment can handle the change. **Current Status** The bill is currently in committee, meaning it has been introduced but has not yet advanced to a full floor vote. As of now, it remains in the early stages of the legislative process.
To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 3570 Olney Laytonsville Road in Olney, Maryland, as the "Edward L. Ramsey Olney Post Office Building".
# Summary of HR 6310 **What the Bill Does:** This bill would rename a U.S. Postal Service facility in Olney, Maryland to honor Edward L. Ramsey. The post office building is located at 3570 Olney Laytonsville Road. If passed, the building would officially be called the "Edward L. Ramsey Olney Post Office Building." This is a commemorative measure with no budget impact—it simply changes the official name of an existing facility. **Who It Affects:** The bill primarily affects the local Olney community and postal customers in that area, who would see the new name on the building. The measure honors Edward L. Ramsey, though the bill text doesn't specify details about who he is or why he's being honored. Such naming bills typically recognize individuals who made significant contributions to their communities or country. **Current Status:** HR 6310 was introduced by Representative Jamie Raskin (D-Maryland) and is currently in committee, meaning it has not yet been voted on by the full House of Representatives. Naming bills for government buildings are generally noncontroversial and often pass with bipartisan support when they move forward for a vote.
Stop Censoring Military Families Act
# Stop Censoring Military Families Act (HR 5527) - Summary **What the Bill Would Do:** This bill aims to protect military families from what sponsors describe as censorship or removal of their online content. While specific details aren't publicly available in standard bill summaries, the title suggests it would establish protections preventing social media platforms or other entities from removing posts, accounts, or content created by military family members. The bill would likely establish rules about how and when such content can be moderated or taken down. **Who It Affects & Current Status:** The bill would directly impact military families, service members, and potentially social media platforms or other online services. It's currently in committee, meaning it's still in the early stages of the legislative process and hasn't yet been debated or voted on by the full House of Representatives. No timeline has been set for further action. **Note:** Without access to the full bill text, this summary focuses on what the title indicates. For detailed provisions and the specific concerns being addressed, the complete legislative text would need to be reviewed on Congress.gov.
To make technical amendments to update statutory references to certain provisions classified to title 2, United States Code, title 50, United States Code, and title 52, United States Code, and to correct related technical errors.
# HR 5210 Summary **What the Bill Does:** This is a technical housekeeping bill that would update and correct references in the U.S. Code—the official compilation of federal laws. Specifically, it would fix outdated or incorrect citations in three main sections: Title 2 (Congress and government operations), Title 50 (war and national defense), and Title 52 (voting and elections). These kinds of bills are routine updates that fix errors or references that have become inaccurate due to previous law changes. **Who It Affects and Current Status:** This bill primarily affects government agencies and legal professionals who rely on accurate statutory references when implementing and interpreting federal law. The general public would not directly feel the impact. The bill is currently in committee and has not yet been voted on by the full House of Representatives. It was introduced by Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) and is a straightforward technical correction measure with no controversial provisions—the type of bill that typically passes with bipartisan support when brought to a vote.
Terminating the emergency determined by the President on August 11, 2025, in the Executive Order titled "Declaring a crime emergency in the District of Columbia".
# Summary of HJRES 115 **What the Bill Would Do:** This joint resolution would cancel an emergency declaration that the President issued on August 11, 2025, regarding crime in Washington, D.C. If passed, it would effectively end whatever special powers or measures the President put in place under that emergency declaration. Joint resolutions like this are one of the Congressional tools available to override or terminate presidential emergency declarations. **Who It Affects:** The bill primarily affects Washington, D.C. and any federal operations or policies that were implemented as part of the crime emergency declaration. It could impact law enforcement, federal agencies operating in D.C., and district residents depending on what specific measures were included in the original emergency order. **Current Status:** As of now, the bill is in committee and has not been voted on by the full House. It was introduced by Rep. Jamie Raskin, a Democrat from Maryland. The bill has not yet advanced to a floor vote, which would be necessary for it to pass.
Clean Hands Firearm Procurement Act
# Clean Hands Firearm Procurement Act Summary **What the bill would do:** The Clean Hands Firearm Procurement Act would restrict the federal government from purchasing firearms or ammunition from companies that have been found liable in civil lawsuits related to gun violence. In practical terms, this means the government could only buy weapons from manufacturers and dealers with clean legal records regarding gun-related damages or injuries. **Who it affects:** The bill primarily affects federal agencies that purchase firearms (such as law enforcement and military agencies) and the firearms industry. It could also indirectly impact gun manufacturers by potentially reducing a revenue stream from government contracts if they face civil liability lawsuits. **Current status:** The bill was introduced in the 119th Congress by Representative Jamie Raskin (D-MD) and is currently in committee, meaning it has not yet been voted on by the full House of Representatives. No additional details about specific provisions or timeline for action are available at this time.
BARK Act of 2025
# BARK Act of 2025 - Summary I don't have access to the detailed text or provisions of HR 3732 (the BARK Act of 2025) to provide you with an accurate summary of what it would do, who it affects, or its key provisions. While I can confirm the bill exists in the 119th Congress and is currently in committee under Rep. Jamie Raskin's sponsorship, providing specifics without reliable information would risk giving you inaccurate details. **To get accurate information about this bill, I'd recommend:** - Visiting Congress.gov and searching "HR 3732" for the full text and summary - Checking the bill's status updates and sponsor statements - Reading analyses from nonpartisan sources like CRS Reports or policy organizations If you can share the bill's text or summary from Congress.gov, I'd be happy to help explain it in plain language.
Truth in Tariffs Act
# Truth in Tariffs Act Summary The Truth in Tariffs Act (HR 3306) would require the federal government to provide more transparency and disclosure about tariffs—taxes placed on imported goods. Specifically, the bill aims to ensure that consumers, businesses, and the public have clearer information about how tariffs affect prices and the economy. While the bill's full details aren't specified in the available information, transparency bills of this type typically require government agencies to publish data, conduct studies, or provide public reports on tariff impacts. The bill would primarily affect importers, businesses that rely on foreign goods, consumers who buy products containing imported materials, and policymakers making trade decisions. It could also impact federal agencies like the Commerce Department that oversee trade policy. **Current Status:** The bill is currently in committee, meaning it has been introduced but has not yet been debated or voted on by the full House of Representatives. For more specific details about the bill's exact provisions, you can review the full text on Congress.gov.
Sarah Debbink Langenkamp Active Transportation Safety Act
# Sarah Debbink Langenkamp Active Transportation Safety Act Summary **What the Bill Would Do:** This bill aims to improve safety for people using active transportation—such as walking, cycling, and using scooters or other non-motorized methods to get around. While specific details aren't provided in the available information, the bill is named after Sarah Debbink Langenkamp, suggesting it may have been prompted by a specific incident involving active transportation safety. If passed, the legislation would likely establish new safety standards, funding, or requirements to protect pedestrians and cyclists on roads and public spaces. **Who It Affects:** The bill would impact pedestrians, cyclists, and anyone using active transportation methods, as well as communities working to make streets safer for these users. It could also affect municipalities and transportation departments responsible for implementing any new safety measures or infrastructure improvements. **Current Status:** As of now, the bill (HR 2011) is in committee, meaning it has been introduced in the House of Representatives but has not yet advanced to a full floor vote. The bill was sponsored by Representative Jamie Raskin (D-Maryland). For more detailed information about the specific provisions, you can search for the full bill text on Congress.gov.
Handgun Permit to Purchase Act
# Handgun Permit to Purchase Act Summary **What the Bill Would Do** The Handgun Permit to Purchase Act would create a federal grant program that provides funding to states, local governments, and Native American tribes to set up licensing systems for handgun purchases. Essentially, it would help fund programs that require people to obtain a permit before buying a handgun, similar to how some states currently operate. The bill would also support evaluating how well these programs work in reducing gun violence. **Who It Affects and Key Details** This bill would primarily affect gun buyers in states or localities that choose to implement permit requirements, as well as law enforcement agencies and tribal governments responsible for administering such programs. The bill doesn't mandate that any state adopt these requirements—it only provides funding for those that want to. States and localities that already have permit systems could potentially use the grants to improve or evaluate their programs. **Current Status** The bill is currently in committee, meaning it hasn't yet been debated or voted on by the full House of Representatives. It was introduced in the 119th Congress by Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD).