WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

HR 384

A Resolution directing the Joint State Government Commission to conduct a study regarding the feasibility of implementing both a Statewide ballot rotation system and a precinct ballot rotation system for the order of listing candidates on ballots in primary and general elections and for each type of office and to issue a report.

2025-2026 Regular Session Introduced by Jill Cooper and 9 co-sponsors

HR 384 authorizes a formal study by the Joint State Government Commission to evaluate feasibility and implications of statewide and precinct ballot rotation for all elections and o

Laid on the table (Pursuant to House Rule 71)
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HR 384

Overview

  • Bill: House Resolution 384 (HR 384)
  • Session/Jurisdiction: Pennsylvania, 2025-2026 Regular Session
  • Prime Sponsor: Rep. Jared Solomon
  • Co-sponsors: Rep. Zach Mako, Rep. Mark Gillen, Rep. Christopher Rabb, Rep. Valerie Gaydos, Rep. Melissa Shusterman, Rep. Jill Cooper, Rep. Pat Gallagher, Rep. Arvind Venkat, Rep. Ben Waxman
  • Status: Referred to State Government (Jan 8, 2026); reported as committed (Feb 3, 2026); laid on the table (Pursuant to House Rule 71) on June 1, 2026

Purpose and Intent

HR 384 directs the Joint State Government Commission (a bicameral, bipartisan statutory agency in Pennsylvania) to conduct a formal study on the feasibility of implementing ballot rotation systems. Specifically, it seeks to examine the viability of:

  • A statewide ballot rotation system
  • A precinct-level ballot rotation system

The study would cover the order of listing candidates on ballots in both primary and general elections, and for each type of office.

Key Provisions

  • Directs the Joint State Government Commission to study:
    • Feasibility of implementing statewide ballot rotation
    • Feasibility of implementing precinct ballot rotation
    • Applicability for both primary and general elections
    • Applicability for each type of elected office (e.g., statewide offices, legislative districts, etc.)
  • Requires the Commission to issue a report detailing findings and recommendations.

Note: The resolution itself does not enact a rotation system; it authorizes a study to assess practicality, benefits, costs, constitutional/legal considerations, administrative implementation, and potential impacts on election fairness and voting behavior.

Who/What Would Be Affected

  • Statewide level: Ballot design and ordering rules if rotation is adopted, potential changes to how candidates are listed on ballots in all statewide contests.
  • Local level: Precinct-level implementation would affect ballot construction and ordering within individual precincts.
  • Stakeholders likely to be affected include voters, county election officials, political parties, candidates, ballot vendors/tech providers, and election administrators.
  • The study would examine legal and administrative feasibility, which could influence future legislative or regulatory action.

Procedural and Timeline Aspects

  • Initiation: The resolution directs the Joint State Government Commission to undertake the study.
  • Reporting: The Commission is to issue a report with its findings and recommendations (no explicit deadline stated in the text provided; typically such resolutions specify a reporting timeframe, which may be determined by the Commission in its internal process or by accompanying language not included here).
  • Committee action: The bill passed the House State Government committee with a 14-12 vote (Feb 3, 2026) and was reported as committed before being laid on the table in June 2026, indicating no immediate advancement to the full House floor at that time.

Potential Impacts and Context

  • Goals: Ballot rotation is often proposed as a measure to reduce ballot-order bias, where candidates listed earlier on ballots may receive more votes due to order rather than merit.
  • Outcomes: The study could yield policy options ranging from preserving current practice to adopting statewide or precinct-level rotation, along with implementation plans, costs, and legal considerations.
  • Next steps: If the Commission’s report supports rotation, next actions could include drafting legislation to authorize or regulate rotation systems, development of standards, procurement considerations for ballot printing, and potential constitutional or statutory amendments.

Summary

HR 384 does not mandate a rotation system but authorizes a thorough, formal study by the Joint State Government Commission to evaluate the feasibility and implications of statewide and precinct-level ballot rotation for ballot order in all primary and general elections and for all office types, culminating in a detailed report for lawmakers.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.