A Democratic bill with 54 Democratic cosponsors · See all 54 cosponsors
Last activity — Referred to the House Committee on Education and Workforce.
In committee
Introduced and handed to a committee in the chamber it started in.
The committee holds it, and most bills are never heard from again. A hearing or a committee vote would be news; silence is the usual outcome, and it kills the bill without anyone voting against it.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
H.R. 4908, known as the Time Off to Vote Act, requires employers to give workers a minimum of two consecutive hours of paid leave to vote in Federal elections. Employees can use this time to vote, return a mail-in ballot in person, or do other voting-related activities while polls are open. Employers have the right to choose the specific two-hour period or require the leave to be taken during early voting. The bill protects workers by stopping employers from interfering with leave rights, cutting benefits, or retaliating against employees. Employers who break these rules can face civil penalties of up to $10,000 per violation.
Yes· 3 of 24
- Scored +8
Would households on low incomes be better off under this?
Low-income workers often cannot afford to take unpaid time off to vote, making paid leave highly beneficial.
- Scored +8
Does this protect the right to vote?
The bill mandates paid leave for voting, significantly improving ballot access for working individuals.
- Scored +8
Does this make casting a ballot easier in practice?
Providing two consecutive hours of paid leave directly facilitates easier casting of ballots in federal elections.
The opposite
- Scored -2
Would business owners be better off under this?
Business owners face administrative mandates and potential civil penalties for compliance failures.
- Scored -2
Does this make it easier to run a small business?
The bill imposes potential civil penalties of up to $10,000 per violation which can be burdensome for smaller employers.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Paid Time to Vote: Under Section 2(a), employees can get a minimum of two consecutive hours of paid leave to vote, return a mail-in ballot in person, or do other voting-related activities while polls are open. This is positive because it helps working people cast their ballots without losing pay.
-
Protection of Benefits: Under Section 2(c), taking this leave does not result in the loss of any employment benefits that were earned before the leave. This ensures workers do not lose what they have already worked for just because they exercised their right to vote.
-
Protection from Retaliation: Under Section 2(d), it is unlawful for an employer to interfere with leave rights, discriminate against an employee, or fire and retaliate against anyone for taking leave or participating in proceedings related to the Act. This holds officials and bosses accountable and protects workers who stand up for their rights.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
-
Employer Control Over Timing: Under Section 2(b), the employer has the right to specify the hours during which the employee takes the leave, and can even require the employee to take the leave during a period designated for early voting instead of election day. This means workers do not have full control over when they take their voting leave.
-
Penalties for Small or Struggling Businesses: Under Section 2(f), employers who violate the Act can face a civil penalty of up to $10,000 per violation. While the Secretary of Labor must consider the size and good faith of the business, a penalty up to this amount could be a heavy burden for employers with 25 or more employees who make mistakes.
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — Low-income workers often cannot afford to take unpaid time off to vote, making paid leave highly beneficial. Would Black Americans be better off under this? — Minority communities often face longer voting lines and scheduling hurdles, which paid leave helps mitigate. Would Hispanic Americans be better off under this? — Hispanic workers frequently encounter workplace scheduling flexibility barriers that this bill addresses. Would men be better off under this? — Working men benefit from guaranteed paid leave to cast their ballots. Would people in middle age be better off under this? — Middle-aged working individuals gain protected time and pay to participate in federal elections. Would middle-income households be better off under this? — Middle-class employees receive guaranteed paid time to fulfill their voting responsibilities without wage loss. Would union members be better off under this? — Union workers benefit from additional federally mandated workplace protections regarding leave. Would people in cities be better off under this? — Urban residents often face longer lines at polling places, making guaranteed paid leave especially useful. Would women be better off under this? — Working women balancing employment and family responsibilities gain guaranteed time to vote. Would people in their twenties and thirties be better off under this? — Young adults often face rigid hourly work schedules and benefit from guaranteed paid voting leave. Would Asian Americans be better off under this? — Asian American workers benefit from guaranteed time off to participate in the democratic process. Would immigrants be better off under this? — Naturalized immigrant workers gain secure paid leave to exercise their right to vote. Would LGBTQ people be better off under this? — Members of the LGBTQ community in the workforce benefit from protected voting access. Would Native Americans be better off under this? — Native American workers gain protected leave to participate in federal elections. Would people with disabilities be better off under this? — Workers with disabilities benefit from having dedicated, paid time to navigate voting processes. Would people in rural areas be better off under this? — Rural workers benefit from protected time off to reach polling stations or handle mail-in ballots. Would veterans be better off under this, taking everything together? — Working veterans receive guaranteed time off to participate in federal elections. Would white Americans be better off under this? — White working Americans benefit generally from guaranteed paid voting leave. Would people over 65 be better off under this? — Some seniors still in the workforce benefit from guaranteed voting leave provisions. Would students be better off under this? — Working students balancing jobs and education find it easier to vote with guaranteed paid leave. Would business owners be better off under this? — Business owners face administrative mandates and potential civil penalties for compliance failures.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Does this make casting a ballot easier in practice? — Providing two consecutive hours of paid leave directly facilitates easier casting of ballots in federal elections. Does this protect the right to vote? — The bill mandates paid leave for voting, significantly improving ballot access for working individuals.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this make elections run better? — The bill facilitates greater civic participation by removing financial barriers to voting for workers. Does this give the federal government more power? — The legislation establishes federal labor requirements and investigative authority via the Department of Labor.
- Economy And Finance
- Does this make it easier to run a small business? — The bill imposes potential civil penalties of up to $10,000 per violation which can be burdensome for smaller employers.
- 10/1/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 6/3/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 10/8/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 10/3/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 9/3/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 8/29/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 8/5/2025
- Referred to the House Committee on Education and Workforce.
- 48 Cosponsors added.
- Introduced in House
One bill Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.
Yassamin AnsariDemocrat · Arizona
Shontel BrownDemocrat · Ohio
Ed CaseDemocrat · Hawaii
Emanuel CleaverDemocrat · Missouri
Yvette ClarkeDemocrat · New York
André CarsonDemocrat · Indiana
Troy CarterDemocrat · Louisiana
Sheila Cherfilus-McCormickDemocrat · Florida
Jasmine CrockettDemocrat · Texas
Diana DeGetteDemocrat · Colorado
Lloyd DoggettDemocrat · Texas
Christopher DeluzioDemocrat · Pennsylvania
Suzan DelBeneDemocrat · Washington
Dwight EvansDemocrat · Pennsylvania
Sarah ElfrethDemocrat · Maryland
Cleo FieldsDemocrat · Louisiana
Shomari FiguresDemocrat · Alabama
Al GreenDemocrat · Texas
Jesús GarcíaDemocrat · Illinois
Henry JohnsonDemocrat · Georgia
Jonathan JacksonDemocrat · Illinois
Raja KrishnamoorthiDemocrat · Illinois
Sydney Kamlager-DoveDemocrat · California
Stephen LynchDemocrat · Massachusetts
Summer LeeDemocrat · Pennsylvania
George LatimerDemocrat · New York
Kweisi MfumeDemocrat · Maryland
Gregory MeeksDemocrat · New York
Gwen MooreDemocrat · Wisconsin
Seth MoultonDemocrat · Massachusetts
Morgan McGarveyDemocrat · Kentucky
Seth MagazinerDemocrat · Rhode Island
Kevin MullinDemocrat · California
Jennifer McClellanDemocrat · Virginia
LaMonica McIverDemocrat · New Jersey
April McClain DelaneyDemocrat · Maryland
Dave MinDemocrat · California
Eleanor NortonDemocrat · District of Columbia
Joe NeguseDemocrat · Colorado
Mark PocanDemocrat · Wisconsin
Ayanna PressleyDemocrat · Massachusetts
Delia RamirezDemocrat · Illinois
Robert ScottDemocrat · Virginia
Janice SchakowskyDemocrat · Illinois
Marilyn StricklandDemocrat · Washington
Terri SewellDemocrat · Alabama
Emilia SykesDemocrat · Ohio
Andrea SalinasDemocrat · Oregon
Lateefah SimonDemocrat · California
Bennie ThompsonDemocrat · Mississippi
Dina TitusDemocrat · Nevada
Paul TonkoDemocrat · New York
Rashida TlaibDemocrat · Michigan
Shri ThanedarDemocrat · Michigan