Bruce Westerman (R-AR)
Expressing support for the designation of April 2025 as "Second Chance Month".
A Republican resolution with 7 Democratic cosponsors · See all 10 cosponsors
Last activity — Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
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
A House resolution is the House speaking for itself: stating a position, honouring someone, or setting its own rules. Adopting it is the whole process. Once the House agrees to it, it is officially the House's word; it is not a law, so the Senate and the President have no part in it.
What this bill would do
This resolution expresses support for designating April 2025 as "Second Chance Month." It highlights how individuals returning from Federal and State prisons face automatic legal and societal barriers known as collateral consequences. These barriers can impact employment, education, and housing stability. The resolution notes that these consequences often exist regardless of the crime's seriousness or the individual's efforts to make amends. By designating this month, the House aims to increase public awareness regarding these barriers. Finally, it encourages communities to provide closure and second chances to those who have paid their debt.
Yes· 3 of 18
- Scored +4
Would Black Americans be better off under this?
The bill notes that collateral consequences disproportionately affect underserved communities of color.
- Scored +4
Does this narrow racial gaps in how people are treated?
The resolution explicitly notes that collateral consequences have particularly impacted underserved communities of color.
- Scored +3
Would households on low incomes be better off under this?
Increasing employment and housing access can significantly help low-income households.
The opposite
No question was scored the opposite.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Increased Public Awareness: The designation aims to increase awareness regarding the impact of collateral consequences and the need for closure for individuals who have paid their debt (Resolution, Section 2, part 1).
-
Community Engagement: The resolution calls for opportunities for employers, congregations, and communities to extend second chances to individuals (Resolution, Section 2, part 1, G) and honors the work of those attempting to remove barriers to help individuals become productive members of society (Resolution, part 2).
-
Economic and Social Benefits: By addressing barriers to employment, education, and housing, the resolution notes that individuals can better contribute to their families and communities, which can improve economic mobility and reduce recidivism (Preamble).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- No specific negative impacts are explicitly stated in the provided text.
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 Black Americans be better off under this? — The bill notes that collateral consequences disproportionately affect underserved communities of color. Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — Increasing employment and housing access can significantly help low-income households. Would children be better off under this? — Improving the economic stability of families can positively impact children's well-being. Would Hispanic Americans be better off under this? — The benefits of the resolution extend to all underserved communities of color. Would Native Americans be better off under this? — The benefits of the resolution extend to all underserved communities of color. Would students be better off under this? — The resolution supports removing barriers to education and financial aid. Would business owners be better off under this? — Expanding the available talent pool can benefit business owners.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Does this narrow racial gaps in how people are treated? — The resolution explicitly notes that collateral consequences have particularly impacted underserved communities of color. Does this make housing cost less? — The resolution notes that collateral consequences often bar individuals from accessing public housing. Is this likely to lift people out of poverty? — By improving employment and housing stability, the resolution aims to boost economic mobility and family well-being. Does this shorten or soften prison sentences? — While not changing sentences, it addresses the ongoing punitive nature of collateral consequences after a sentence is served. Is this likely to reduce homelessness? — Improving access to housing for those with criminal records can help mitigate housing instability.
- Economy And Finance
- Is this likely to create jobs? — By advocating for the removal of barriers to employment, the resolution supports better job access for formerly incarcerated individuals. Is this likely to grow the economy? — Increased economic mobility for millions of citizens can contribute to broader economic growth. Does this make it easier to run a small business? — The bill notes that removing collateral consequences can help formerly incarcerated individuals access capital to start small businesses.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this protect the right to fair treatment by the courts? — The resolution advocates for the rights of individuals who have already paid their debt to the society. Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — The resolution aims to increase public awareness about the impact of collateral consequences.
- Education And Technology
- Does this make college cost less? — The resolution highlights the need to remove barriers to financial aid for educational programs.
- 4/9/2025
- 4 Cosponsors added.
- 4/1/2025
- Submitted in House
- Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
- 6 Cosponsors added.
3 bills Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.
Don BaconRepublican · Nebraska
Shontel BrownDemocrat · Ohio
Danny DavisDemocrat · Illinois
Maxwell FrostDemocrat · Florida
Carol MillerRepublican · West Virginia
Lucy McBathDemocrat · Georgia
Barry MooreRepublican · Alabama
Eleanor NortonDemocrat · District of Columbia
Terri SewellDemocrat · Alabama
Frederica WilsonDemocrat · Florida