Received in the Senate.
This resolution authorizes the Speaker of the House and the Senate Majority Leader (or their designees), after consulting the House and Senate minority leaders, to notify Members to assemble at a place outside Washington, D.C., during the 119th Congress if they determine the public interest warrants it. It relies on the Constitution provision that allows Congress to change its meeting place with the consent of both Houses. As a concurrent resolution about internal congressional procedure, it does not create binding law for the public or require the President's signature. It only governs how and where Congress may be called to meet.
Concurrent resolutions address internal congressional matters and are not presented to the President; they do not have the force of law outside Congress.
This concurrent resolution authorizes the Speaker of the House and the Senate Majority Leader, after consulting the House and Senate Minority Leaders, to notify Members to assemble at a location outside the District of Columbia during the 119th Congress if they judge the public interest warrants it.
It relies on the Constitution's provision allowing Congress to determine its meeting place.
The resolution sets a procedural permission; it does not specify locations, funding, or operational details.
Narrow, noncontroversial procedural measure with low fiscal impact and built-in consultation; Senate concurrence is the main remaining hurdle.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this concurrent resolution is a concise, narrowly scoped authorization that clearly identifies the constitutional basis and the officials empowered to act, but it provides minimal operational, fiscal, and accountability detail.
Liberals stress transparency and public access concerns
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Liberals stress transparency and public access concerns
Viewed as a narrow procedural authorization that could be useful in emergencies but raises transparency and access concerns.
Support is conditional on safeguards ensuring public access, oversight, and minimal disruption to constituents.
Seen as a pragmatic, routine procedural tool to preserve Congress's ability to meet outside D.C. in exceptional circumstances.
Support hinges on clear criteria, cost controls, and preserving minority consultation.
Likely seen as a reasonable assertion of congressional authority and flexibility to meet outside the capital when needed.
Viewed as consistent with constitutional prerogatives and useful for security or practical reasons.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Narrow, noncontroversial procedural measure with low fiscal impact and built-in consultation; Senate concurrence is the main remaining hurdle.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Liberals stress transparency and public access concerns
Narrow, noncontroversial procedural measure with low fiscal impact and built-in consultation; Senate concurrence is the main remaining hurd…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this concurrent resolution is a concise, narrowly scoped authorization that clearly identifies the constitutional basis and the officials empowered to act, but it provides mini…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.