Likely helped
- No clear beneficiaries surfaced yet.
H. Con. Res. 65 (110th)Bill Overview
Disagreeing with the plan announced by the President on January 10, 2007, to increase by more than 20…
Concurrent ResolutionInternational Affairs|AlliancesArmed forces abroad
Current stageCommittee
Committee Hearings Held.
Introduced
Committee
Floor
President
Law
01 · The brief
Plain-English summaryWhat this bill actually does
<p>States that Congress disagrees with the plan announced by the President on January 10, 2007, to increase by more than 20,000 the number of U.S. combat troops in Iraq and urges the President to consider the options set forth in this resolution.</p> <p>States that Congress believes that: (1) the military rules of engagement must allow maximum opportunity for U.S. and coalition forces to pursue the enemy in Iraq; (2) U.S. Armed Forces fighting insurgents and al Qaida terrorists in Al Anbar Province need to be reinforced as determined by military commanders; (3) the Iraq reconstruction effort must focus on projects with a small security footprint; (4) one person in Iraq must have absolute authority and responsibility for reconstruction funding; (5) the United States and its Middle Eastern allies should develop an Iraqi repatriation program; (6) terrorism has been fueled by staggering unemployment rates in Iraq and that the United States with its allies should develop an economic development plan for Baghdad and Al Anbar Province; and (7) the U.S. government should develop a program to open and revitalize the several hundred shuttered state-owned enterprises in Iraq with primary focus on Baghdad and Al Anbar Province. </p>
Why people may split
The main political fault lines are not fully surfaced yet, so coalition durability is still unclear.
Watch point
The next hurdle is converting committee movement into a floor coalition.
<p>States that Congress disagrees with the plan announced by the President on January 10, 2007, to increase by more than 20,000 the number of U.S. combat troops in Iraq and urges the President to consider the options set forth in this resolution.</p> <p>States that Congress believes that: (1) the military rules of engagement must allow maximum opportunity for U.S. and coalition forces to pursue the enemy in Iraq; (2) U.S. Armed Forces fighting insurgents and al Qaida terrorists in Al Anbar Province need to be reinforced as determined by military commanders; (3) the Iraq reconstruction effort must focus on projects with a small security footprint; (4) one person in Iraq must have absolute authority and responsibility for reconstruction funding; (5) the United States and its Middle Eastern allies should develop an Iraqi repatriation program; (6) terrorism has been fueled by staggering unemployment rates in Iraq and that the United States with its allies should develop an economic development plan for Baghdad and Al Anbar Province; and (7) the U.S. government should develop a program to open and revitalize the several hundred shuttered state-owned enterprises in Iraq with primary focus on Baghdad and Al Anbar Province. </p>
Passage38/100
This bill has moved beyond introduction, but committee and floor dynamics still determine whether it can build durable support.
CredibilityPartial
How solid the drafting looks.
Contention—
The main political fault lines are not fully surfaced yet, so coalition durability is still unclear.
02 · What it does
Who stands to gain, and who may push back.
Likely benefits vs burdens0% / 100%
Likely helpedLikely burdened
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Likely burdened
- No clear downsides surfaced yet.
03 · Why people split
Why the argument around this bill splits.
The main political fault lines are not fully surfaced yet, so coalition durability is still unclear.
Progressive—
The main political fault lines are not fully surfaced yet, so coalition durability is still unclear.
Centrist—
The main political fault lines are not fully surfaced yet, so coalition durability is still unclear.
Conservative—
The main political fault lines are not fully surfaced yet, so coalition durability is still unclear.
04 · Can it pass?
The path through Congress.
Introduced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Committee
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Floor
Still ahead
President
Still ahead
Law
Still ahead
Passage likelihood38/100
This bill has moved beyond introduction, but committee and floor dynamics still determine whether it can build durable support.
Why this could stall
- The next hurdle is converting committee movement into a floor coalition.
05 · Recent votes
Recent votes on the bill.
No vote history yet
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
06 · Go deeper
Go deeper than the headline read.
Included on this page
The main political fault lines are not fully surfaced yet, so coalition durability is still unclear.
This bill has moved beyond introduction, but committee and floor dynamics still determine whether it can build durable support.
Unlocked analysis
Pro readers get the full perspective split, passage barriers, legislative design review, stakeholder impact map, and lens-based policy tradeoff analysis for Disagreeing with the plan announced by the President on Januar…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.
Perspective breakdownsPassage barriersLegislative design reviewStakeholder impact map
Open full analysis