H. Res. 156 (119th)Bill Overview

Honoring the 25th anniversary of the partnership between Guam and the Republic of the Philippines under the State Partnership Program.

Simple ResolutionInternational Affairs|International Affairs
Cosponsors
Support
Republican
Introduced
Feb 24, 2025
Discussions
Bill Text
Current stageCommittee

Referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, and in addition to the Committee on Armed Services, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consi…

Introduced
Committee
Floor
President
Law
Congressional Activities
01 · The brief
Plain-English summaryWhat this bill actually does

This House resolution honors the 25th anniversary of the State Partnership Program between the Guam National Guard and the Armed Forces of the Philippines. It enumerates past joint activities (training, disaster response, infrastructure work), praises the partnership’s role in regional security and deterrence, and expresses continued support for the program and possible similar partnerships with other U.S. states and territories.

Why people may split

Liberal emphasizes humanitarian and rights safeguards

Watch point

Ceremonial resolutions typically pass the House with little opposition; referral to committees may slow timing but rarely blocks passage.

This House resolution honors the 25th anniversary of the State Partnership Program between the Guam National Guard and the Armed Forces of the Philippines.

It enumerates past joint activities (training, disaster response, infrastructure work), praises the partnership’s role in regional security and deterrence, and expresses continued support for the program and possible similar partnerships with other U.S. states and territories.

The resolution is symbolic and contains no appropriation or new authorities.

Passage0/100

House simple resolutions are non‑binding expressions of the chamber and do not become law; content would face no legal obstacles but cannot become statute.

CredibilityPartial

How solid the drafting looks.

Contention15/100

Liberal emphasizes humanitarian and rights safeguards

02 · What it does

Who stands to gain, and who may push back.

Likely benefits vs burdens50% / 50%
Likely helpedLikely burdened

These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.

Likely helped
  • Potential benefitStrengthens U.S.-Philippine security cooperation and military interoperability through sustained training and exercises.
  • Potential benefitImproves disaster response and emergency preparedness through joint exercises and infrastructure reconstruction experie…
  • Potential benefitReinforces diplomatic ties and symbolic commitment, potentially facilitating additional bilateral programs and assistan…
Likely burdened
  • Potential burdenMay be perceived as escalatory by China, raising regional tensions and risk of diplomatic friction.
  • Potential burdenCould legitimize expanded U.S. military presence, increasing the chance of involvement in regional disputes.
  • Potential burdenOffers only symbolic recognition without appropriations, potentially distracting from needed concrete policy or aid.
03 · Why people split

Why the argument around this bill splits.

Liberal emphasizes humanitarian and rights safeguards
Progressive80%

Likely views the resolution positively for highlighting disaster response, capacity building, and regional cooperation.

Would appreciate humanitarian and training aspects while expressing caution about military escalation framing and ensuring human rights and transparency.

Overall supportive but wary of language emphasizing increased U.S. military presence.

Leans supportive
Centrist90%

Sees the resolution as a low-cost, bipartisan affirmation of a long-standing military-to-military partnership.

Values disaster relief, capacity building, and deterrence balance.

Wants clarity that this is symbolic, with prudent oversight if activities expand or require funding.

Leans supportive
Conservative95%

Likely strongly supportive, viewing the resolution as recognition of a valuable security partnership that helps deter Chinese aggression and bolster American influence in the Indo-Pacific.

Appreciates emphasis on defense cooperation and the Mutual Defense Treaty.

Leans supportive
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 likelihood0/100

House simple resolutions are non‑binding expressions of the chamber and do not become law; content would face no legal obstacles but cannot become statute.

Scope and complexity
24%
Scopenarrow
24%
Complexitylow
Why this could stall
  • Whether Senate will adopt a companion or consider similar language
  • Potential procedural delays in House committee referral or scheduling
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

Liberal emphasizes humanitarian and rights safeguards

House simple resolutions are non‑binding expressions of the chamber and do not become law; content would face no legal obstacles but cannot…

Unlocked analysis

Pro readers get the full perspective split, passage barriers, legislative design review, stakeholder impact map, and lens-based policy tradeoff analysis for Honoring the 25th anniversary of the partnership between Guam…

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