H. Res. 294 (119th)Bill Overview

Providing for consideration of the joint resolution (S.J. Res. 18) disapproving the rule submitted by the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection relating to "Overdraft Lending: Very Large Financial Institutions"; providing for consideration of the joint resolution (S.J. Res. 28) disapproving the rule submitted by the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection relating to "Defining Larger Participants of a Market for General-Use Digital Consumer Payment Applications"; providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 1526) to amend title 28, United States Code, to limit the authority of district courts to provide injunctive relief, and for other purposes; providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 22) to amend the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 to require proof of United States citizenship to register an individual to vote in elections for Federal office, and for other purposes; and for other purposes.

Congress|CongressHouse of Representatives

Sponsor

Virginia FoxxR

Cosponsors

Support

Republican

Introduced

Apr 7, 2025

Discussions

Bill Text

View ↗

Current stageFloor

Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.

Introduced

Committee

Floor

President

Law

Congressional Activities

01 · The brief

Res. 294 is a House rule that makes in order floor consideration of: two Congressional Review Act joint resolutions to disapprove two CFPB rules (on overdraft lending by very large institutions and on defining larger participants in digital payment apps); H.R.1526, which would limit district courts’ authority to issue injunctive relief; and H.R.22, which would amend the National Voter Registration Act to require proof of U.S. citizenship to register to vote in federal elections.

The resolution waives points of order, sets one hour of debate for each measure, allows specified motions to commit or recommit, and adopts H.

Passage20/100

Multiple divisive substantive measures packaged together reduce chances of clearing both chambers and surviving legal challenges; Senate and implementation hurdles substantial.

CredibilityAligned

Relative to its intended legislative type, this House rule resolution is clear and specific about how the House will consider the named joint resolutions and bills. It specifies waived points of order, debate allocation, permitted motions, and adoption of an amendment in the nature of a substitute where applicable.

Contention78/100

Voter ID/citizenship proof: seen as integrity safeguard vs voter suppression risk

02 · What it does

Full Analysis

Who stands to gain, and who may push back.

Who this appears to help vs burden50% / 50%

Federal agenciesConsumers · Federal agencies

Likely helped

Targeted stakeholdersEnables rapid congressional review and possible nullification of CFPB rules, reducing compliance costs for affected fir…
Targeted stakeholdersLimits district courts' authority to issue nationwide injunctions, reducing defensive litigation costs for businesses.
Federal agenciesRequires proof of citizenship to register federally, supporters say it improves voter roll accuracy and public confiden…

Likely burdened

ConsumersNullifying CFPB rules may reduce consumer protections against overdraft practices and large payment-platform risks.
Targeted stakeholdersRequiring proof of citizenship could decrease voter registration rates, disproportionately affecting marginalized or mo…
Federal agenciesLimiting injunctive relief may make it harder to obtain immediate court protection against unlawful federal actions.

03 · Why people split

Full Analysis

Why the argument around this bill splits.

Voter ID/citizenship proof: seen as integrity safeguard vs voter suppression risk

Progressive10%

Likely opposed.

The rule fast-tracks measures seen as rolling back consumer protections, restricting judicial remedies, and imposing new voter registration barriers.

The procedural waivers limit deliberation and amendment opportunities.

Likely resistant

Centrist50%

Mixed/leaning cautious.

Appreciates orderly consideration of rules and judicial reform debate, but wary of broad waivers and quick floor actions on sensitive voting and consumer issues.

Wants adequate evidence and narrow, well-defined fixes.

Split reaction

Conservative80%

Generally supportive.

Views the rule as an appropriate, efficient vehicle to rein in perceived CFPB overreach, constrain expansive nationwide injunctions, and strengthen voter-registration integrity by requiring citizenship proof.

Leans supportive

04 · Can it pass?

Full Analysis

The path through Congress.

Introduced

Reached or meaningfully advanced

Committee

Reached or meaningfully advanced

Floor

Reached or meaningfully advanced

President

Still ahead

Law

Still ahead

Passage likelihood20/100

Multiple divisive substantive measures packaged together reduce chances of clearing both chambers and surviving legal challenges; Senate and implementation hurdles substantial.

Scope and complexity

52%

Scopemoderate

52%

Complexitymedium

Why this could stall