H. Res. 382 (119th)Bill Overview

Providing a point of order in the House of Representatives during the 119th Congress against reconciliation measures that reduce benefits under the Medicaid program or the supplemental nutrition assistance program.

Simple ResolutionEconomics and Public Finance|Economics and Public Finance
Cosponsors
Support
Republican
Introduced
May 5, 2025
Discussions
Bill Text
Current stageCommittee

Referred to the House Committee on Rules.

Introduced
Committee
Floor
President
Law
Congressional Activities
01 · The brief
Simple ResolutionWhat this resolution actually does

This resolution creates a House rule during the 119th Congress that allows members to raise a point of order to block consideration of any budget reconciliation bill, amendment, or related conference report that would reduce Medicaid or SNAP eligibility or benefits for children, seniors, pregnant women, or people with disabilities. If a point of order is sustained, the House may not consider the offending provision unless the point of order is waived. The rule specifically exempts provisions that reduce improper payments, stop fraud, or improve eligibility verification. The rule only applies in the House and lasts through the end of the 119th Congress.

Passage rules

This is a House rule adopted via a simple resolution and applies only in the House during the 119th Congress; it is enforced by a point of order rather than creating binding law. It does not bind the Senate or the President.

This House resolution creates a point of order during the 119th Congress that bars consideration of reconciliation bills, resolutions, amendments, or conference reports that would reduce enrollment or benefits under Medicaid or reduce SNAP eligibility or benefits for specified protected groups.

The protected groups are individuals under 19, people age 65 or older, pregnant women, and people with disabilities.

An exception allows provisions that reduce improper payments, eliminate fraudulent billing, or enhance data verification to ensure eligibility.

Passage40/100

Likely adoptable in the House if its majority supports procedural protections; not a statute and not subject to Senate enactment, so limited 'law' status and contingent on internal House politics.

CredibilityAligned

Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill functions as a focused House procedural rule that is clearly written, ties into existing statutes, and contains specific definitions and an exception, with implementation relying on standard point-of-order practice.

Contention72/100

Libs emphasize protecting vulnerable beneficiaries; conservatives emphasize fiscal flexibility

02 · What it does

Who stands to gain, and who may push back.

Likely benefits vs burdens50% / 50%
SeniorsFederal agencies

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

Likely helped
  • SeniorsProtects health and nutrition access for children, seniors, pregnant women, and people with disabilities.
  • Potential benefitLimits use of the reconciliation process to enact benefit reductions for vulnerable populations.
  • Potential benefitMay reduce short-term increases in uninsured rates and food insecurity among covered groups.
Likely burdened
  • Potential burdenRestricts congressional fiscal flexibility to consider entitlement changes via reconciliation.
  • Federal agenciesCould increase projected federal spending or deficit pressure by blocking potential benefit reductions.
  • Potential burdenMay shift contentious policy changes to non-reconciliation vehicles, complicating budget negotiations.
03 · Why people split

Why the argument around this bill splits.

Libs emphasize protecting vulnerable beneficiaries; conservatives emphasize fiscal flexibility
Progressive95%

Overall supportive: views the resolution as a procedural safeguard protecting vulnerable populations from budget reconciliation cuts.

Sees it as preserving core safety-net coverage for children, seniors, pregnant people, and people with disabilities.

May watch the exception for fraud-related provisions to ensure it is not used to erode benefits.

Leans supportive
Centrist70%

Cautiously supportive but pragmatic: appreciates protecting highly vulnerable groups while concerned about hampering budget process flexibility.

Sees value in the fraud-prevention exception, but wants clear definitions and guardrails to avoid unintended procedural gridlock or unfunded mandates.

Leans supportive
Conservative20%

Likely opposed: views the resolution as an unnecessary constraint on congressional budgeting and entitlement reform through reconciliation.

Sees it as protecting entitlement spending and limiting lawmakers' ability to address program growth, targeting, or long-term fiscal sustainability.

Likely resistant
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 likelihood40/100

Likely adoptable in the House if its majority supports procedural protections; not a statute and not subject to Senate enactment, so limited 'law' status and contingent on internal House politics.

Scope and complexity
24%
Scopenarrow
24%
Complexitylow
Why this could stall
  • Whether House majority and Rules Committee will prioritize adoption
  • How 'reduces' will be interpreted in close cases
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

Libs emphasize protecting vulnerable beneficiaries; conservatives emphasize fiscal flexibility

Likely adoptable in the House if its majority supports procedural protections; not a statute and not subject to Senate enactment, so limite…

Unlocked analysis

Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill functions as a focused House procedural rule that is clearly written, ties into existing statutes, and contains specific definitions and an exception, with implementa…

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