Referred to the House Committee on House Administration.
This resolution authorizes a specific dollar amount for the House Committee on Rules to pay staff and other committee expenses for the 119th Congress. It splits the total into equal amounts for each year of the two-year Congress and sets how vouchers and approvals must be handled. The resolution directs that spending follow rules set by the Committee on House Administration. Because it is a House simple resolution, it governs only internal House administration and does not create law for the public.
This is a House simple resolution, so it is adopted by the House alone and is not sent to the Senate or the President. It affects only internal House budgeting and procedures and is not binding law for outside parties.
This House resolution allocates $8,544,397.95 for the Committee on Rules for the 119th Congress, split equally between the two annual sessions ($4,272,198.97 each).
Payments require vouchers authorized by the Committee, signed by the Chairman, and approved under Committee on House Administration rules; expenditures must follow Committee on House Administration regulations.
Internal House resolution is likely to be adopted by the House but does not become law and does not require Senate or presidential action.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a concise, well-targeted administrative resolution that specifies total and per-session funding for the Committee on Rules and sets basic procedural requirements for payment and regulatory compliance.
Progressives stress transparency and procedural abuse risks.
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Progressives stress transparency and procedural abuse risks.
Views the resolution as routine funding for a powerful House committee but wants safeguards.
Supports necessary staff and operations while worrying about procedural impacts on legislation and transparency.
Treats the resolution as a standard, necessary appropriation for committee functioning.
Wants modest oversight and clear bookkeeping but sees no major policy controversy in the funding itself.
Likely to support necessary funding for the Rules Committee, especially if under Republican control.
Concerned about overall federal spending and wants fiscal accountability.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Internal House resolution is likely to be adopted by the House but does not become law and does not require Senate or presidential action.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Progressives stress transparency and procedural abuse risks.
Internal House resolution is likely to be adopted by the House but does not become law and does not require Senate or presidential action.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a concise, well-targeted administrative resolution that specifies total and per-session funding for the Committee on Rules and sets basic procedural requirements f…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.