Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
This resolution sets the House's rules for debating and voting on H.R. 7006, a consolidated appropriations bill for fiscal year 2026. It authorizes the Speaker to have the House sit as the Committee of the Whole, waives the bill's first reading, and removes many procedural objections so consideration can proceed quickly. Debate is limited to one hour equally divided, amendments are limited to those printed in the Rules Committee report with fixed debate times, and only one motion to recommit is allowed.
This is a House special-rule resolution that governs only House floor procedure; it does not go to the Senate or the President and does not create law. It waives various points of order and restricts which amendments may be offered, as set by the Rules Committee.
This resolution provides the procedural rule for House consideration of H.R. 7006, a consolidated appropriations bill for FY2026.
It waives points of order, limits general debate to one hour, allows amendment consideration under the five-minute rule only for amendments printed in the Rules Committee report, and permits a single motion to recommit.
The Chair of the Appropriations Committee may submit explanatory material to the Congressional Record by January 16, 2026.
Procedure itself is likely adoptable in House, but final enactment depends on negotiation and Senate approval of a contentious appropriations bill.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this special rule is well-constructed and specific in prescribing how the House will consider H.R. 7006. It defines actors, timelines, and permitted actions clearly, making it straightforward to implement.
Closed amendment process versus desire for open floor amendments
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Closed amendment process versus desire for open floor amendments
Likely views the rule with mixed feelings: pragmatic support for timely funding but concern that the closed process blocks progressive amendments.
Worried that waiving points of order and limiting amendments could permit harmful riders or deny protections for social programs.
May accept the rule to avoid a funding lapse while pushing for changes elsewhere.
Generally supportive because the rule enables orderly, timely consideration of an essential appropriations bill.
Cautious about the closed nature and waived points of order, but likely to favor the rule to prevent a funding lapse.
Emphasizes transparency and clarity about which amendments will be allowed.
Views the rule pragmatically but with reservations: supports orderly consideration to avoid a shutdown but opposes broad waivers that block spending-control or policy amendments.
Worries the closed amendment process shields spending levels and riders from challenge.
Prefers opportunities to offer deficit-reduction amendments.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Procedure itself is likely adoptable in House, but final enactment depends on negotiation and Senate approval of a contentious appropriations bill.
The House formally adopted this resolution. A resolution applies only to the House and does not require the other chamber's approval or the President's signature — this vote settles the matter.
A resolution is a formal statement of opinion or decision by the chamber.
Debate was cut short. The House will proceed directly to a vote on the underlying question.
In the House, this ends debate and forces an immediate vote on the main question.
Closed amendment process versus desire for open floor amendments
Procedure itself is likely adoptable in House, but final enactment depends on negotiation and Senate approval of a contentious appropriatio…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this special rule is well-constructed and specific in prescribing how the House will consider H.R. 7006. It defines actors, timelines, and permitted actions clearly, making it…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.