Passed
216 Yea215 Nay1 Not voting1/2 required
HRES-1057-119
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
Sponsored by Chip Roy (R-TX)
What it does
H. Res. 1057 is a procedural "rule" resolution that would set the terms under which the House of Representatives considers four separate bills: (1) S. 1383, establishing a Veterans Advisory Committee on Equal Access; (2) H.R. 2189, modifying federal firearms laws for new technologies and less-than-lethal weapons; (3) H.R. 261, exempting previously authorized undersea fiber optic cables from additional National Marine Sanctuaries Act permits; and (4) H.R. 3617, directing the Department of Energy to secure supplies of critical minerals and energy resources. It also waives the normal two-thirds vote requirement to allow same-day consideration of continuing appropriations resolutions through February 13, 2026.
Who benefits
The House majority party benefits by controlling the floor schedule and limiting amendments. Members who support any of the four underlying bills benefit from a guaranteed path to a floor vote. Telecommunications companies with undersea cable infrastructure benefit indirectly if H.R. 261 advances. Veterans' advocacy groups benefit if S. 1383 advances. Firearms manufacturers and technology developers benefit if H.R. 2189 advances. Critical minerals producers and domestic energy companies benefit if H.R. 3617 advances. Federal agencies and government contractors benefit from the continuing appropriations waiver, which smooths the path to avoiding a government shutdown.
Who is hurt
The House minority party loses the ability to offer floor amendments or delay consideration of the four underlying bills. Members who oppose any of the underlying bills lose procedural tools to slow or modify them. Environmental groups and marine sanctuary advocates may be disadvantaged if H.R. 261 advances without additional scrutiny. Firearms regulation advocates may be disadvantaged if H.R. 2189 advances. Taxpayers and agencies dependent on full-year appropriations rather than a continuing resolution may be indirectly affected by the same-day waiver provision.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that rules resolutions are a routine and necessary tool for managing the House floor schedule, and that this resolution ensures each of the four underlying bills receives structured, orderly debate with equal time for both parties. They contend that waiving the same-day rule for continuing appropriations resolutions is a practical measure to prevent a government funding lapse, and that bundling multiple bills under one rule is a standard efficiency practice that has been used by majorities of both parties for decades.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that waiving all points of order against the underlying bills and limiting floor amendments removes meaningful checks on legislation that covers disparate and consequential policy areas — from firearms law to marine environmental protection. They contend that bundling four unrelated bills under a single closed or structured rule reduces transparency and limits the minority's ability to offer amendments that could improve the legislation or expose weaknesses, undermining the deliberative function of the full House.
Passed
Passed