HRES-1096-119
Motion to Discharge Committee filed by Ms. DeLauro. Petition No: 119-17. (<a href="https://clerk.house.gov/DischargePetition/2026031817">Discharge petition</a> text with signatures.)
Sponsored by Rosa DeLauro (D-CT)
What it does
This resolution would set the procedural rules for the House to consider H.R. 4213, the Department of Homeland Security appropriations bill for fiscal year 2026. It would waive all points of order against the bill, substitute the text of H.R. 7481 as the working version of the legislation, limit floor debate to one hour split equally between the majority and minority, and allow only one motion to recommit. It would also require the House Clerk to transmit the passed bill to the Senate within three calendar days of passage.
Who benefits
Members of the minority party who want to force a floor vote on DHS funding that the majority-controlled Rules Committee has not scheduled. DHS employees and contractors whose funding depends on a full-year appropriation rather than a continuing resolution. Border security, immigration enforcement, cybersecurity, and disaster response agencies funded under DHS. Constituents who prefer a regular appropriations process over stopgap funding.
Who is hurt
The majority party leadership, which loses control over the floor schedule if the discharge petition succeeds. Members who prefer to negotiate DHS funding terms before a floor vote is forced. Lawmakers who may want more than one hour of debate on a major spending bill. The Rules Committee, which is bypassed entirely if the discharge petition gathers enough signatures.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that Congress has a constitutional duty to fund the government through regular order, and that using a discharge petition is a legitimate tool when leadership refuses to bring appropriations bills to the floor. They contend that DHS — which oversees border security, FEMA, the Coast Guard, and cybersecurity — cannot be effectively managed under repeated continuing resolutions, and that forcing a vote ensures accountability and transparency in the spending process.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that discharge petitions circumvent the deliberative committee process that exists to vet complex legislation, and that forcing a floor vote on a spending bill without majority leadership support is unlikely to produce a bill that can pass the Senate or be signed into law. They contend that the substituted text (H.R. 7481) may not reflect current negotiating positions, making the exercise procedurally disruptive without advancing a workable funding agreement.
Constitutional context
Article I, Section 9 of the Constitution requires that appropriations be made by law, giving Congress the power of the purse over executive agencies including DHS. This resolution is a procedural vehicle to exercise that power; no active constitutional tension arises from the resolution itself, though the underlying appropriations bill (H.R. 4213) would involve standard Commerce Clause and spending power considerations.
Checks and balances
The House gains the ability to act on DHS appropriations independently of committee leadership; the Rules Committee is bypassed, but the Senate and the President retain their standard checks — the Senate must pass the bill and the President must sign or veto it.
Historical precedent
Discharge petitions have been used periodically to force floor votes on stalled legislation; the most recent high-profile example was the 2019 discharge petition that forced a vote on bills to reopen the government during a DHS funding lapse.