Passed
196 Yea192 Nay44 Not voting1/2 required
HRES-1115-119
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
Sponsored by Virginia Foxx (R-NC)
What it does
H. Res. 1115 is a procedural "rule" resolution passed by the House that sets the terms for floor debate on three separate bills: (1) H.R. 556, which would prohibit federal land managers from banning lead ammunition or fishing tackle on certain federal lands; (2) H.R. 1958, which would clarify that unauthorized immigrants convicted of defrauding the federal government or unlawfully receiving public benefits are inadmissible and deportable; and (3) H.R. 4638, which would make unauthorized immigrants convicted of harming law enforcement animals inadmissible and deportable. The resolution also extends debate time to one hour for a proposed constitutional amendment requiring a balanced federal budget.
Who benefits
Members of the House majority who want to bring these three bills to the floor under controlled conditions with limited amendments. Hunters and anglers who use lead ammunition and tackle on federal lands (beneficiaries of H.R. 556). Federal agencies seeking clearer statutory grounds for deportation and inadmissibility decisions (H.R. 1958 and H.R. 4638). Law enforcement agencies that use working animals (H.R. 4638). Supporters of a balanced budget amendment who gain extended debate time.
Who is hurt
House minority members and any majority members who wish to offer floor amendments to the three bills, as the rule waives all points of order and limits amendments. Wildlife and environmental advocacy groups opposed to lead ammunition on federal lands would see H.R. 556 advanced. Immigrants and immigration advocacy groups opposed to expanded deportation grounds would see H.R. 1958 and H.R. 4638 advanced.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that structured rules are a standard and necessary tool for managing House floor time efficiently, ensuring that bills that have already cleared committee receive a timely and orderly vote. They contend that waiving points of order and limiting amendments prevents procedural obstruction of legislation that reflects the will of the committee process and the majority, consistent with longstanding House practice.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that closed or structured rules that waive all points of order and limit amendments reduce transparency and cut off minority members' ability to offer alternative proposals or challenge potentially flawed provisions on the floor. They contend that packaging multiple unrelated policy areas — federal land use, immigration, and a constitutional amendment — into a single procedural vehicle limits meaningful deliberation on each distinct issue.
Passed
Passed