Passed
217 Yea212 Nay3 Not voting1/2 required
HRES-313-119
Pursuant to the provisions of H.Res. 707, H.Res. 313 is amended.
Sponsored by Virginia Foxx (R-NC)
What it does
H. Res. 313 would do two things. First, it would set the procedural rules for the House to consider and vote on the Senate's version of the FY2025 congressional budget resolution (H. Con. Res. 14), covering fiscal years 2025–2034, limiting debate to one hour split equally between the Budget Committee chair and ranking member, and blocking procedural objections. Second, it would suspend the counting of calendar days from April 9 through September 30, 2025, for purposes of the National Emergencies Act's automatic termination review process, specifically regarding a national emergency declared by the President on April 2, 2025.
Who benefits
The House majority party, which gains a streamlined path to pass the budget resolution without procedural delays or points of order. The President, whose April 2, 2025 national emergency declaration would be shielded from the automatic congressional review timeline under the National Emergencies Act through September 30, 2025. Executive branch agencies and programs whose funding levels are set by the underlying budget resolution. Constituencies whose priorities are reflected in the Senate-passed budget.
Who is hurt
House minority party members, who would have limited ability to slow or amend the budget resolution through procedural tools. Members of Congress who wish to exercise the National Emergencies Act's oversight mechanism to review or terminate the April 2, 2025 emergency declaration — their window to act under the standard timeline would effectively be paused. Constituencies whose budget priorities differ from those in the Senate amendment. Taxpayers and interest groups opposed to the spending or revenue levels in the underlying budget resolution.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that this rule is a necessary and routine procedural step to move the budget process forward efficiently, preventing minority obstruction of a budget resolution that sets fiscal parameters for the next decade. They contend that the calendar-day suspension for the National Emergencies Act is a reasonable accommodation to give Congress adequate time to deliberate on the April 2 emergency declaration without being forced into a rushed vote, ensuring more thoughtful oversight rather than less.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that waiving all points of order removes important procedural safeguards that allow members to flag violations of budget rules, effectively bypassing the checks built into the congressional budget process. They contend that suspending the National Emergencies Act calendar is not routine oversight but a deliberate mechanism to delay Congress's statutory right to review and potentially terminate a presidential emergency declaration, weakening the legislative branch's check on executive emergency powers.
Constitutional context
The National Emergencies Act provision touches on the separation of powers between Congress and the Executive. The Presentment Clause and Congress's constitutional authority to define its own procedures (Art. I, §5) are relevant. No Commerce Clause or agency-authority issues are directly raised by this procedural resolution itself.
Checks and balances
The House majority gains procedural control to advance the budget resolution on its preferred terms; the minority loses standard floor tools. Separately, the Executive branch retains its emergency declaration while Congress's statutory review clock is paused, reducing a legislative check on presidential emergency power through September 30, 2025.
Historical precedent
Rules committees routinely pass structured rules to govern floor consideration of budget resolutions; the use of a rule to waive points of order on budget measures is a standard but contested practice in the modern House.
Passed
Passed