Overview

Title

Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 626) to advance commonsense policy priorities.

ELI5 AI

H. RES. 1027 is a special plan that helps the House of Representatives talk about a new idea called H.R. 626 more quickly, but it doesn't explain what this idea is. It's like when a teacher says, "Let's talk about this now and skip some steps," to make things go faster.

Summary AI

H. RES. 1027 sets the procedure for the House of Representatives to consider bill H.R. 626, aimed at advancing commonsense policy priorities. It allows the House to begin considering the bill immediately and waives any procedural objections. An amendment, based on a previous bill (H.R. 7372) and potentially modified by Representative Fitzpatrick, will be automatically included. The resolution permits one hour of debate divided between supporters and opponents and allows for one motion to recommit.

Published

2024-02-23
Congress: 118
Session: 2
Chamber: HOUSE
Status: Introduced in House
Date: 2024-02-23
Package ID: BILLS-118hres1027ih

Keywords AI

h.r. 626 house of representatives procedural waiver amendment process debate limits legal jargon transparency issues fast-tracking procedure clause 1(c) of rule xix legislative process

Sources

Bill Statistics

Size

Sections:
3
Words:
364
Pages:
2
Sentences:
13

Language

Nouns: 95
Verbs: 37
Adjectives: 12
Adverbs: 6
Numbers: 22
Entities: 29

Complexity

Average Token Length:
4.41
Average Sentence Length:
28.00
Token Entropy:
4.52
Readability (ARI):
17.14

AnalysisAI

General Summary of the Bill

The proposed resolution, H. RES. 1027, is concerned with the consideration of a bill known as H.R. 626, which is aimed at advancing "commonsense policy priorities." The resolution sets forth the framework within which the House of Representatives will discuss and potentially pass H.R. 626. Major procedural steps will be bypassed, and an amendment in the nature of a substitute will be automatically adopted. An hour of debate is allotted, equally divided between proponents and opponents, with a possibility of one final amendment motion.

Summary of Significant Issues

  1. Complex Language and Lack of Transparency:
    The procedural language used in the resolution is legalistic and complex ("considered as adopted," "waived"), which could pose difficulties for the general public's understanding. This lack of accessibility might reduce public engagement and transparency regarding legislative processes.

  2. Lack of Content Description:
    The resolution does not provide any details about the contents or implications of H.R. 626, making it challenging for stakeholders and the general public to understand who might benefit or be impacted by the bill.

  3. Fast-Tracking Concerns:
    The resolution allows for a fast-tracking procedure, which includes waiving points of order and adopting amendments without thorough debate. This approach could undermine democratic processes by limiting comprehensive legislative discussions and scrutiny.

  4. Ambiguous Amendment Process:
    The procedure for amendments is somewhat unclear, particularly with stipulations like "only the last amendment submitted shall be considered." Such wording could lead to misunderstandings or potential procedural errors.

  5. Contextual Gaps Regarding Parliamentary Rules:
    The reference to specific clauses and rules (e.g., “Clause 1(c) of rule XIX”) lacks context, which may result in confusion about what exceptions or processes are being referred to.

Impact on the Public and Stakeholders

Broad Public Impact:

The resolution's lack of detail on the bill H.R. 626 means the general public may remain uninformed about the potential direct impact of the legislation on citizens' lives. The fast-tracking approach, with predetermined procedural waivers, can be seen as excluding the broader public from contributing to or influencing the legislative outcome.

Impact on Specific Stakeholders:

Due to the absence of specific information regarding the bill’s purpose or beneficiaries, identifying which groups might benefit or be adversely affected is a challenge. The use of an amendment based on H.R. 7372 suggests there might be targeted priorities, possibly directed at specific economic or social policies, but these are not explicitly stated.

In summary, while H. RES. 1027 lays the groundwork for discussing H.R. 626, significant gaps in explanation and the use of procedural shortcuts may obscure the legislative process from the public eye and limit stakeholder engagement. Without further transparency, both the benefits and consequences of H.R. 626 will remain hypothetical to the general public.

Issues

  • The bill employs procedural language such as 'considered as adopted', 'waived', 'considered as ordered', which may be complex and difficult for the general public to understand, reducing transparency and accessibility (Section 1).

  • There is no clear description of the contents or implications of the bill (H.R. 626) within the resolution, making it difficult for stakeholders to assess the potential impact or any parties that may benefit (Section 1).

  • The use of a fast-tracking procedure, including the waiver of points of order and predetermined amendment adoption, might limit thorough debate or consideration within the legislative process, potentially undermining democratic norms (Section 1).

  • The reference to exceptions to Clause 1(c) of rule XIX lacks context and detail, making it unclear what exceptions are being referred to and possibly causing confusion (Section 2).

  • The amendment process is potentially confusing due to unclear language about the submission and consideration of amendments ('only the last amendment submitted shall be considered'), which could lead to misunderstandings or procedural errors (Section 3).

  • The language used throughout, including phrases like 'designated for that purpose in clause 8 of rule XVIII', is legalistic and may be difficult for those unfamiliar with legislative procedures to understand, potentially reducing transparency and public engagement (Sections 1, 2, and 3).

Sections

Sections are presented as they are annotated in the original legislative text. Any missing headers, numbers, or non-consecutive order is due to the original text.

Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

The House plans to consider a bill called H.R. 626, which focuses on advancing sensible policy priorities. They've agreed to skip certain procedural steps, adopt a substitute amendment, and move towards a final decision with an hour of debate and a chance for one last amendment.

2. Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

In this section, it is stated that Clause 1(c) of rule XIX will not be applied to the discussion of bill H.R. 626.

3. Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

The section explains that the proposed amendment, substituting text from H.R. 7372, can be further modified by an amendment from Representative Fitzpatrick, printed at least a day before considering H.R. 626. If multiple such amendments are submitted, only the last one will be used.