Overview
Title
Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 7888) to reform the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978; providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 529) to extend the customs waters of the United States from 12 nautical miles to 24 nautical miles from the baselines of the United States, consistent with Presidential Proclamation 7219; providing for consideration of the resolution (H. Res. 1112) denouncing the Biden administration’s immigration policies; and providing for consideration of the resolution (H. Res. 1117) opposing efforts to place one-sided pressure on Israel with respect to Gaza.
ELI5 AI
This bill is like a set of rules for talking about several important topics, such as changing how the government watches people to keep them safe, deciding how far out in the ocean belongs to the US, discussing what President Biden is doing about people moving to the US, and talking about how the US deals with Israel and Gaza. It's all about making sure everyone knows the guidelines for these discussions.
Summary AI
The resolution H. RES. 1137 outlines the procedures for the House to consider multiple legislative items. It allows the House to discuss and potentially amend a bill aimed at reforming the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (H.R. 7888) and another bill proposing to extend the customs waters of the United States from 12 to 24 nautical miles (H.R. 529). Additionally, it provides for consideration of two resolutions: one criticizing the immigration policies of the Biden administration (H. Res. 1112), and the other opposing pressures on Israel regarding Gaza (H. Res. 1117). The resolution establishes guidelines for debate and amendments for these legislative items.
Published
Keywords AI
Sources
Bill Statistics
Size
Language
Complexity
AnalysisAI
The resolution H. RES. 1137, introduced in the 118th Congress, aims to set the stage for the consideration of several legislative proposals. These include a bill to reform the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978, another bill to extend U.S. customs waters from 12 to 24 nautical miles, and two resolutions: one denouncing the Biden administration's immigration policies and another opposing efforts to pressure Israel regarding Gaza.
General Summary of the Resolution
The resolution is a procedural directive allowing the House of Representatives to consider these legislative items following specific rules and timelines. It outlines how each piece of legislation will be debated, amended, and brought to a vote. The resolution also sets limitations on amendments and debate, aiming to streamline the legislative process.
Significant Issues
Several issues arise from the procedural structure proposed in the resolution. One primary concern is the waiver of all points of order for the bill to reform the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), which may reduce transparency and hinder comprehensive debate on its provisions. Similarly, the resolution denouncing the Biden administration's immigration policies offers no room for alternative viewpoints or division of the question, potentially indicating a partisan approach.
Furthermore, the resolution addressing Israel and Gaza lacks transparency by not explaining the rationale for opposing pressures on Israel. This omission could result in misunderstandings about U.S. foreign policy. The complex legislative jargon employed throughout the resolution may also pose comprehension challenges for the general public. Lastly, the limited debate time proposed for the resolutions on immigration and Israel may restrict in-depth discussion and consideration of diverse perspectives.
Impact on the Public
Broadly, the resolution, by streamlining legislative procedures, seeks to ensure efficient handling of various significant issues. However, the restrictions on debate and amendments may impact public understanding and involvement in these legislative actions. The complexities in the resolution's language can make it difficult for the public to grasp the issues fully, potentially affecting informed civic participation.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
1. Lawmakers and Policymakers: The limited debate time and the waiver of points of order may benefit lawmakers seeking swift legislative action but could frustrate those desiring a more thorough discussion.
2. Advocacy and Interest Groups: Groups focused on civil liberties may be particularly concerned about the FISA reform, given the limited opportunity for amendments and debate. Similarly, organizations that advocate for immigrant rights and foreign policy may find the resolution processes limiting in terms of influencing legislative outcomes.
3. The General Public: Citizens may find it challenging to follow legislative changes due to the procedural complexity and reduced transparency. This could affect their ability to engage with their representatives effectively on these issues.
In conclusion, while the resolution aims to facilitate legislative processes, it does so at the risk of curtailing comprehensive discussion and transparency, which are key components of an inclusive democratic process. These procedural decisions might lead to significant implications for various stakeholders, influencing the public's role in engaging with national policy debates.
Issues
The waiver of all points of order against the bill (H.R. 7888) to reform the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 as outlined in Section 1 could limit debate and scrutiny, reducing transparency and robust discussion about its provisions.
The consideration of the resolution (H. Res. 1112) denouncing the Biden administration's immigration policies without the possibility of intervention or division of the question in Section 3 may indicate a partisan approach rather than allowing for a balanced discussion, which could politically polarize the issue.
The resolution (H. Res. 1117) opposing efforts to pressure Israel with respect to Gaza, as noted in Section 4, lacks transparency since it doesn't provide details about the reasons for the opposition. This could lead to misunderstandings about U.S. foreign policy and its implications.
The procedural complexity and use of legislative jargon throughout the text, particularly highlighted in Sections 1 and 2, may make it difficult for the general public to understand the processes and implications involved in the consideration of these bills and resolutions.
The limitation on debate time to only one hour for resolutions H. Res. 1112 and H. Res. 1117 in Sections 3 and 4, respectively, might be considered insufficient for a comprehensive discussion on their implications, potentially overlooking important viewpoints and concerns.
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 Speaker of the House can decide to review a bill about reforming the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978, bypassing some usual procedures, and limiting debate time. After initial discussions based on a pre-approved text, further amendments are limited to those specified in a report, and the bill will move towards a final vote following these guided amendments.
2. Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The resolution allows for the consideration of a bill (H.R. 529) in the House that aims to extend the customs waters of the United States from 12 to 24 nautical miles. The bill will proceed with waived points of order, and one hour of debate and a motion to recommit are allowed before its final passage, with no further amendments permitted after this process.
3. Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
Upon adoption of this resolution, the House will consider a resolution criticizing the Biden administration's immigration policies without any obstacles. The resolution will be read aloud and debated for one hour, with time divided equally between leaders from the Judiciary Committee.
4. Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The resolution allows the House to consider a specific proposal (H. Res. 1117), which opposes putting pressure on Israel regarding Gaza, without any points of order interrupting. The proposal is read, debated for one hour, and then voted on without any further changes, with debate time equally shared between the two main political parties involved.