H.R.es377 - Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 276) to rename the Gulf of Mexico as the Gulf of America, and providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 881) to establish Department of Homeland Security funding restrictions on institutions of higher education that have a relationship with Confucius Institutes, and for other purposes. (119th Congress)
Summary
H.Res.377 is a resolution providing for the consideration of two bills: H.R. 276, which proposes renaming the Gulf of Mexico as the "Gulf of America," and H.R. 881, which seeks to establish Department of Homeland Security funding restrictions on institutions of higher education with ties to Confucius Institutes. The resolution outlines the procedures for debating and amending these bills in the House of Representatives.
Specifically, it waives certain points of order against the bills and sets time limits for debate. It also specifies which amendments will be considered as adopted.
The resolution streamlines the process for considering these bills, potentially expediting their passage through the House.
Expected Effects
If adopted, this resolution will allow the House to consider H.R. 276 and H.R. 881 under specific rules that limit debate and amendment opportunities. This could lead to a quicker vote on both bills.
H.R. 276, if passed, would rename the Gulf of Mexico, while H.R. 881, if passed, would restrict DHS funding to certain universities. The actual effect depends on whether these bills are ultimately approved by both the House and Senate and signed into law.
Potential Benefits
- Streamlined legislative process for H.R. 276 and H.R. 881, potentially leading to quicker decisions on these matters.
- Focused debate on specific amendments, ensuring key issues are addressed.
- Increased scrutiny of foreign influence in higher education through the consideration of H.R. 881.
- Clear rules for debate and amendment, promoting transparency and order in the legislative process.
Potential Disadvantages
- Limited debate time may restrict thorough discussion of the bills' potential impacts.
- Waiver of points of order could bypass important procedural safeguards.
- Restrictions on amendments may prevent consideration of alternative solutions or compromises.
- Potential for expedited passage of bills without sufficient public input or awareness.
Constitutional Alignment
The resolution itself is procedurally aligned with the Constitution, as Article I, Section 5 grants each House the power to determine the rules of its proceedings. The constitutionality of the underlying bills (H.R. 276 and H.R. 881) would need to be evaluated separately based on their specific provisions.
For example, H.R. 881 could raise First Amendment concerns regarding academic freedom and freedom of association if the funding restrictions are overly broad or discriminatory. However, Congress also has the power to set conditions on how federal funds are spent, so the alignment is mixed and depends on the specific implementation and justification of the restrictions.
Impact Assessment: Things You Care About ⓘ
This action has been evaluated across 19 key areas that matter to you. Scores range from 1 (highly disadvantageous) to 5 (highly beneficial).