Removing a certain Member from a certain standing committee of the House of Representatives.
Summary
H. Res. 643 proposes the removal of Representative Delia Ramirez from the House Committee on Homeland Security. The resolution cites a statement made by Representative Ramirez in Mexico City, where she allegedly said, "I am a proud Guatemalan before I am an American." The resolution argues this statement violates clause 1 of rule XXIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, which requires members to behave in a manner that reflects creditably on the House.
Expected Effects
If passed, Representative Ramirez will be removed from the Committee on Homeland Security. This could impact the committee's work and potentially influence future legislative decisions related to homeland security. It may also set a precedent for removing members based on perceived violations of House rules regarding conduct.
Potential Benefits
- Potentially upholds standards of conduct for members of the House of Representatives.
- Could reinforce the importance of representing American interests on committees like Homeland Security.
- May deter similar statements or actions by other members in the future.
- Could lead to a more unified and focused approach within the Homeland Security Committee.
- May satisfy constituents who believe Representative Ramirez's statement was inappropriate.
Potential Disadvantages
- Could be seen as a suppression of free speech and expression, potentially violating the First Amendment.
- May set a precedent for politically motivated removals from committees based on subjective interpretations of conduct rules.
- Could alienate Representative Ramirez's constituents and create further division within the House.
- May distract from more pressing issues facing the Homeland Security Committee.
- Could be perceived as a disproportionate response to a single statement.
Most Disadvantaged Areas:
Constitutional Alignment
The resolution raises potential First Amendment concerns regarding freedom of speech. While the House has internal rules governing member conduct, these rules must be balanced against the constitutional rights of individual members. The action's alignment with the Constitution depends on whether the statement is deemed to be protected speech or a violation of a legitimate House rule. Article 1, Section 5 grants each House the power to determine the Rules of its proceedings, punish its members for disorderly behavior, and, with the concurrence of two thirds, expel a member.
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).