H. Res. 1095 (119th)Bill Overview

Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 7744) making appropriations for the Department of Homeland Security for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2026, and for other purposes.

Congress|CongressHouse of Representatives

Sponsor

Brian JackR

Cosponsors

Support

Republican

Introduced

Mar 3, 2026

Discussions

Bill Text

View ↗

Current stageFloor

Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.

Introduced

Committee

Floor

President

Law

Congressional Activities

01 · The brief

This House rule resolution permits consideration of H.R. 7744, the Department of Homeland Security appropriations bill for FY2026.

It waives all points of order, deems the bill as read, limits debate to one hour equally divided, and allows one motion to recommit.

Passage5/100

This is a House procedural resolution, not a statute; even if adopted in the House, it does not become law.

CredibilityAligned

Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a clear and concise procedural/agenda-setting rule that specifies the principal mechanics for floor consideration of H.R. 7744 and is proportionately detailed for its narrow purpose.

Contention68/100

Progressives emphasize lost amendment opportunities and oversight risks.

02 · What it does

Full Analysis

Who stands to gain, and who may push back.

Who this appears to help vs burden50% / 50%

Targeted stakeholdersTargeted stakeholders

Likely helped

Targeted stakeholdersExpedites House consideration, increasing likelihood of timely DHS appropriations passage and funding continuity.
Targeted stakeholdersLimits procedural obstacles by waiving points of order, shortening procedural delays during floor debate.
Targeted stakeholdersProvides a fixed, one-hour debate promoting legislative efficiency and predictable floor schedule.

Likely burdened

Targeted stakeholdersRestricts minority opportunities to offer amendments and extended debate on DHS funding provisions.
Targeted stakeholdersWaiving points of order limits procedural checks, potentially reducing scrutiny of complex provisions.
Targeted stakeholdersShort debate time may curtail examination of civil liberties and national security tradeoffs.

03 · Why people split

Full Analysis

Why the argument around this bill splits.

Progressives emphasize lost amendment opportunities and oversight risks.

Progressive25%

Likely critical of the rule because it waives points of order and sharply limits debate and amendment opportunities.

Views the resolution as concentrating floor control and potentially blocking amendments that protect civil rights, humanitarian concerns, or oversight.

Likely resistant

Centrist70%

Sees the rule as a pragmatic way to move a major appropriations bill efficiently while accepting tradeoffs.

Concerned the one-hour debate and full waivers reduce opportunities for needed fixes or cost review, but tolerates the approach to avoid funding gaps.

Leans supportive

Conservative90%

Generally favorable: views the rule as restoring floor control, preventing obstruction, and ensuring DHS funding moves swiftly.

Appreciates the waiver of points of order and constrained debate to avoid filibuster-style delays.

Leans supportive

04 · Can it pass?

Full Analysis