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.
Introduced March 3, 2026 · Last action March 4, 2026
Plain English Summary
This resolution is a procedural motion that allows the House of Representatives to consider and debate H.R. 7744, the Department of Homeland Security appropriations bill for fiscal year 2026. It waives standard parliamentary objections and sets rules for one hour of debate and one motion to recommit before a final vote.
Who benefits
House leadership and the majority party control the floor debate and can expedite passage of the DHS appropriations bill without standard procedural delays; the outcomes depend entirely on the substance of H.R. 7744, which is not detailed in this resolution.
Who pays / loses
The minority party loses procedural opportunities to offer amendments or extend debate; the general public and DHS-affected constituencies (immigration enforcement agents, border patrol, airport security workers, and FEMA-served disaster areas) will be materially affected by whatever spending levels and policy choices are in H.R. 7744, but this resolution itself does not specify those impacts.
Funding & Lobbying Interests
This resolution itself contains no appropriations. The underlying H.R. 7744 will control spending and policy priorities. The primary sponsor, Rep. Brian Jack (R-GA-3), received the largest share of campaign contributions in 2024 from the 'Other' category ($310,207.56), with smaller contributions from Finance ($10,420.71), Energy ($6,506.35), Healthcare ($2,250), and Transportation ($1,000); no PAC contributions were recorded. Without the text of H.R. 7744, financial interests with stakes in DHS funding cannot be identified from this procedural resolution alone.
Political Impact
Affected Groups
House members (especially minority party, who face restricted amendment opportunities); Department of Homeland Security employees and contractors (whose budget authority and policy direction depend on H.R. 7744's contents); border communities and immigration enforcement areas; disaster-relief-dependent regions served by FEMA; airports and transportation security personnel; and the general public traveling through airports or depending on DHS services.
Political Subtext
Proponents of such procedural resolutions argue they enable timely passage of necessary funding bills and prevent obstruction of essential government operations. Critics view waiver of points of order as suppression of minority input and amendment rights. This specific resolution is a standard majority-party procedural motion to move H.R. 7744 forward; the substantive debate about DHS priorities, enforcement policies, and border spending will occur during consideration of the underlying appropriations bill, not this resolution.
Real-World Stakes
If adopted, this resolution removes procedural impediments to House passage of the DHS appropriations bill. The House will then debate and vote on H.R. 7744 under compressed timelines and limited amendment opportunities. The actual stakes—which agencies get funded, at what levels, and under what restrictions—depend entirely on H.R. 7744's text. Procedural resolutions of this type have become routine in recent Congresses; their passage typically indicates majority-party confidence in floor vote outcomes and minority-party frustration with limited amendment time. The substantive consequences for border enforcement, immigration policy, airport security, disaster response, and cybersecurity depend on the underlying appropriations bill.
Sponsor
Vote Record
No recorded votes.
Campaign Finance — Primary Sponsor
Top contributing industries
Other$310,207.56
Finance$10,420.71
Energy$6,506.35
Healthcare$2,250
Transportation$1,000
501(c)(4) disclosure: Contributions from 501(c)(4) "dark money" organizations are not required to be publicly disclosed and are not reflected in the figures above. Data sourced from FEC public disclosure filings.
Community Discussion
Share this bill
Sign in to join the discussion.
No comments yet. Be the first.