H.Res. 1398House simple resolution · 119th CongressIn progressCongress

Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 8800) to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2027 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 8595) making appropriations

Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 8800) to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2027 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 8595) making appropriations for national security, Department of State, and related programs for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2027, and for other purposes; providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 8884) to amend title II of the Social Security Act to reauthorize demonstration authority for the disability insurance program; providing for consideration of the resolution (H. Res. 1383) commemorating the one-year anniversary of the enactment of the Working Families Tax Cuts; and for other purposes.

Sponsored byAustin ScottR-GA-8Introduced Jun 30, 2026Full text on congress.gov ↗

Latest action (Jul 13, 2026) VACATING PROCEEDINGS - Mr. Steil asked that the ordering of a recorded vote on the question of reconsideration of the vote on adoption on H. Res. 1398 be vacated to the end that the motion to reconsider be . Agreed to without objection.

What it does

Congressional Research Service, Jun 30, 2026

This resolution provides for the consideration of the bill (H.R. 8800) to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2027 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 8595) making appropriations for national security, Department of State, and related programs for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2027, and for other purposes; providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 8884) to amend title II of the Social Security Act to reauthorize demonstration authority for the disability insurance program; providing for consideration of the resolution (H. Res. 1383) commemorating the one-year anniversary of the enactment of the Working Families Tax Cuts; and for other purposes.

Face Value

as reported to the House
100Narrow

How much of this bill its name accounts for.

  • Every bill starts at100
  • Nothing counted against it: one area of law, and short enough that length doesn't register.

Face Value measures reach, not honesty. A big bill can be accurately named, and a low score is not an accusation — it means the contents reach further than any short title could describe. Count it yourself ↗ How this is worked out

What Congress did

2 recorded
  • On Agreeing to the Resolutiondecisive vote

    House · Jun 30, 2026

    Whether to adopt the resolution itself.

    198224

    Failed

    Every vote →
  • On

    House · Jun 30, 2026

    A procedural vote to cut off debate and amendments. It sounds neutral; in practice it's a vote about who controls what happens next.

    215210

    Passed

    Every vote →

Discussion

9 comments

Sign in to join the discussion and put your vote on the record.

Sort
15
dustin_reyesDemoNJ-11voted Nay20d ago
Does anyone have the CBO score on this? The summary is silent on cost and that's usually the whole argument.
9
SierraTrailDemoCA-12voted Nay18d ago
Honest question, not a gotcha: what would change your mind on this?
2
marisol_qDemoPA-14voted Yea20d ago
In favour, with a caveat: the effective date is doing a lot of work here. If it slips, everything else in this bill is theoretical.
1
SierraTrailDemoCA-12voted Nay24d ago
I'd oppose this. It reads like it was written to be announced rather than administered.
-1
yusuf.aDemoCA-28voted Nay25d ago
Agreed on the substance, disagree on the timing. Doing this badly now makes doing it well later harder.
1
marisol_qDemoPA-14voted Yea24d ago
Fair, but the alternative on the table is nothing, and nothing has a cost too.
4
yusuf.aDemoCA-28voted Nay22d ago
Where are you seeing that? I read the summary twice and it doesn't say that anywhere.
1
steelcityscribeDemoMI-7voted Nay20d ago
This is my worry too — the cost estimate always assumes full compliance and full compliance never happens.
9
yusuf.aDemoCA-28voted Nay21d ago
Counterpoint: the reporting requirement is the guardrail. Once the numbers are public the politics change on their own.
Your position on H.Res. 139850% Yea · 8 VoteWire users