PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.
Congressional Research Service
No official summary is available in the imported record yet.
People & committees
Rep. Luna, Anna Paulina [R-FL-13] · R–FL
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We also preserved the text version used in the PlainBill explanation below.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Sep 12, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.J.Res.114 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.J.Res.114 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.J.Res.114 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.J.Res.114 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.
PlainBill explanation
Based on the full Introduced in House · 2025-08-15 text. This explanation has not received human editorial review. This overview describes the proposal’s major provisions; it does not establish what its real-world effects would be.
This joint resolution proposes extending the crime emergency in the District of Columbia that the President determined on August 11, 2025. The emergency would continue until the President declares it over. The supplied text does not specify a calendar date for it to end.
the emergency determined by the President on August 11, 2025 in the Executive Order titled Declaring a crime emergency in the District of Columbia is hereby extended until the President declares an end to such emergency.
The proposed extension invokes section 740(d) of the District of Columbia Home Rule Act as its legal basis. That section's underlying rules are not reproduced in the resolution.
pursuant to section 740(d) of the District of Columbia Home Rule Act (sec. 1–207.40(d), D.C. Official Code)
The official-actions snapshot updated September 12, 2025, records introduction in the House and referral to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform on August 15, 2025.
Source snapshot updated 2025-09-12T20:19:41Z. 2025-08-15: Referred to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. 2025-08-15: Introduced in House
A closer look
Reviewed version: Introduced in House · 2025-08-15. These findings describe provisions and who may benefit; they are not judgments of waste, corruption, or motive.
This review covers the supplied bill text. “None identified” does not rule out provisions in later versions or accompanying reports and disclosures.
Provisions outside the bill’s main subject, or policy changes attached to appropriations.
None identified in the reviewed text
No unrelated provision was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version and does not establish the contents of other versions or accompanying materials.
Spending directed to particular recipients or places outside ordinary competitive or formula-based allocation.
None identified in the reviewed text
No directed spending was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version; accompanying earmark disclosures and committee materials are not supplied.
Narrow exceptions, exemptions, or preferential treatment that warrant a closer look.
None identified in the reviewed text
No narrow preferential benefit, carve-out, or special exemption was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion does not extend to other versions or accompanying materials.
Full text preserved for this analysis. Legislative record snapshot: Sep 12, 2025. How PlainBill uses AI