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. Crow, Jason [D-CO-6] · D–CO
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 19, 2026. 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.136 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.136 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.136 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.136 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 · 2026-01-06 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 would require the President to proclaim a Democracy Day each year and encourage governments, education officials and the public to observe it with programs and activities. Its preamble recommends January 6, but the proposed legal requirement does not specify which date the President must designate.
Whereas January 6 would be an appropriate day to designate as Democracy Day: Now, therefore, be it
The President shall issue each year a proclamation— (1) designating a day as Democracy Day; (2) calling on State and local governments and the people of the United States to observe Democracy Day with appropriate programs and activities; and (3) urging civil and educational authorities of States, counties, cities, and towns to observe Democracy Day through appropriate programs and activities.
The resolution would add section 149, titled “Democracy Day,” to chapter 1 of title 36 of the United States Code. It would make an annual presidential proclamation mandatory.
That chapter 1 of title 36, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new section (and conforming the table of contents for such chapter accordingly): 149. Democracy Day The President shall issue each year a proclamation— (1) designating a day as Democracy Day;
January 6 is suggested in the introductory statements explaining the resolution. The operative provision—the language that would change the law—requires designation of “a day,” without fixing January 6 as that date.
Whereas January 6 would be an appropriate day to designate as Democracy Day: Now, therefore, be it
The President shall issue each year a proclamation— (1) designating a day as Democracy Day;
The proclamation would have to call on state and local governments and the public to participate, and urge state, county, city and town civil and education authorities to organize appropriate observances. These provisions encourage participation; they do not require those governments, officials or individuals to hold activities.
(2) calling on State and local governments and the people of the United States to observe Democracy Day with appropriate programs and activities; and (3) urging civil and educational authorities of States, counties, cities, and towns to observe Democracy Day through appropriate programs and activities.
The preamble presents the January 6, 2021 Capitol attack and law enforcement officers’ response as reasons for the observance. It describes the attack as an attempt to disrupt election certification and harm lawmakers, states that it resulted in multiple deaths and injuries to more than 140 law enforcement members, and credits officers with helping ensure the presidential transition. These are the resolution’s stated findings.
Whereas, on January 6, 2021, insurrectionists carried out a violent attack against the United States Capitol in a failed attempt to disrupt and harm lawmakers certifying the outcome of the 2020 Presidential election;
Whereas the assault on the United States Capitol resulted in multiple deaths and physical harm to over 140 members of law enforcement;
Whereas the tremendous bravery displayed by law enforcement officers helped ensure the successful and democratic transition of presidential power;
The supplied official-actions snapshot, updated September 19, 2026, records introduction in the House and referral to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform on January 6, 2026.
Source snapshot updated 2026-09-19T23:23:27Z. 2026-01-06: Referred to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. 2026-01-06: Introduced in House
A closer look
Reviewed version: Introduced in House · 2026-01-06. 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 or attachment history 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 congressionally directed spending for particular recipients or places was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version; earmark disclosures and accompanying committee materials were not supplied.
Narrow exceptions, exemptions, or preferential treatment that warrant a closer look.
None identified in the reviewed text
No materially narrow exemption, carve-out or preferential treatment was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version and does not establish absence in other versions or accompanying materials.
Full text preserved for this analysis. Legislative record snapshot: Sep 19, 2026. How PlainBill uses AI