PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Military Personnel.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Aug 2, 2007
(This measure has not been amended since it was reported to the House on July 31, 2007. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Ensuring Military Readiness Through Stability and Predictability Deployment Policy Act of 2007 - Prohibits any unit of the regular Armed Forces from being deployed for Operation Iraqi Freedom unless the period between the most recent previous deployment and a subsequent deployment is equal to or longer than the period of the most recent previous deployment. Expresses the sense of Congress that the optimal minimum period between such deployments should be equal to or longer than twice the period of the most recent previous deployment.
Prohibits any unit of the reserves from being deployed for such Operation unless the period between the most recent previous deployment and a subsequent deployment is at least three times longer than the period of the most recent previous deployment. Expresses the sense of Congress that units of the reserves should not be mobilized continuously for more than one year, and that the optimal minimum period between such deployments should be five years.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Provides exceptions from deployment requirements with respect to: (1) special operations forces; and (2) units needed to assist in the redeployment of members from Iraq to another operational requirement or back to their home stations.
Authorizes the: (1) President to waive deployment requirements if the President certifies to Congress within 30 days that the deployment is necessary to meet U.S. national security interests; and (2) chief of staff of the military department concerned to waive such requirements with respect to a member who has voluntarily requested mobilization.
People & committees
Rep. Tauscher, Ellen O. [D-CA-10] · D–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Military Personnel.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Armed Services.
Received in the Senate.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On passage Passed by recorded vote: 229 - 194, 3 Present (Roll no. 796). (text: CR H9566)
House roll call 796 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed by recorded vote: 229 - 194, 3 Present (Roll no. 796).(text: CR H9566)
House roll call 796 · Individual votesOn motion to recommit with instructions Failed by the Yeas and Nays: 207 - 217, 1 Present (Roll no. 795). (consideration: CR H9578)
House roll call 795 · Individual votesThe previous question on the motion to recommit with instructions was ordered without objection. (consideration: CR H9577)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Hunter motion to recommit with instructions. The instructions contained in the motion seek to require the bill to be reported back to the House with amendments inserting a new section providing for certification requirement.
Mr. Hunter moved to recommit with instructions to Armed Services. (consideration: CR H9576; text: CR H9576)
The previous question was ordered pursuant to the rule. (consideration: CR H9576)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate on H.R. 3159.
Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 3159 with 1 hour of general debate. Previous question shall be considered as ordered without intervening motions except motion to recommit with or without instructions. Measure will be considered read. Bill is closed to amendments.
Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 601. (consideration: CR H9565-9579)
Rule H. Res. 601 passed House.
Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 601 Reported to House. Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 3159 with 1 hour of general debate. Previous question shall be considered as ordered without intervening motions except motion to recommit with or without instructions. Measure will be considered read. Bill is closed to amendments.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 183.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Armed Services. H. Rept. 110-282.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Armed Services. H. Rept. 110-282.
Ordered to be Reported by the Yeas and Nays: 32 - 25.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the House Committee on Armed Services.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Jun 6, 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.R.3159 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.R.3159 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.R.3159 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.R.3159 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.