PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.UNANIMOUS CONSENT - Mr. Franklin, C. Scott asked unanimous consent that, notwithstanding section 1(a)(2)(A) of House Resolution 12 (as amended by section 1(c) of House Resolution 78), and the order of the House of today, the Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government be composed of not more than 21 Members, Delegates, or the Resident Commissioner appointed by the Speaker, of whom not more than 9 shall be appointed in consultation with the Minority Leader. Agreed to without objection.
Congressional Research Service
Version 53 · Passed House · Jan 10, 2023
This resolution temporarily establishes in the House of Representatives the Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government, which is comprised of not more than 13 Members appointed by the Speaker (5 of whom shall be appointed in consultation with the minority leader).
The subcommittee must investigate matters related to the collection, analysis, dissemination, and use of information on U.S. citizens by executive branch agencies, including whether such efforts are illegal, unconstitutional, or otherwise unethical. The subcommittee must make a final report of its findings by January 2, 2025, and terminates 30 days after filing that report.
People & committees
Rep. Jordan, Jim [R-OH-4] · R–OH
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
UNANIMOUS CONSENT - Mr. Franklin, C. Scott asked unanimous consent that, notwithstanding section 1(a)(2)(A) of House Resolution 12 (as amended by section 1(c) of House Resolution 78), and the order of the House of today, the Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government be composed of not more than 21 Members, Delegates, or the Resident Commissioner appointed by the Speaker, of whom not more than 9 shall be appointed in consultation with the Minority Leader. Agreed to without objection.
UNANIMOUS CONSENT - Mr. Reschenthaler asked unanimous consent that, notwithstanding section 1(a)(2)(A) of House Resolution 12 (as amended by section 1(c) of House Resolution 78), the Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government be composed of the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on the Judiciary, together with not more than 19 other Members, Delegates, or the Resident Commissioner appointed by the Speaker, of whom not more than 8 shall be appointed in consultation with the minority leader. Agreed to without objection.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On agreeing to the resolution Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 221 - 211 (Roll no. 27). (text: CR H129-130)
House roll call 27 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On agreeing to the resolution Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 221 - 211 (Roll no. 27). (text: CR H129-130)
House roll call 27 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H144-145)
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on H. Res. 12, the Chair put the question on agreeing to the resolution and by voice vote, announced that the ayes had prevailed. Mr. McGovern demanded the yeas and nays and the Chair postponed further proceedings on agreeing to the resolution until a time to be announced.
The previous question was ordered pursuant to the rule.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate on H. Res. 12.
Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 5. (consideration: CR H129-143)
Referred to the House Committee on Rules.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: May 27, 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.Res.12 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.Res.12 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.Res.12 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.Res.12 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.