Resolution Limits Session to Growth Program

Summary#

HCR 105 is a proposed concurrent resolution, not a bill that changes an existing law. It would limit the business of Iowa’s first extraordinary 2026 session to considering a bill about the major economic growth attraction program, including effective-date provisions, and any resolutions either chamber adopts. Its stated purpose is to set the session’s business; it would not itself create or change that program.

  • The House and Senate would both need to adopt the resolution for its limits to apply.
  • The resolution would allow consideration of a bill on the named subject, but it would not require the chambers to pass that bill.
  • It would also allow either chamber to adopt other resolutions.
  • The supplied status says SCR 103 substituted for HCR 105.

What it means for you#

  • Iowans generally: This resolution would not directly change taxes, benefits, services, rights, or business rules. Any such changes would have to come from separate legislation.
  • Legislators: If adopted, the resolution would limit the session’s business to the specified bill and resolutions.
  • People or businesses affected by the program: The resolution gives no program details, so it does not establish who would qualify, what assistance might be offered, or what conditions might apply.

Money#

No cost information is in the available material.

  • The resolution does not itself appropriate money or set a tax, fee, or benefit.
  • The cost of any separate bill considered under it is not stated.

What is unclear#

  • The resolution does not explain what the “major economic growth attraction program” would do.
  • The text of the bill that could be considered is not supplied, so its effects and costs cannot be assessed.
  • The supplied status says SCR 103 substituted for HCR 105, but SCR 103’s text is not provided; its final terms cannot be checked here.
  • The material does not establish whether HCR 105 was adopted.

Case for#

  • A possible argument for the resolution is that it would keep the extraordinary session focused on a defined subject.
  • Allowing either chamber to adopt resolutions gives the chambers some room to address other matters without opening the session to unrelated bills.
  • Setting the agenda does not itself commit the state to the program or its costs.

Case against#

  • Limiting the session to one bill topic could leave other issues outside the session’s scope.
  • The resolution names a program but gives no detail about its design, so the public cannot judge the proposed policy from this text.
  • It is unclear whether the substituted resolution keeps the same limits or changes them.