Summary#
This resolution would change House floor rules to limit when recorded (roll-call) votes can happen. It bans any recorded vote at or after 11:00 p.m. on days the House is in session unless at least three-quarters of Members voting agree that an urgent exception is needed. The stated goal is to protect deliberation by preventing routine late-night recorded votes.
- Main change: Adds a rule that no recorded vote may be ordered on or after 11:00 p.m. unless a three-fourths supermajority of Members voting, with a quorum present, finds exigent (urgent) circumstances.
- Overrides other rules: The new rule applies notwithstanding other House rules, so it would take precedence on the timing of recorded votes.
- Applies to recorded votes under the voting procedures in rule XX: The text targets recorded votes conducted under the House’s roll-call voting procedures.
- What is unclear: The bill does not define “exigent circumstances,” explain who decides timing details, or say how the rule would affect other kinds of votes (for example, voice votes).
What it means for you#
- Members of the House: They would not be able to force a roll-call vote at or after 11:00 p.m. unless three-fourths of those voting agree to an exception. This could change scheduling of legislation and require more votes earlier in the day.
- House leadership and party managers: They may need to plan floor calendars differently. Leadership might seek supermajority support before late votes or move work to earlier hours.
- House staff and support services: Staff who run votes, prepare vote records, and support Members may see changes in work hours or scheduling. This could shift workload to earlier in the day.
- People who follow House votes (public, media, researchers): Fewer late-night roll-call votes could make vote timing more predictable. It may also affect when recorded vote records are produced.
- Other votes: The resolution addresses recorded (roll-call) votes. It does not explicitly ban voice votes or other non-recorded procedures, so those might still be used after 11:00 p.m. The text does not clearly explain this.
Expenses#
No publicly available information.
- The bill text and accompanying material do not include a fiscal note or cost estimate.
- This change could affect staffing hours or floor operations, which might have small operational costs, but the bill does not provide numbers or estimates.
- Possible indirect costs or savings (for example, from altered scheduling) are not quantified in the available material.
Proponents' View#
- The bill appears intended to reduce routine late-night roll-call votes and encourage more deliberation and transparency during regular hours.
- Supporters may argue that it promotes better public access to votes by keeping them at predictable times.
- It could encourage floor scheduling that gives Members and staff clearer advance notice of votes.
- Requiring a three-fourths vote for exceptions could limit the use of late-night votes to genuinely urgent situations.
Opponents' View#
- One concern is that the bill does not define “exigent circumstances,” leaving ambiguity about when exceptions apply.
- The rule may make it harder to finish urgent or time-sensitive business that arises late in the day without gaining a large majority for an exception.
- It could increase pressure on daytime schedules, leading to longer days before 11:00 p.m. or more compressed debate earlier.
- The resolution does not explain how it would interact with other voting methods (such as voice votes), so it may shift how votes are recorded without eliminating late decisions.