H.Con.Res. 391: Expressing the sense of Congress concerning the well-being of members of the Armed Forces and calling on the Department of Defense to do its utmost to see that deployed military personnel have the best force protection equipment the Nation can make available, and for other purposes.

H.Con.Res. 391: Expressing the sense of Congress concerning the well-being of members of the Armed Forces and calling on the Department of Defense to do its utmost to see that deployed military personnel have the best force protection equipment the Nation can make available, and for other purposes.

108th Congress · introduced 2004-03-18 · Armed Forces and National Security · Latest: Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR H2341-2342)

federal

Follow this bill, step by step

Where it came from: introduced 2004-03-18 · official record
Who proposed it: Rep. Meehan, Martin T. [D-MA-5] · what a sponsor is
What happened next: no floor votes in our records yet. Why?
Where it stands now: Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR H2341-2342) Not final yet: this can still change. We check for updates every day.
If it becomes law and spends money: follow the money to money laws, then agencies and contracts and grants.

What does this mean?

Official title

Expressing the sense of Congress concerning the well-being of members of the Armed Forces and calling on the Department of Defense to do its utmost to see that deployed military personnel have the best force protection equipment the Nation can make available, and for other purposes.

Plain summary

Expresses the sense of Congress that: (1) the well-being of deployed U.S. armed forces is of paramount importance; (2) the Department of Defense (DOD) should do its utmost to see that such personnel have the best force protection equipment available; (3) DOD and the military departments should increase the ability of currently unarmored vehicles that are deployed forward under Operations Iraqi Freedom and Enduring Freedom to resist improvised explosive devices; and (4) DOD should immediately release to the military departments all funds that have been authorized and appropriated, but not released, for defeating such improvised explosive devices and mitigating their effect on vehicles.

Congressional Research Service summary (Introduced in House), quoted unchanged (nonpartisan). Read the source.

What a vote does

A “Yea” vote

A Yea supports adopting this resolution.

A “Nay” vote

If it is not passed, current law stays as it is.

PSI Sci description of the legislative step (not an opinion).

What does this mean? (plain words)

Official text

Expressing the sense of Congress concerning the well-being of members of the Armed Forces and calling on the Department of Defense to do its utmost to see that deployed military personnel have the best force protection equipment the Nation can make available, and for other purposes.

Source: Congressional Research Service summary (Introduced in House)

AI explanation – may be wrong, check the official text

No AI explanation yet. It takes up to a minute to write and is then saved for everyone.

Limited to a few requests an hour per person.

The strongest published arguments

Arguments for (supporters)

Needs sources: no published arguments on this side yet. We only show items backed by a published source. Suggest one.

Arguments against (opponents)

Needs sources: no published arguments on this side yet. We only show items backed by a published source. Suggest one.

Alternatives

Needs sources: no published alternatives yet (for example a different bill, a law instead of an amendment, or keeping current law). We only show items backed by a published source. Suggest one.

How did my representative vote? · This bill's floor votes

Officials and money

Sponsor: Rep. Meehan, Martin T. [D-MA-5] · 33 cosponsors

Cost estimate: No cost estimate published yet.

Cosponsors on this site

Adam Smith (D-WA), James P. McGovern (D-MA), Frank Pallone, Jr. (D-NJ), John B. Larson (D-CT), Edward J. Markey (D-MA), Adam B. Schiff (D-CA), Rosa L. DeLauro (D-CT), Janice D. Schakowsky (D-IL), Rick Larsen (D-WA)

Agencies named in this bill

Department of Defense: its federal spending and other bills that name it

Found automatically: the agency's full official name appears in the bill title. A bill can affect agencies it does not name, so this list may be incomplete.

No linked floor roll calls in our collected records yet. This does not mean the bill has never had a vote. Check the official bill history.

Words on this page, explained (4)

Appropriation: Money a legislature sets aside by law for a specific purpose. Government agencies may spend public money only as it has been appropriated.
Authorization: A law that creates or continues a government program and says what it may do, often with a suggested spending ceiling. An authorization alone does not provide money; a separate appropriation does.
Resolution: A formal statement or decision by a legislative body. Simple resolutions often only express an opinion or set rules for one chamber; they do not become law.
Roll-call vote: A vote where each member's position is recorded by name, so the public can see how every member voted. "Yea" means yes, "Nay" means no, "Present" means the member was there but did not take a side.

Plain meanings written from linked sources. All words.

Sources

Congressional Research Service summary (Introduced in House)
Congress.gov
Data: GovInfo BILLSTATUS bulk data (Library of Congress), BILLSTATUS-108hconres391.xml <https://www.govinfo.gov/bulkdata/BILLSTATUS/108/hconres>

Record fed-us-cong108-hconres391 · catalog fed-us-congress-bills-cong108 · updated 2026-11-15 by psicol fed-bills-cong108