H.Res. 1289: Expressing the sense of the House that Democratic Members of the House should join Republican Members of the House in a total ban on earmarks for one year, that total discretionary spending should be reduced by the amount saved by earmark moratoriums, and that a bipartisan, bicameral committee should be created to review and overhaul the budgetary, spending, and earmark processes.
Before you vote › Federal bills
H.Res. 1289: Expressing the sense of the House that Democratic Members of the House should join Republican Members of the House in a total ban on earmarks for one year, that total discretionary spending should be reduced by the amount saved by earmark moratoriums, and that a bipartisan, bicameral committee should be created to review and overhaul the budgetary, spending, and earmark processes.
111th Congress · introduced 2010-04-22 · Congress · Latest: Referred to House Rules
federal
Follow this bill, step by step
- Where it came from: introduced 2010-04-22 · official record
- Who proposed it: Rep. Goodlatte, Bob [R-VA-6] · what a sponsor is
- What happened next: no floor votes in our records yet. Why?
- Where it stands now: Referred to House Rules 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.
Official title
Expressing the sense of the House that Democratic Members of the House should join Republican Members of the House in a total ban on earmarks for one year, that total discretionary spending should be reduced by the amount saved by earmark moratoriums, and that a bipartisan, bicameral committee should be created to review and overhaul the budgetary, spending, and earmark processes.
Plain summary
Expresses the sense of the House of Representatives that: (1) Democratic Members of the House should join its Republican Members in a total ban on earmarks for one year; (2) discretionary spending should be reduced in the concurrent budget resolution for FY2011 by the total amount that was spent on requests for earmarks in FY2010; (3) if spending in that resolution is not reduced by such amount, an amendment to that resolution to effectuate this change should be made in order; and (4) a complete review and overhaul of the congressional budgetary, spending, and earmark processes should be commenced by creating a bipartisan, bicameral committee to study the issue and report to the House and Senate with its recommendations.
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 the House that Democratic Members of the House should join Republican Members of the House in a total ban on earmarks for one year, that total discretionary spending should be reduced by the amount saved by earmark moratoriums, and that a bipartisan, bicameral committee should be created to review and overhaul the budgetary, spending, and earmark processes.
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. Goodlatte, Bob [R-VA-6] · 165 cosponsors
Cost estimate: No cost estimate published yet.
Cosponsors on this site
Gus M. Bilirakis (R-FL), Marsha Blackburn (R-TN), John Boozman (R-AR), Vern Buchanan (R-FL), Ken Calvert (R-CA), Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV), John R. Carter (R-TX), Bill Cassidy (R-LA), Mario Diaz-Balart (R-FL), Virginia Foxx (R-NC) and 105 more.
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 (2)
- 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-111hres1289.xml <https://www.govinfo.gov/bulkdata/BILLSTATUS/111/hres>
Record fed-us-cong111-hres1289 · catalog fed-us-congress-bills-cong111 · updated 2026-11-15 by psicol fed-bills-cong111