H.Res. 441: Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that further reductions to core national security funding will cause significant harm to United States interests.
Before you vote › Federal bills
H.Res. 441: Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that further reductions to core national security funding will cause significant harm to United States interests.
112th Congress · introduced 2011-10-14 · Armed Forces and National Security · Latest: Referred to the Committee on Armed Services, and in addition to the Committee on the Budget, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
federal
Follow this bill, step by step
- Where it came from: introduced 2011-10-14 · official record
- Who proposed it: Rep. Forbes, J. Randy [R-VA-4] · what a sponsor is
- What happened next: no floor votes in our records yet. Why?
- Where it stands now: Referred to the Committee on Armed Services, and in addition to the Committee on the Budget, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned. 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 of Representatives that further reductions to core national security funding will cause significant harm to United States interests.
Plain summary
Expresses the sense of the House of Representatives that further reductions to core national security funding, such as those triggered by the sequestration alternative of the Budget Control Act of 2011, may cause irreparable harm to U.S. interests and that decisions on U.S. national security policy and spending levels should be based on: (1) the National Security Strategy, a sequential determination of the threats to the United States, and an analysis of the capabilities needed to deter or defeat threats; and (2) the principles that a strong economy and a strong national security are inextricably linked and that national security is the most important obligation of the federal government and should take precedence over other priorities.
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 of Representatives that further reductions to core national security funding will cause significant harm to United States interests.
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. Forbes, J. Randy [R-VA-4] · 36 cosponsors
Cost estimate: No cost estimate published yet.
Cosponsors on this site
Joe Wilson (R-SC), Michael R. Turner (R-OH), Robert J. Wittman (R-VA), Tim Walberg (R-MI), Glenn Thompson (R-PA), Mike Rogers (R-AL), Tim Scott (R-SC)
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)
- Obligation
- A binding promise by a government agency to pay money, for example by signing a contract or awarding a grant. Spending data such as USAspending.gov counts money when it is obligated, which can be before it is actually paid out.
- 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.
- Securities
- Financial investments that can be bought and sold, such as stocks and bonds.
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-112hres441.xml <https://www.govinfo.gov/bulkdata/BILLSTATUS/112/hres>
Record fed-us-cong112-hres441 · catalog fed-us-congress-bills-cong112 · updated 2026-11-15 by psicol fed-bills-cong112