H.Con.Res. 161: Expressing the sense of Congress that those who served in the bays, harbors, and territorial seas of the Republic of Vietnam during the period beginning on January 9, 1962, and ending on May 7, 1975, should be presumed to have been exposed to the toxin Agent Orange and should be eligible for all related Federal benefits that come with such presumption under the Agent Orange Act of 1991.

H.Con.Res. 161: Expressing the sense of Congress that those who served in the bays, harbors, and territorial seas of the Republic of Vietnam during the period beginning on January 9, 1962, and ending on May 7, 1975, should be presumed to have been exposed to the toxin Agent Orange and should be eligible for all related Federal benefits that come with such presumption under the Agent Orange Act of 1991.

114th Congress · introduced 2016-09-22 · Armed Forces and National Security · Latest: Referred to the Subcommittee on Disability Assistance and Memorial Affairs.

federal

Follow this bill, step by step

Where it came from: introduced 2016-09-22 · official record
Who proposed it: Rep. Stefanik, Elise M. [R-NY-21] · what a sponsor is
What happened next: no floor votes in our records yet. Why?
Where it stands now: Referred to the Subcommittee on Disability Assistance and Memorial Affairs. 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 that those who served in the bays, harbors, and territorial seas of the Republic of Vietnam during the period beginning on January 9, 1962, and ending on May 7, 1975, should be presumed to have been exposed to the toxin Agent Orange and should be eligible for all related Federal benefits that come with such presumption under the Agent Orange Act of 1991.

Plain summary

Recognizes that the intent of the Agent Orange Act of 1991 included the presumption that veterans who served in the Armed Forces in the bays, harbors, and territorial seas of the Republic of Vietnam between January 9, 1962, and May 7, 1975, were exposed to Agent Orange. Expresses the intent that such veterans who served in those areas and other areas exposed to Agent Orange who have been diagnosed with connected medical conditions should be equally recognized for such exposure through equitable benefits and coverage. Calls on the Department of Veterans Affairs to acknowledge such intent, rescind specified parts of the VA Adjudication Procedure Manual M21-1 pertaining to developing claims based on herbicide exposure in Vietnam, and reissue guidance extending presumptive coverage for Agent Orange exposure to such veterans.

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 that those who served in the bays, harbors, and territorial seas of the Republic of Vietnam during the period beginning on January 9, 1962, and ending on May 7, 1975, should be presumed to have been exposed to the toxin Agent Orange and should be eligible for all related Federal benefits that come with such presumption under the Agent Orange Act of 1991.

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. Stefanik, Elise M. [R-NY-21] · 19 cosponsors

Cost estimate: No cost estimate published yet.

Cosponsors on this site

David G. Valadao (R-CA), Mark Takano (D-CA), Joe Courtney (D-CT), James A. Himes (D-CT), John B. Larson (D-CT), Rosa L. DeLauro (D-CT), Gus M. Bilirakis (R-FL), Julia Brownley (D-CA)

Sponsor's campaign money: Rep. Stefanik, Elise M. [R-NY-21] reported raising $5.0 million (2025–2026). Details. Shown for context only; it does not mean any donor supported this bill.

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-114hconres161.xml <https://www.govinfo.gov/bulkdata/BILLSTATUS/114/hconres>

Record fed-us-cong114-hconres161 · catalog fed-us-congress-bills-cong114 · updated 2026-11-15 by psicol fed-bills-cong114