House Passes Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2026 and Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2026; Rejects Venezuela War Powers Resolution 215-215
The House convened for a major legislative day, passing two significant appropriations bills: the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2026 (H.R. 7148) and the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2026 (H.R. 7147). These bills represent the culmination of months of bipartisan, bicameral negotiations to fund the Federal Government for the fiscal year. Additionally, the House debated and voted on a concurrent resolution to direct the removal of U.S. Armed Forces from Venezuela (H. Con. Res. 68), which failed on a tied vote. The House also considered and passed the Pregnant Students' Rights Act (H.R. 6359), after rejecting a motion to recommit.
This chamber-day is highly significant as it completes the annual appropriations process for fiscal year 2026, providing full-year funding for critical government functions including defense, homeland security, labor, health and human services, education, and transportation. The passage of these bills ends reliance on continuing resolutions and sets the fiscal priorities for the current administration. The tied vote on the Venezuela War Powers Resolution highlights deep divisions within Congress regarding executive authority in military actions and the role of the legislative branch in matters of war and peace. The passage of the Pregnant Students' Rights Act also marks a notable legislative step in the ongoing national debate over reproductive rights and student support.
Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2026
H.R. 7148Question before the chamber
Passage of H.R. 7148, the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2026, as amended by House Resolution 1014.
The case for
Proponents argued that the bill represents a return to regular order, fiscally responsible governance, and the completion of the annual appropriations process. They emphasized that the bill funds critical priorities of the 'America First agenda,' including strengthening military defense, investing in biomedical research, supporting schools, and modernizing transportation. Specific benefits highlighted included a 3.8 percent pay raise for servicemembers, increased NIH funding for medical research, and investments in affordable housing and air traffic control.
The case against
Opponents criticized the appropriations process for lacking transparency and limiting amendments, calling it a 'clown show' that blocked 99 percent of submitted amendments. They expressed concern that the bill provides a 'blank check' to an administration that has shown 'lawlessness.' Specific objections were raised against earmarks perceived to fund 'woke' initiatives, such as those related to transgender care for children or facilities that perform abortions, and against the inclusion of a new ethanol domestic energy council as a political maneuver.
Disposition
passed · recorded vote
The bill passed the House.
341-88
Amendments
- An amendment to prohibit the use of funds to implement section 24220 of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, which mandates impaired driving prevention technology in new vehicles. (Mr. Massie) — rejected [164-268]
- An amendment to strip out all Community Project Funding/Congressionally Directed Spending earmarks within the Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education division of the bill. (Mr. Norman) — rejected [136-291]
Who is affected
- American taxpayers: Impacted by the allocation of $1.2 trillion in federal spending and the reduction of certain agency budgets.
- Military personnel and their families: Receive a 3.8 percent pay raise and benefit from investments in readiness, modernization, and medical research.
- Patients and healthcare providers: Benefit from increased NIH funding for biomedical research, opioid response grants, and protected funding for public health programs, but some specific earmarks for certain healthcare services were debated.
- Students and educational institutions: Benefit from funding for K-12 education, financial aid, Head Start, and career and technical education, with specific earmarks supporting various educational initiatives.
- Commuters and travelers: Benefit from investments in roads, bridges, ports, and air traffic control, including hiring more air traffic controllers.
- Automobile consumers: Potentially impacted by the implementation of impaired driving prevention technology in new vehicles, as an amendment to defund this was rejected.
- Rural communities and farmers: Impacted by the creation of an ethanol domestic energy council and the ongoing debate over year-round E15 sales.
Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2026
H.R. 7147Question before the chamber
Passage of H.R. 7147, the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2026.
The case for
Proponents argued that the bill is essential for keeping the American people and homeland safe, aligning with the 'America First agenda.' They highlighted funding for border patrol, detention and deportation efforts, counter-fentanyl initiatives, and Coast Guard investments to counter foreign aggression. The bill also provides resources for FEMA for disaster preparedness and response, and for CISA to protect critical infrastructure. They noted the inclusion of body cameras for ICE personnel and a pay raise for Coast Guard members.
The case against
Opponents strongly criticized the bill for funding U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), which they characterized as a 'lawless, vindictive, aggressive, cruel' agency that has committed civil rights violations, including detaining U.S. citizens and using excessive force. They argued that the bill provides a 'blank check' to an administration that has shown 'lawlessness' and that it fails to include sufficient guardrails or accountability mechanisms for ICE operations. Concerns were also raised about the impact on communities and the prioritization of enforcement over other DHS missions.
Disposition
passed · recorded vote
The bill passed the House.
220-207
Who is affected
- American taxpayers: Impacted by the allocation of funds for homeland security operations and disaster relief.
- Immigrant communities and U.S. citizens: Directly affected by ICE enforcement operations, with concerns raised about civil rights and due process, despite funding for body cameras and increased Inspector General oversight.
- DHS personnel (CBP, ICE, TSA, Coast Guard): Receive funding for operations, equipment, and in some cases, pay raises (Coast Guard), enabling them to carry out their missions.
- Communities affected by disasters: Benefit from increased funding for FEMA and the Disaster Relief Fund, enhancing preparedness and response capabilities.
- Critical infrastructure operators: Benefit from funding for CISA to enhance cybersecurity and infrastructure protection.
Removal of the Use of United States Forces for Hostilities Within or Against Venezuela
H. Con. Res. 68Question before the chamber
Adoption of H. Con. Res. 68, directing the President to remove U.S. Armed Forces from Venezuela.
The case for
Proponents argued that the resolution is necessary for Congress to reclaim its constitutional Article I authority over war powers, which they asserted was usurped by the executive branch's recent military operation in Venezuela. They cited the January 3 operation, which involved U.S. troops, resulted in wounded personnel, and led to the replacement of one dictator with another, as an unauthorized act of war. They emphasized the need for congressional debate and authorization for any military action, especially given concerns about the administration's motives related to oil and potential for endless conflict.
The case against
Opponents argued that the resolution was unnecessary and politically motivated, stating that the U.S. is not at war with Venezuela and there are no U.S. forces engaged in hostilities within Venezuelan territory. They characterized the January 3 operation as a targeted law enforcement action to apprehend a narcoterrorist (Nicolas Maduro), not an act of war. They cited historical precedents of limited military actions by Presidents without declarations of war and asserted that the President's actions were aimed at protecting the U.S. homeland and promoting freedom in Venezuela.
Disposition
not agreed to · recorded vote
The concurrent resolution failed on a tied vote.
215-215
Who is affected
- U.S. military personnel: Their deployment and potential engagement in hostilities are directly at stake, with proponents arguing for congressional oversight to prevent unauthorized risks.
- Venezuelan people: Their political future and the nature of their government are impacted by U.S. military interventions, with differing views on whether recent actions promote or hinder democracy.
- U.S. taxpayers: The financial cost of military operations is a consideration, with proponents arguing against funding 'forever wars' without proper authorization.
- International relations: The U.S. role in global affairs and adherence to international norms are impacted by unilateral military actions.
Pregnant Students' Rights Act
H.R. 6359Question before the chamber
Passage of H.R. 6359, the Pregnant Students' Rights Act, as amended.
The case for
Proponents argued that the bill is a commonsense and compassionate measure to empower pregnant students by ensuring they are aware of their existing rights and available resources under Title IX to continue their education while carrying a baby to term. They emphasized that no woman should feel forced to choose between motherhood and academic success, and that the bill promotes a 'culture of life' by supporting pregnant and parenting women.
The case against
Opponents argued that the bill is a 'thinly veiled anti-abortion law' that provides incomplete and biased information to pregnant students. They contended that by focusing solely on resources for carrying a pregnancy to term and omitting information on comprehensive reproductive healthcare, including contraception and abortion rights, the bill risks endangering students' health and limiting their ability to make informed decisions. They also criticized the bill as political theater that fails to address systemic barriers faced by student parents.
Disposition
passed · recorded vote
The bill passed the House.
217-211
Who is affected
- Pregnant students: Will receive mandated information on rights, accommodations, and resources to support carrying a pregnancy to term and parenting while pursuing education. Opponents argue this information is incomplete and could limit access to other reproductive healthcare options.
- Higher education institutions: Will be required to disseminate specific information to students via email, handbooks, orientations, and websites, and to have mechanisms for Title IX complaints related to pregnancy discrimination.
- Parents and caregivers: The bill aims to support students who choose to become parents by ensuring they have access to information and resources to balance academic and family responsibilities.
Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2026 Passes, Completing FY26 Funding
highThe House passed H.R. 7148, the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2026, by a vote of 341-88. This measure combines several appropriations bills, including Defense, Labor-HHS-Education, and Transportation-HUD, marking the completion of the fiscal year 2026 appropriations process. Proponents highlighted the return to regular order, fiscal responsibility, and investments in national security, health, education, and infrastructure.
Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2026 Passes
highH.R. 7147, the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2026, passed the House by a vote of 220-207. The bill funds critical homeland security functions, including border security, immigration enforcement, and disaster response. Debate focused heavily on the conduct and oversight of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), with opponents raising concerns about civil rights violations and lack of accountability.
Venezuela War Powers Resolution Fails on Tied Vote
highA concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 68) directing the removal of U.S. Armed Forces from Venezuela, unless explicitly authorized by Congress, failed to pass on a tied vote of 215-215. Proponents argued for Congress to reclaim its Article I authority over war powers, citing recent military actions in Venezuela. Opponents contended that the U.S. was not at war and that the resolution was a politically motivated attack on the President's actions against a narcoterrorist.
Pregnant Students' Rights Act Passes, Mandating Information Dissemination
mediumThe House passed H.R. 6359, the Pregnant Students' Rights Act, by a vote of 217-211. The bill requires institutions of higher education to disseminate information on the rights, accommodations, and resources available to pregnant students who choose to carry a baby to term. A motion to recommit the bill, which sought to include comprehensive reproductive healthcare information, was rejected.
Amendments to Appropriations Bill Regarding Impaired Driving Technology and Earmarks Rejected
mediumDuring consideration of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2026, two amendments were offered and rejected. Amendment No. 1, offered by Mr. Massie, sought to defund a provision requiring impaired driving prevention technology in new vehicles, failing 164-268. Amendment No. 2, offered by Mr. Norman, aimed to strip nearly $1.4 billion in earmarks from the Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education division, failing 136-291. Debates on these amendments highlighted concerns over privacy, government overreach, and the use of taxpayer funds for controversial programs.