What: All Issues : Health Care : Veterans and Active Military Personnel : H.R. 1268. Appropriations/Veterans/Procedural Vote on Whether to Overrule Chair's Decision that Amendment Proposing Appropriation for Veterans' Health Administration May Not Be Considered As Part of Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Bill. (2005 house Roll Call 71)
 Who: All Members
[POW!]
 

To find out how your Members of Congress voted on this bill, use the form on the right.

H.R. 1268. Appropriations/Veterans/Procedural Vote on Whether to Overrule Chair's Decision that Amendment Proposing Appropriation for Veterans' Health Administration May Not Be Considered As Part of Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Bill.
house Roll Call 71     Mar 15, 2005
Progressive Position:
Nay
Progressive Result:
Loss

In this procedural vote, the House voted to uphold a decision by the Chair of the House proceedings that an amendment offered by Bob Filner (D-CA) that proposed to make a $3.1 billion appropriation for the Veterans' Health Administration (VHA) could not be considered. Filner had offered the amendment as part of the Emergency Supplemental appropriations bill then being debated on the House floor. Each year, Congress appropriates the funds necessary for the running of the country for the coming fiscal year. Later in the year, Congress also generally considers an "emergency supplemental appropriations" bill to fund activities or areas of need that were, arguably, unanticipated at the time of the year's original appropriations process. H.R. 1268 was the Emergency Supplemental appropriations bill for Fiscal Year 2005. As part of the bill's consideration, Filner offered his amendment to provide $3.1 billion for the VHA. Arguing the Progressive position, Filner stated that the money would be necessary "for the veterans of this Nation, especially those who are returning from the war in Iraq and Afghanistan who may not be able to get the services they need for a variety of wounds, both physical and mental." Jerry Lewis (R-CA) then raised a point of order (an interruption in the proceedings contending that consideration of the pending legislation or other current business is improper and violates the Constitution or other law or House rules; points of order take precedence over pending legislation and must be resolved before the House can continue its other business), citing a House rule that forbids substantive legislation (meaning legislation that will "chang[e] existing law," as opposed to simply appropriate funds) from being offered on an appropriations bill. Lewis added that the funds needed for the VHA were already being considered in a more appropriate venue. The rule against what is known as "legislating on an appropriations bill" is frequently disregarded in the appropriations process when the House opts to suspend the rules for purposes of considering a particular piece of legislation. In this case, the Chair of the House ruled that Lewis's point of order was correct, and Filner asked for a recorded vote on whether the Chair's opinion ought to be upheld or overruled. Progressives lost this vote when the House upheld the Chair's opinion that the $3.1 billion for the VHA constituted legislation on an appropriations bill. The vote was 224 to 200 along straight party lines. Thus, the additional $3.1 billion for the Veterans' Health Administration was not included in the bill authorizing additional funds beyond those originally budgeted in 2005.

Issue Areas:

Find your Member of
Congress' votes

Select by Name