Lizzie Fletcher (D-TX)
Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the Secretary of Health and Human Services should withdraw a reduction in public notice and comment opportunities.
A Democratic resolution with 23 Democratic cosponsors · See all 23 cosponsors
Last activity — Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
In committee
Introduced and handed to a committee in the chamber it started in.
The committee holds it, and most bills are never heard from again. A hearing or a committee vote would be news; silence is the usual outcome, and it kills the bill without anyone voting against it.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- In Committee
A House resolution is the House speaking for itself: stating a position, honouring someone, or setting its own rules. Adopting it is the whole process. Once the House agrees to it, it is officially the House's word; it is not a law, so the Senate and the President have no part in it.
What this bill would do
H. Res. 369 is a resolution expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the Secretary of Health and Human Services should withdraw a specific notice. This notice, published on March 3, 2025, would reduce opportunities for public notice and comment. The resolution asks the Secretary to affirm the rulemaking practices that were in effect on February 27, 2025. It emphasizes that public participation is necessary for fair and sound policy.
Yes· 3 of 9
- Scored +8
Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see?
The resolution explicitly seeks to restore public notice and comment periods, increasing transparency in the regulatory process.
- Scored +5
Does this protect the right to fair treatment by the courts?
Upholding Administrative Procedure Act standards ensures a more fair and predictable rulemaking process.
- Scored +3
Does this protect the individual right to speak freely?
Restoring the right to comment on agency rulemaking supports the freedom of expression and public participation.
The opposite
No question was scored the opposite.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Maintains public input: By asking to withdraw the reduction in notice and comment opportunities, the resolution seeks to ensure program beneficiaries, State and local governments, human services providers, and organizations can still provide input on proposed regulatory changes.
-
Protects against poor rulemaking: The text states that open rulemaking helps prevent the possibility of arbitrary, harmful, and ill-advised rulemaking.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- No negative impacts for people are explicitly mentioned in the provided text.
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — The resolution explicitly seeks to restore public notice and comment periods, increasing transparency in the regulatory process. Does this protect the right to fair treatment by the courts? — Upholding Administrative Procedure Act standards ensures a more fair and predictable rulemaking process. Does this protect the individual right to speak freely? — Restoring the right to comment on agency rulemaking supports the freedom of expression and public participation. Does this leave more decisions to the states? — The resolution advocates for maintaining opportunities for State and local governments to provide input on federal regulations.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would business owners be better off under this? — Provides human services providers and organizations the ability to comment on regulations that affect their operations. Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — Low-income beneficiaries of HHS programs are better protected when they have a voice in rulemaking. Would people with disabilities be better off under this? — Protects the ability of disability advocacy organizations to influence HHS regulations. Would middle-income households be better off under this? — Ensures a more stable and transparent regulatory environment for all citizens.
- Healthcare
- Does this make health care easier to get in general? — Ensuring public input in HHS rulemaking helps prevent arbitrary regulations that could restrict healthcare access.
- 6/5/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 5/19/2025
- 2 Cosponsors added.
- 5/7/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 5/1/2025
- Submitted in House
- Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
- 19 Cosponsors added.
One bill Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.
Gabe AmoDemocrat · Rhode Island
Sanford BishopDemocrat · Georgia
Kathy CastorDemocrat · Florida
Angie CraigDemocrat · Minnesota
Diana DeGetteDemocrat · Colorado
Debbie DingellDemocrat · Michigan
Dwight EvansDemocrat · Pennsylvania
Cleo FieldsDemocrat · Louisiana
Bill FosterDemocrat · Illinois
Julie JohnsonDemocrat · Texas
Greg LandsmanDemocrat · Ohio
Doris MatsuiDemocrat · California
Lucy McBathDemocrat · Georgia
Kevin MullinDemocrat · California
Jennifer McClellanDemocrat · Virginia
Eleanor NortonDemocrat · District of Columbia
Mark PocanDemocrat · Wisconsin
Mike QuigleyDemocrat · Illinois
Raul RuizDemocrat · California
Paul TonkoDemocrat · New York
Rashida TlaibDemocrat · Michigan
Nydia VelázquezDemocrat · New York
Debbie Wasserman SchultzDemocrat · Florida