# H.Res. 499 (119th): Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 4) the Rescissions Act; and for other purposes

Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 4) the Rescissions Act; and for other purposes

## How this bill is scored

Tier: no Tier 1 record. A bill with no record cannot newly become Tier 1.
Lane: appropriations. Category: corruption_stewardship. Lane tag: general equity.
Lane: budget_process. Category: not stored. Lane tag: not stored.
Lane: legislative_process. Category: not stored. Lane tag: not stored.
Lane: rescissions. Category: not stored. Lane tag: not stored.
Tier 1 sign-off: no record. A bill with no record cannot newly become Tier 1.
Stored polarity: mixed. Only tags the rules mark scoreable on a mixed bill are scored. A yea can draw a penalty or a credit according to the tag. A nay on a tag scored as good can draw a penalty.
Roll 164: On Ordering the Previous Question. Vote type: procedural.
Roll 165: On Agreeing to the Resolution. Vote type: final_passage.
Polarity rationale: Reviewed enrichment (llm_import) polarity: The measure is a procedural rule that sets up consideration of a spending-rescission bill. Rescissions of federal funds are ordinary prudential budget decisions, not a direct advancement or restraint of a named moral evil on the face of this metadata. Because the basic dispute (cutting federal spending) is discernible, the classification is mixed rather than unclear.
Theological note: The resolution itself is procedural and does not directly restrain or advance a named moral harm. Its issue relevance lies in the stewardship of public funds and the just ordering of government spending, which a Reformed reading treats as prudential matters for the reviewing legislature to weigh with general equity and care for the vulnerable.

## Recorded votes

Roll 164: On Ordering the Previous Question. Yea 210 · Nay 204 · Other 18.
Roll 165: On Agreeing to the Resolution. Yea 213 · Nay 207 · Other 12.

HTML: https://justmeasure.org/bill/hres-499-119/