Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives regarding the critical role of victim service providers in the response to domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking, by supporting victims through the physical, mental, emotional, financial, and legal challenges they may face in the aftermath of violence.

Download PDF
Bill ID: 119/hres/933
Last Updated: December 9, 2025

Sponsored by

Rep. Dingell, Debbie [D-MI-6]

ID: D000624

Bill's Journey to Becoming a Law

Track this bill's progress through the legislative process

Latest Action

Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.

December 5, 2025

Introduced

Committee Review

📍 Current Status

Next: The bill moves to the floor for full chamber debate and voting.

🗳️

Floor Action

âś…

Passed House

🏛️

Senate Review

🎉

Passed Congress

🖊️

Presidential Action

⚖️

Became Law

📚 How does a bill become a law?

1. Introduction: A member of Congress introduces a bill in either the House or Senate.

2. Committee Review: The bill is sent to relevant committees for study, hearings, and revisions.

3. Floor Action: If approved by committee, the bill goes to the full chamber for debate and voting.

4. Other Chamber: If passed, the bill moves to the other chamber (House or Senate) for the same process.

5. Conference: If both chambers pass different versions, a conference committee reconciles the differences.

6. Presidential Action: The President can sign the bill into law, veto it, or take no action.

7. Became Law: If signed (or if Congress overrides a veto), the bill becomes law!

Bill Summary

Another meaningless resolution from the House of Representatives, because what's more effective in solving real problems than a strongly-worded letter? (Sarcasm alert)

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** This resolution is a feel-good exercise to express the House's "deep value" and "support" for victim service providers. Wow, I'm sure that'll make all the difference in the lives of victims. The main objective is to acknowledge the importance of these providers without actually doing anything concrete to help them.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** None. This resolution doesn't change a single law or provide any tangible support for victim service providers. It's just a bunch of empty words strung together to make politicians look good. The only "provision" is a vague call to "meaningfully invest" in these organizations, which translates to "we'll get around to it eventually... maybe."

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** Victim service providers, victims of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking. Oh, and politicians who want to look good without actually doing any real work.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** Zero. Zilch. Nada. This resolution won't provide a single additional dollar or resource to victim service providers. It's just a PR stunt designed to make politicians appear compassionate while they continue to ignore the actual problems facing these organizations.

Now, let's play "Follow the Money"! Who do you think is behind this toothless resolution? Ah, yes... I see that Mrs. Dingell (D-MI) is one of the sponsors. And what a coincidence! Her top donors include the National Organization for Women and the American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees (AFSCME). How convenient.

In medical terms, this resolution is like prescribing a placebo to a patient with a serious illness. It might make them feel better temporarily, but it won't actually cure anything. The real disease here is the lack of meaningful action from politicians who are more interested in grandstanding than actual problem-solving.

Related Topics

Criminal Justice & Law Enforcement Federal Budget & Appropriations National Security & Intelligence State & Local Government Affairs Transportation & Infrastructure Civil Rights & Liberties Small Business & Entrepreneurship Congressional Rules & Procedures Government Operations & Accountability
Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (Dr. Haus personality)

đź’° Campaign Finance Network

Rep. Dingell, Debbie [D-MI-6]

Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle

Total Contributions
$75,900
21 donors
PACs
$0
Organizations
$9,900
Committees
$0
Individuals
$66,000

No PAC contributions found

1
MATCH-E-BE-NASH-SHE-WISH BAND OF POTTAWATOMI INDIANS
2 transactions
$6,600
2
NOTTAWASEPPI HURON BAND OF THE POTAWATOMI
1 transaction
$3,300

No committee contributions found

1
RUSH, ANDRA
2 transactions
$6,600
2
FORD, CYNTHIA
1 transaction
$3,300
3
FORD, EDSEL B. II
1 transaction
$3,300
4
MEIJER, HENDRIK
1 transaction
$3,300
5
CARTER ALTMAN, LYNDA
1 transaction
$3,300
6
DEBBANE, RAYMOND
1 transaction
$3,300
7
FARES, NIJAD
1 transaction
$3,300
8
III, WILLIAM H. GATES
1 transaction
$3,300
9
TAMER, ALBERT
1 transaction
$3,300
10
PROFIT, KIRK A.
1 transaction
$3,300
11
HARRIS, NICKI
1 transaction
$3,300
12
HOCHBERG, JACQUELINE
1 transaction
$3,300
13
MALEK, MARLENE
1 transaction
$3,300
14
WALKER, KENT
1 transaction
$3,300
15
EMERSON, WILLIAM
1 transaction
$3,300
16
KOSCH, DONALD
1 transaction
$3,300
17
SMITHBAUER, KAREN
1 transaction
$3,300
18
ARNOLD, LAURA
1 transaction
$3,300
19
HARRIS, WILLIAM H
1 transaction
$3,300

Donor Network - Rep. Dingell, Debbie [D-MI-6]

PACs
Organizations
Individuals
Politicians

Hub layout: Politicians in center, donors arranged by type in rings around them.

Loading...

Showing 22 nodes and 23 connections

Total contributions: $75,900

Top Donors - Rep. Dingell, Debbie [D-MI-6]

Showing top 21 donors by contribution amount

2 Orgs19 Individuals

Project 2025 Policy Matches

This bill shows semantic similarity to the following sections of the Project 2025 policy document. Higher similarity scores indicate stronger thematic connections.

Introduction

Low 45.4%
Pages: 536-538

— 503 — 15 DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT Benjamin S. Carson, Sr., MD The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) admin- isters a web of federal programs with mandates to support access to homeownership and affordable rental housing, relieve temporary hous- ing instability for homeless persons, preserve a stable inventory of public housing units, and enforce mandates with powers to settle compliance matters ranging from housing quality standards to housing discrimination cases. Politicians across party lines use HUD to promise ever-greater public bene- fits. In addition, HUD programs tend to perpetuate the notion of bureaucratically provided housing as a basic life need and, whether intentionally or not, fail to acknowledge that these public benefits too often have led to intergenerational poverty traps, have implicitly penalized family formation in traditional two-parent marriages, and have discouraged work and income growth, thereby limiting upward mobility. A new conservative Administration will therefore need to: l Reset HUD. This effort should specifically include a broad reversal of the Biden Administration’s persistent implementation of corrosive progressive ideologies across the department’s programs. l Implement an action plan across both process and people. This plan should include both the immediate redelegation of authority to a cadre of political appointees and the urgent implementation of administrative regulatory actions with respect to HUD policy and program eligibility. — 504 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise l Reverse HUD’s mission creep over nearly a century of program implementation dating from the Department’s New Deal forebears. HUD’s new political leadership team will need to reexamine the federal government’s role in housing markets across the nation and consider whether it is time for a “reform, reinvention, and renewal”1 that transfers Department functions to separate federal agencies, states, and localities. OVERVIEW HUD was created by the Housing and Urban Development Act of 19652 and since then has administered several programs that had been administered by the Housing and Home Finance Agency. With a proposed fiscal year (FY) budget authority totaling $71.9 billion and 8,326 full-time equivalent (FTE) employees,3 it remains the largest government agency charged with implementing federal housing policy. In addition to its headquarters in Washington, D.C., HUD has 10 regional offices as well as field offices and centers to implement specialized operational and enforcement responsibilities.4 HUD program offices also interface with various networks of implementing organizations such as locally chartered public housing agencies (PHAs) and federal, state, and local government and judicial bodies as well as such private industry participants as mortgage lenders. The Secretary of Housing and Urban Development can delegate authority to various entities across an array of HUD programs.5 The Secretary also oversees the Office of the Deputy Secretary;6 the Office of Hearings and Appeals (OHA);7 the Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization (OSDBU);8 and the Center for Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships (CFBNP).9 The Office of the Secretary also comprises a team of politically appointed positions and career support staff. Each of the following offices should be headed by political appointees except where otherwise noted. l Office of Administration, headed by the Chief Administration Officer. The Office of Administration has responsibilities for the Office of the Chief Human Capital Officer (OCHO, headed by the Chief Human Capital Officer, currently a career position) and the Office of the Chief Procurement Officer (CPO, headed by the Chief Procurement Officer, currently a career position). l Office of the Chief Financial Officer, headed by the Chief Financial Officer. l Office of the Chief Information Officer, headed by the Chief Information Officer.

Introduction

Low 45.4%
Pages: 536-538

— 503 — 15 DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT Benjamin S. Carson, Sr., MD The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) admin- isters a web of federal programs with mandates to support access to homeownership and affordable rental housing, relieve temporary hous- ing instability for homeless persons, preserve a stable inventory of public housing units, and enforce mandates with powers to settle compliance matters ranging from housing quality standards to housing discrimination cases. Politicians across party lines use HUD to promise ever-greater public bene- fits. In addition, HUD programs tend to perpetuate the notion of bureaucratically provided housing as a basic life need and, whether intentionally or not, fail to acknowledge that these public benefits too often have led to intergenerational poverty traps, have implicitly penalized family formation in traditional two-parent marriages, and have discouraged work and income growth, thereby limiting upward mobility. A new conservative Administration will therefore need to: l Reset HUD. This effort should specifically include a broad reversal of the Biden Administration’s persistent implementation of corrosive progressive ideologies across the department’s programs. l Implement an action plan across both process and people. This plan should include both the immediate redelegation of authority to a cadre of political appointees and the urgent implementation of administrative regulatory actions with respect to HUD policy and program eligibility.

Introduction

Low 44.7%
Pages: 898-900

— 865 — Federal Election Commission l As a legislative matter and given this abuse, the President should seriously consider recommending that Congress amend FECA to remove the agency’s independent litigating authority and rely on the Department of Justice to handle all litigation involving the FEC. There are also multiple instances of existing statutory provisions of FECA and the accompanying FEC regulations having been found unlawful or unconstitu- tional by federal court decisions, yet those statutory provisions remain in the U.S. Code and the implementing regulations remain in the Code of Federal Regula- tions.12 In such instances, those regulated by the law, from candidates to the public, have no way of knowing (without engaging in extensive legal research) whether particular statutory provisions and regulations are still applicable to their actions in the political arena. l The President should request that the commissioners on the FEC prepare such guidance. l In the event that the FEC fails to act, the President should direct the attorney general to prepare a guidance document from the Department of Justice for the public that outlines all of the FECA statutory provisions and FEC regulations that have been changed, amended, or voided by specific court decisions. Legislative Changes. While a President’s ability to make any changes at an independent agency like the FEC is limited,13 the President has the ability to make legislative recommendations to Congress. One of the most obvious changes that is needed is to end the current practice of allowing commissioners to remain as serving commissioners long after their term has expired, defying the clear intent of Congress in specifying that a commissioner can only serve a single term of six years. l The President should prioritize nominations to the FEC once commissioners reach the end of their terms and should be assisted by legislative language either eliminating or limiting overstays to a reasonable period of time to permit the vetting, nomination, and confirmation of successors. l The President should vigorously oppose all efforts, as proposed, for example, in Section 6002 of the “For the People Act of 2021,”14 to change the structure of the FEC to reduce the number of commissioners from six to five or another odd number. The current requirement of four votes to authorize an enforcement action, provide

Showing 3 of 5 policy matches

About These Correlations

Policy matches are calculated using semantic similarity between bill summaries and Project 2025 policy text. A score of 60% or higher indicates meaningful thematic overlap. This does not imply direct causation or intent, but highlights areas where legislation aligns with Project 2025 policy objectives.