Bill · H.Res. 932· House(119-HRES-932)
Denouncing dangerous and seditious rhetoric by Members of Congress and expressing condemnation of Senator Mark Kelly, Senator Elissa Slotkin, Representative Jason Crow, Representative Christopher Deluzio, Representative Maggie Goodlander, and Representative Chrissy Houlahan for attempting to sow disallegiance amongst members of the United States military and intelligence community and encouraging them to act against the Commander in Chief and President of the United States and violate the Uniform Code of Military Justice.
- Introduced
- 12/4/2025
- Last activity
- 12/4/2025 — Referred to the Committee on Armed Services, and in addition to the Committee on Intelligence (Permanent Select), for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
- Sponsored by
- Ryan Zinke
- Cosponsors
- - 30 - 0
- 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
This resolution denounces specific Members of Congress for what it describes as dangerous and seditious rhetoric. The resolution expresses condemnation of Senator Mark Kelly, Senator Elissa Slotkin, and Representatives Jason Crow, Christopher Deluzio, Maggie Goodlander, and Chrissy Houlahan. It accuses these individuals of attempting to sow disallegiance within the military and intelligence communities. The text alleges these members encouraged service members to act against the President and violate the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Finally, the resolution claims this rhetoric undermines national security and the chain of command.
Yes
Would veterans be better off under this, taking everything together?+1
The resolution seeks to safeguard the institutional integrity of the military and the safety of troops.
Does this increase the pay, pensions or support veterans receive?+1
The resolution aims to protect the stability of the military chain of command which supports service members.
The opposite
Does this protect the individual right to speak freely?-2
The resolution denounces the speech of specific Members of Congress, which may have a chilling effect on political discourse.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Protection of the Chain of Command: The resolution asserts that the chain of command is sacrosanct and essential for the efficient and successful functioning of military and intelligence institutions.
-
Preservation of National Security: The resolution argues that denouncing the rhetoric in question helps prevent an environment that compromises and undermines the national security of the United States.
-
Safeguarding Service Members: The resolution claims that the actions being denounced have led to an environment that places troops and their loved ones at risk of harm.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
-
Impact on Military Service Members: The resolution alleges that the rhetoric used by the identified Members of Congress encourages service members to undermine their own oaths by refusing orders they deem to be illegal.
-
Erosion of Institutional Confidence: The text states that the claims made by these Members of Congress regarding trust in the military serve to erode confidence and respect for these institutions.
-
Damage to Public Trust: The resolution claims that the rhetoric insinuating the administration is threatening Americans is damaging and places American citizens at odds with the government.
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Governance And Ideology
- Improves Freedom Of Speech-2
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Good For Veterans+1
- National Security And Foreign Policy
- Improves Veterans Benefits+1
- 1/30/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 12/15/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 12/9/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 12/4/2025
- Submitted in House
- Referred to the Committee on Armed Services, and in addition to the Committee on Intelligence (Permanent Select), for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
- 27 Cosponsors added.
Rick AllenRepublican · Georgia
Jack BergmanRepublican · Michigan
James BairdRepublican · Indiana
Sheri BiggsRepublican · South Carolina
Eric CrawfordRepublican · Arkansas
Earl CarterRepublican · Georgia
Andrew ClydeRepublican · Georgia
Mike CollinsRepublican · Georgia
Elijah CraneRepublican · Arizona
Warren DavidsonRepublican · Ohio
Neal DunnRepublican · Florida
Scott FranklinRepublican · Florida
Randy FineRepublican · Florida
Clay HigginsRepublican · Louisiana
Abraham HamadehRepublican · Arizona
Ronny JacksonRepublican · Texas
Doug LaMalfaRepublican · California
Anna Paulina LunaRepublican · Florida
Barry MooreRepublican · Alabama
Mariannette Miller-MeeksRepublican · Iowa
Mark MessmerRepublican · Indiana
John McGuireRepublican · Virginia
Dan NewhouseRepublican · Washington
John RutherfordRepublican · Florida
Pete SessionsRepublican · Texas
Lloyd SmuckerRepublican · Pennsylvania
Keith SelfRepublican · Texas
Claudia TenneyRepublican · New York
Derrick Van OrdenRepublican · Wisconsin
Roger WilliamsRepublican · Texas