HR406 is a House of Representatives resolution that names four Members to be removed from their standing committees: Mrs. Watson Coleman from Appropriations; Mr. Menendez from Energy and Commerce; and Mrs. McIver from Homeland Security and from Small Business. Introduced May 13, 2025 by Rep.
Earl Carter (R-GA) and referred to the Committee on Ethics, the measure catalogs the affected assignments and directs their removal on the listed panels. As a resolution, it operates within the House’s internal governance tools and would alter committee rosters if adopted, rather than creating new statutory obligations.
At a Glance
What It Does
The resolution directs the removal of four named Members from their respective standing committees. It lists the four committee-member pairings and specifies that those Members would be removed from the listed panels if the measure is enacted.
Who It Affects
Affected are the named Members (Watson Coleman, Menendez, McIver) and the standing committees involved (Appropriations, Energy and Commerce, Homeland Security, Small Business). The change would ripple through committee rosters and leadership dynamics.
Why It Matters
The measure shifts committee composition, potentially altering policy priorities and oversight capabilities. It also presents a procedural example of using a House resolution to adjust committee membership, which has implications for governance and accountability within the House.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
This resolution targets four named Members for removal from their standing committees: Mrs. Watson Coleman from Appropriations; Mr. Menendez from Energy and Commerce; and Mrs. McIver from Homeland Security and Small Business. The sponsor, Rep.
Earl Carter, introduced the measure on May 13, 2025, and it was referred to the Ethics Committee. The text itself is limited to listing these removals and does not describe a replacement process or an automatic transition; its operative effect would come from adoption by the House.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The resolution lists four removals from standing committees.
McIver would lose two committee assignments (Homeland Security and Small Business).
Watson Coleman would be removed from the Appropriations Committee.
The measure is referred to the House Ethics Committee.
Introduced May 13, 2025, in the 119th Congress by Rep. Earl Carter (R-GA).
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Removal of named Members from standing committees
The text enumerates four targeted removals across four standing committees: Watson Coleman from Appropriations; Menendez from Energy and Commerce; and McIver from Homeland Security and Small Business. The mechanism is a directive that, if enacted, would strip these Members of their assignments on the specified panels. The provision is narrowly tailored to these individuals and committees, with no other adjustments described in the bill.
Referral to the Committee on Ethics
The resolution is referred to the Committee on Ethics, signaling initial procedural handling within the House. This step places the measure in a channel where concerns about appropriateness, due process, or precedent could be evaluated before any floor consideration.
Scope and limitations
The bill text is limited to listing removals and does not specify replacement rules, timelines, or criteria for eligibility of new committee members. It does not, in its current form, spell out an effective date or transition plan, leaving the operative details to subsequent action if the measure advances.
Nature of instrument and jurisdiction
This document is a House resolution, not a bill. As such, its effect would be organizational within the House’s internal rules rather than creating or altering statutory law. Passage would modify committee rosters through House action rather than executive or judicial reliance.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Government across all five countries.
Explore Government in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- House leadership seeking to adjust committee balance and advance preferred policy alignments
- Incoming or remaining members who benefit from new committee seats or shifts in majority dynamics
- Policy staff and offices aligned with the leadership's agenda who anticipate changes in committee oversight and prioritization
- Committees that gain different members could see shifts in funding priorities, oversight focus, or hearing selection
- Constituents in districts who prefer different representative influence on committee decisions
Who Bears the Cost
- The named Members lose influential committee positions and related influence over legislation and oversight
- Committee staff tied to the removed Members may experience reassignment or disruption
- Other Members on the affected committees may shoulder new duties or face changes in leadership dynamics and workload
- Constituents who rely on the named Members for advocacy or expertise on specific issues may experience less direct representation in those committees
- Potential perception of partisan use of committee power could affect trust in House governance
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central dilemma is whether using a resolution to remove Members from committees strengthens accountability and internal discipline, or whether it enables partisan reshuffling that politicizes committee composition and undermines stable governance.
The bill creates a mechanism to remove named Members from specific committees through a House resolution. This raises tensions between accountability and potential partisan utilization of committee power.
Without an explicit replacement process or clear criteria for who fills the newly opened seats, the practical impact hinges on subsequent House actions or rules. The reliance on a simple resolution to rearrange committee rosters could create a precedent for targeted removals that may be invoked in future political disputes.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.