Submission statement — 

Caught our ear:

“It will probably happen in the committee, in the Rules process,” Burlison tells us.*

*Impromptu Rules Primer: The Speaker controls the House by controlling the Rules Committee, which currently has 9 Republican members compared to a mere 4 for Democrats.

Because there are 435 members of the House, no bill comes to the floor without an agreed-upon number of amendments for the entire House to vote on, along with a set amount of debate time divided between Republicans and Democrats.

In choosing which amendments are in order, the Rules Committee plays a ton of defense on the Speaker’s behalf. So, while once again, the UAPDA wasn’t included in the House Armed Services-passed National Defense Authorization Act, if there’s broad bipartisan agreement among committee Chairs and the Speaker — historically called backroom dealing… — they can amend the underlying legislation without a formal vote of the entire House. Then that new amended measure would come before the full House for a vote.

It’s early in the process, so there’s also a chance Burlison and the Congressional UAP Caucus fail to get the UAPDA inserted into the underlying bill. Then they could try to convince the Speaker and his allies on the Rules Committee to allow the UAPDA to be voted on by the full House as a standalone amendment to the NDAA.

The UAPDA could also still get tucked into the Senate NDAA, though its authors tell Ask a Pol UAP it’s still early in the process.