What bills in the House specifically passed or failed regarding Greenland and what were their vote totals?
Executive summary
A cluster of House bills and companion Senate measures were introduced in January 2026 that address Greenland — proposals range from empowering the President to acquire or annex Greenland to measures barring U.S. military action or funding for such a move — but none of the reporting provided shows any of those House bills having passed or failed on the House floor or lists any recorded House vote totals [1] [2] [3] [4] [5]. Reporting instead focuses on introductions, competing proposals, and bipartisan Senate efforts intended to block a forcible seizure of the Danish territory [6] [7] [8].
1. What was introduced in the House: the pro-annexation bills
Multiple House Republicans introduced high-profile, pro-annexation bills: Representative Randy Fine’s two-page “Greenland Annexation and Statehood Act,” described in his press release and covered by Axios and The Hill, would authorize the President to take steps to acquire Greenland and put it on a path to statehood [1] [9] [6]. Congress.gov entries show several related measures filed in the 119th Congress, including H.R.361 (“Make Greenland Great Again Act”) and H.R.7012, a bill “to authorize the annexation and subsequent admission to statehood of Greenland” [2] [3]. These are legislative proposals introduced to the House but the sources describe introduction and summaries rather than final House actions [2] [3].
2. What was introduced in the House: alternative and protective bills
Democrats and some Republicans countered with bills designed to block any forcible or unilateral U.S. action: Representative Jimmy Gomez reportedly planned the “Greenland Sovereignty Protection Act” to bar federal funds for takeover plans, and Congress.gov lists H.R.7013 as the “Greenland Sovereignty Protection Act,” while H.R.1161 (“Red, White, and Blueland Act of 2025”) also appears as a purchase/negotiation-authorizing bill with a satirical rename in its summary [7] [4] [5]. News reports emphasize a split: competing House measures would either enable presidential negotiation/acquisition or prevent U.S. military or funding actions against a NATO member’s territory [7] [6] [5].
3. Senate action and bipartisan blocking measures — context for House prospects
Several Senate senators moved quickly to draft bipartisan legislation aimed at preventing any military blockade, occupation or Annexation of Greenland, led by Senator Jeanne Shaheen and Senator Lisa Murkowski; those Senate bills were framed to prohibit Defense Department funds being used to invade or occupy any NATO partner’s territory — a clear rebuke to presidential rhetoric [8] [10]. Politico and Reuters reported bipartisan Senate efforts and planned congressional delegations to Denmark intended to de-escalate the crisis, which helps explain why House floor action authorizing annexation would face steep headwinds [11] [7].
4. What the record shows about votes and outcomes
The reporting and Congress.gov summaries in the provided sources document bill introductions and summaries but do not show any House committee or floor passage, nor do they supply any recorded House roll-call vote totals for these Greenland-related bills; therefore it cannot be stated from these sources that any specific House bill “passed” or “failed” with numerical vote counts [2] [3] [4] [5]. Coverage in The Hill, Axios, Fox News and Reuters discusses political momentum, statements and proposed language, but none of those pieces reports a completed House vote or a tally on a given bill [6] [9] [12] [7].
5. Political framing, implicit agendas and competing narratives
Pro-annexation sponsors framed their bills as national-security moves to counter China and secure Arctic interests, an argument advanced in Fine’s press release and conservative outlets [1] [12], while Senate and Democratic voices framed protective measures as necessary to uphold NATO, diplomatic norms and prevent reckless use of force [8] [10]. Media coverage itself carries slants: campaign-style press releases and partisan outlets emphasize assertive framing of annexation, while Reuters, Politico and Al Jazeera emphasize diplomatic fallout and bipartisan pushback — readers should note that introductions of dramatic-sounding bills do not equal legislative success or recorded votes [1] [7] [11] [10].
6. Bottom line and reporting limitations
Based on the documents and news reporting supplied, several House bills concerning Greenland were introduced — some seeking presidential authority to acquire or annex Greenland, others aiming to block any such action — but the sources do not provide any House final votes or vote totals showing passage or failure of those bills; therefore the factual answer is that no House passage/failure with vote totals is documented in these sources [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [7]. If definitive vote counts or outcomes are required, the public Congressional record (roll-call votes on Congress.gov or the House Clerk’s roll call) would need to be consulted beyond the reporting assembled here.