PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Congressional Research Service
Version 82 · Passed Senate without amendment · Sep 22, 2008
(This measure has not been amended since it was passed by the House on June 26, 2008. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Commends the Director of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) for working with leading scientists and researchers to organize the first NIH conference on hydrocephalus in September 2005 and the Inaugural Cerebellar Development: Bench to Bedside International Conference in November 2006.
Expresses the sense of Congress that: (1) the Director of NIH should continue the current collaboration among the National Human Genome Research Institute, the National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering, the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, and the Office of Rare Diseases with respect to Dandy-Walker syndrome; (2) further research into Dandy-Walker syndrome and hydrocephalus should be conducted and supported; and (3) public awareness and professional education regarding Dandy-Walker research should increase through partnerships between the federal government and patient advocacy organizations.
People & committees
Rep. Wilson, Heather [R-NM-1] · R–NM
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Resolution agreed to in Senate without amendment and with a preamble by Unanimous Consent. (text: CR S9181)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Resolution agreed to in Senate without amendment and with a preamble by Unanimous Consent.(text: CR S9181)
Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions discharged by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S9179-9185)
Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions discharged by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S9179-9185)
Received in the Senate and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR 6/24/2008 H5940)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR 6/24/2008 H5940)
Considered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H6121)
At the conclusion of debate, the chair put the question on the motion to suspend the rules. Mr. Terry objected to the vote on the grounds that a quorum was not present. Further proceedings on the motion were postponed. The point of no quorum was withdrawn.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H. Con. Res. 163.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H5940-5942)
Ms. Hooley moved to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution, as amended.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Apr 21, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.Con.Res.163 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.Con.Res.163 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.Con.Res.163 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.Con.Res.163 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.