PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Nov 22, 1993
Provides for the sine die adjournment of the first session of the 103d Congress.
People & committees
Rep. Gephardt, Richard A. [D-MO-3] · D–MO
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.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion that the House agree to the Senate amendment Agreed to without objection.
Resolving differences -- House actions: On motion that the House agree to the Senate amendment Agreed to without objection.
Mr. Gephardt asked unanimous consent that the House agree to the Senate amendment.
Resolution agreed to in Senate with an amendment by Voice Vote.
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Resolution agreed to in Senate with an amendment by Voice Vote.
Amendment SP 1242 agreed to in Senate by Voice Vote.
Amendment SP 1242 proposed by Senator Sasser for Senator Mitchell.
Measure laid before Senate. (consideration: CR S17224)
Received in the Senate.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On agreeing to the resolution Agreed to without objection.
Passed/agreed to in House: On agreeing to the resolution Agreed to without objection.
Considered as privileged matter. (consideration: 11/22/93 CR H10908)
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: Jan 19, 2023. 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.190 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.190 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.190 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.190 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.