PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.
H.Con.Res.79 / 104th Congress

Expressing the sense of Congress regarding an appropriate minimum length of stay for routine deliveries.

Referred to the Subcommittee on Health and Environment.

Official summary

Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jun 27, 1995

Expresses the sense of the Congress that: (1) the Maternal and Child Health Bureau and other concerned organizations should encourage well-designed studies to identify safe neonatal practices with regard to the hospital discharge of mothers and infants and establish appropriate medical care procedures during the perinatal period; (2) decisions on hospital stays of mothers and newborns after delivery should be made by doctors and patients and not by hospitals, health insurers, and health service organizations; and (3) hospitals, health insurers, health service organizations, and health benefit plans should abide by the current Guidelines for Perinatal Care of the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists regarding discharge.

Read the summary on Congress.gov
PlainBill analysis is coming later. This page presents official source data. We have not yet published a PlainBill explanation for this bill.

Who introduced it

Rep. Sanders, Bernard [I-VT-At Large] · I–VT

Committees

  • Energy and Commerce Committee
33 cosponsorship records, including any withdrawals

Actions

A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.

  1. Referred to the Subcommittee on Health and Environment.

  2. Referred to the House Committee on Commerce.

  3. Introduced in House

  4. Introduced in House

Bill text & related measures

Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.

Related bills identified by Congress.gov

No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.

Source last updated: Jun 3, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.

Explore the bill from different angles

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.

Neutral evidence review

Objective

Analyze H.Con.Res.79 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.

View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact

Progressive lens

Examine H.Con.Res.79 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.

View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope

Conservative lens

Examine H.Con.Res.79 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.

View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power

Liberty lens

Examine H.Con.Res.79 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.

View full prompt & sources