PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Became Public Law No: 104-54.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Nov 17, 1995
Makes further continuing appropriations for FY 1996 for such amounts as may be necessary for the following activities: (1) necessary for the expenses of Medicare contractors under title XVIII (Medicare) of the Social Security Act under the account heading "Program management" under the Health Care Financing Administration in the Department of Health and Human Services; (2) funded under the account heading "Limitation on administrative expenses" under the Social Security Administration; and (3) necessary to process and provide for veterans' compensation, pension payments, dependency and indemnity compensation (DIC) payments, and to provide veterans' medical care under the Department of Veterans Affairs. Sets the amount of such funding. (Sec. 105) Provides that, unless otherwise provided for in this joint resolution or in the applicable appropriations Act, appropriations and funds made available and authority granted pursuant to this joint resolution shall be available until whichever of the following occurs first: (1) enactment into law of an appropriation for any project or activity provided for in this joint resolution; (2) the enactment of the applicable appropriations Act by both Houses without any provision for such project or activity; or (3) September 30, 1996.
People & committees
Rep. Livingston, Bob [R-LA-1] · R–LA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 104-54.
Became Public Law No: 104-54.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
The previous question was ordered pursuant to a previous order of the House.
On motion that the House agree to the Senate amendment Agreed to by voice vote. (consideration: CR H13343-13346)
Resolving differences -- House actions: On motion that the House agree to the Senate amendment Agreed to by voice vote.(consideration: CR H13343-13346)
DEBATE - Pursuant to a previous unanimous consent request, the House proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Livingston motion.
Mr. Livingston moved that the House agree to the Senate amendment.
CONSIDERATION OF LEGISLATION - Mr. Livingston asked unanimous consent that it be in order to take from the Speaker's table the joint resolution H.J. Res. 122, with the Senate amendment thereto, and to consider in the House a motion offered by the Chairman of the Committee on Appropriations to dispose of the Senate amendment, that the Senate amendment shall be considered as read, that the motion shall be debatable for ten minutes equally divided and controlled by the Chairman and Ranking Member of the Committee, and that the previous question shall be considered as ordered on the motion to final adoption without intervening motion. Agreed to without objection.
Passed Senate with an amendment by Unanimous Consent.
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate with an amendment by Unanimous Consent.
Amendment SP 3061 agreed to in Senate by Unanimous Consent.
Amendment SP 3061 proposed by Senator Dole.
Measure laid before Senate by unanimous consent. (consideration: CR S17485-17486)
Received in the Senate. Read twice. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 246.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the resolution Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 416 - 0 (Roll no. 818).
House roll call 818 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the resolution Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 416 - 0 (Roll no. 818).
House roll call 818 · Individual votesDEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H13325-13332)
Mr. Livingston moved to suspend the rules and pass the resolution.
CONSIDERATION OF LEGISLATION - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 275, the Chair announced that a motion to suspend the rules and pass H.J. Res. 123 would be considered later in the day.
Referred to the House Committee on Appropriations.
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 7, 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.J.Res.123 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.J.Res.123 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.J.Res.123 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.J.Res.123 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.