PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Became Public Law No: 105-257.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Oct 14, 1998
Extends the law making continuing appropriations for FY 1999 through October 16, 1998.
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: 105-257.
Became Public Law No: 105-257.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Received in the Senate, read twice, considered, read the third time, and passed without amendment by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S12539)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Received in the Senate, read twice, considered, read the third time, and passed without amendment by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S12539)
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On passage Passed by voice vote.
Passed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed by voice vote.
Considered as unfinished business.
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate, the Chair put the question on passing the joint resolution by voice vote and announced that the ayes had prevailed. Mr. LaHood objected to the voice vote on the grounds that a quorum was not present. Further proceedings on the joint resolution were postponed and the point of no quorum was considered as withdrawn.
The previous question was ordered pursuant to a previous order of the House.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate.
Considered by previous order of the House. (consideration: CR H10861-10868)
Consideration initiated by previous order of the House.
ORDER OF BUSINESS - Mr. Livingston asked unanimous consent that the Committee on Appropriation be discharged from the further consideration of H.J. Res. 135 when called up; and that it be in order at any time to consider the joint resolution in the House; that the joint resolution be considered as read for amendment; that the joint resolution be debatable for not to exceed one hour to be equally divided and controlled by Mr. Livingston and Mr. Obey; that all points of order against the joint resolution and against its consideration be waived; and that the previous question be considered as ordered on the joint resolution to final passage without intervening motion, except one motion to recommit, with or without instructions. Agreed to without objection.
Committee on Appropriations discharged.
Committee on Appropriations discharged.
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.135 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.135 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.135 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.135 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.