PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 1, 1996
Constitutional Amendment - Requires a two-thirds vote of each House of the Congress in order to pass any bill levying a new tax or increasing the rate or base of any tax. Allows the Congress to waive that requirement during war or certain military conflict. Requires all votes under this Amendment to be by yeas and nays and the names of persons voting for and against to be entered in the Journal of each House.
People & committees
Rep. Barton, Joe [R-TX-6] · R–TX
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On passage Failed by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 243 - 177 (Roll no. 117).
House roll call 117 · Individual votesFailed of passage/not agreed to in House: On passage Failed by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 243 - 177 (Roll no. 117).
House roll call 117 · Individual votesOn motion to recommit with instructions Failed by voice vote. (consideration: CR H3304)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with ten minutes of debate on the motion to recommit with instructions.
Mr. Stenholm moved to recommit with instructions to Judiciary.
The previous question was ordered pursuant to the rule.
DEBATE - The House resumed general debate.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 395, the House proceeded with three hours of general debate.
On motion to table the motion to reconsider Agreed to by recorded vote: 236 - 157 (Roll No. 116). (consideration: CR H3272)
House roll call 116 · Individual votesMr. Canady moved to table the motion to reconsider
Mr. Skaggs moved to reconsider the vote.
On motion to consider the joint resolution Agreed to by recorded vote: 241 - 157 (Roll No. 115). (consideration: CR H3271)
House roll call 115 · Individual votesMr. Skaggs moved to consider.
Mr. Skaggs raised the question of consideration of the Joint Resolution.
Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 395, an amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the text of H.J. Res. 169 was considered as having been adopted.
Rule provides for consideration of H.J. Res. 159 with 3 hours of general debate. Previous question shall be considered as ordered without intervening motions except motion to recommit. Providing for the consideration in the House. A specified amendment is in order. An amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the text of H.J. Res. 169 shall be considered as having been adopted. One motion to amend shall be in order, if offered by the Minority Leader or his designee, debatable for one hour.
Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 395. (consideration: CR H3272-3304)
Rule H. Res. 395 passed House.
Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 395 Reported to House. Rule provides for consideration of H.J. Res. 159 with 3 hours of general debate. Previous question shall be considered as ordered without intervening motions except motion to recommit. Providing for the consideration in the House. A specified amendment is in order. An amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the text of H.J. Res. 169 shall be considered as having been adopted. One motion to amend shall be in order, if offered by the Minority Leader or his designee, debatable for one hour.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on the Constitution.
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
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.159 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.159 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.159 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.159 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.