PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Became Public Law No: 105-21.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 21, 1997
States that the United States consents to certain amendments adopted by Hawaii to the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act, 1920.
People & committees
Rep. Abercrombie, Neil [D-HI-1] · D–HI
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 105-21.
Became Public Law No: 105-21.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S5645)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S5645)
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 54.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Reported to Senate by Senator Murkowski without amendment. With written report No. 105-19.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Reported to Senate by Senator Murkowski without amendment. With written report No. 105-19.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Ordered to be reported without amendment favorably.
Received in the Senate and read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the resolution Agreed to by voice vote.
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the resolution Agreed to by voice vote.
Considered as unfinished business.
Ms. Sanchez asked unanimous consent to vacate the previous proceedings ordering the Yeas and Nays on the resolution. Without objection, the proceedings were vacated. The Chair announced that the question would be put de novo on the motion to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution at the conclusion of debate on all motions to suspensions.
At the conclusion of debate, the Chair put the question 7 on the motion to suspend the rules and announced that, by voice vote, the measure was agreed to. Ms. Sanchez demanded the yeas and nays on agreeing to the resolution, which was supported by 1/5 of the Members present and the yeas and nays were ordered. Pursuant to clause 5, rule I, the Speaker announced that the vote would be postponed until later in the day.
At the conclusion of debate, the Yeas and Nays were demanded and ordered. Pursuant to the provisions of clause 5, rule I, the Chair announced that further proceedings on the motion would be postponed.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H831-833, H847)
Mr. Doolittle moved to suspend the rules and pass the resolution.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 12.
Reported by the Committee on Resources. H. Rept. 105-16.
Reported by the Committee on Resources. H. Rept. 105-16.
Ordered to be Reported by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the House Committee on Resources.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Sep 8, 2026. 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.32 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.32 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.32 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.32 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.