PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Became Public Law No: 110-149.
Congressional Research Service
Version 49 · Public Law · Dec 21, 2007
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Amends Public Law 110-92 to extend through December 31, 2007, specified continuing appropriations for FY2008.
Makes specified appropriations for payment to the heirs at law of Julia Carson, a former Representative from Indiana.
Continues in effect throughout FY2008 the authority of the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to provide hospital care, medical services, and nursing home care to any veteran who participated in a test conducted by the Department of Defense Deseret Test Center as part of a program for chemical and biological warfare testing from 1962 through 1973 (including the program designated as “Project Shipboard Hazard and Defense (SHAD)” and related land-based tests).
Continues in effect throughout FY2008 the Secretary's authority to furnish, when requested, an appropriate government headstone or marker at U.S. expense for the grave of an individual eligible for burial in a national cemetery, or an individual who at the time of death was entitled to military retired pay, who is buried in a private cemetery.
People & committees
Rep. Obey, David R. [D-WI-7] · D–WI
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 110-149.
Became Public Law No: 110-149.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Cleared for White House.
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 S15980-15981)
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 S15980-15981)
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On passage Passed by voice vote. (text: CR H16889)
Passed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed by voice vote.(text: CR H16889)
The previous question was ordered pursuant to the rule. (consideration: CR H16889)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate on H.J. Res. 72.
Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 2764 and H.J. Res. 72.
Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 893. (consideration: CR H16889)
Rule H. Res. 893 passed House.
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.
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.72 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.72 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.72 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.72 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.