PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.On passage Failed by recorded vote (2/3 required): 227 - 204, 1 Present (Roll No. 277).
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 2, 1995
Constitutional Amendment - Prohibits the election of any person to a full term as a Senator more than twice or to a full term as a Representative more than six times. Bars any person who has been a: (1) Senator for more than three years of a term to which another person was elected from being subsequently elected more than once; and (2) Representative for more than a year from being subsequently elected more than five times. Excludes election or service occurring before this amendment becomes operative when determining eligibility for election.
People & committees
Rep. McCollum, Bill [R-FL-8] · R–FL
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
On passage Failed by recorded vote (2/3 required): 227 - 204, 1 Present (Roll No. 277).
House roll call 277 · Individual votesFailed of passage/not agreed to in House: On passage Failed by recorded vote (2/3 required): 227 - 204, 1 Present (Roll No. 277).
House roll call 277 · Individual votesThe previous question was ordered pursuant to the rule.
The House rose from the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union to report H.J. Res. 73.
Mr. McCollum asked unanimous consent that the time for debate on the McCollum amendment be reduced to 30 minutes, equally divided. Agreed to without objection.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 116, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with one hour of debate on the McCollum amendment.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 116, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with one hour of debate on the Hilleary amendment.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 116, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 1 hour of debate on the Inglis amendment.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 116, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with one hour of debate on the Peterson amendment.
GENERAL DEBATE - The Committee of the Whole continued with approximately 1 hour remaining for general debate.
The House resolved into Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for further consideration.
Considered as unfinished business.
Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union rises leaving H.J. Res. 73 as unfinished business.
GENERAL DEBATE - The Committee of the Whole continued with approximately 2 hours remaining for general debate.
The House resolved into Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for further consideration.
Considered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H3915-3965)
The Committee of the Whole reported the words of Mr. Hoke back to the House. The Chair declared the words to be unparliamentary and, by unanimous consent, the words were stricken from the record. Objection was heard to a unanimous consent request to allow Mr. Hoke to proceed in order. The Chair then put the question on allowing Mr. Hoke to proceed in order and announced that, by voice vote, the motion had passed. Mr. Conyers objected to the vote on the grounds that a quorum was not present and a roll call vote was ordered.
Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union rises leaving H.J. Res. 73 as unfinished business.
During the course of debate, Mr. Dingell demanded that certain words of Mr. Hoke be taken down. Mr. Hoke asked unanimous consent that the words in question be stricken from the record, and objection was heard to the request. The Committee of the Whole then rose to report the words.
GENERAL DEBATE - The Committee of the Whole proceeded with three hours of general debate.
The Speaker designated the Honorable Scott L. Klug to act as Chairman of the Committee.
House resolved itself into the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union pursuant to H. Res. 116 and Rule XXIII.
Rule provides for consideration of H.J. Res. 73 with 3 hours of general debate. Previous question shall be considered as ordered without intervening motions except motion to recommit. Specified amendments are in order. No amendment to the joint resolution shall be in order except those specified in the report accompanying this resolution, to be offered in the order and manner specified. Each amendment shall be considered notwithstanding the adoption of a previous amendment in the nature of a substitute and not subject to further amendment. If more than one amendment is adopted, the amendment receiving the greatest number of affirmative votes shall be considered as finally adopted. In the case of a tie, only the last amendment to receive that number of affirmative votes shall be considered as finally adopted.
Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 116. (consideration: CR H3888-3909)
Rule H. Res. 116 passed House.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR H3553)
Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 116 Reported to House. Rule provides for consideration of H.J. Res. 73 with 3 hours of general debate. Previous question shall be considered as ordered without intervening motions except motion to recommit. Specified amendments are in order. No amendment to the joint resolution shall be in order except those specified in the report accompanying this resolution, to be offered in the order and manner specified. Each amendment shall be considered notwithstanding the adoption of a previous amendment in the nature of a substitute and not subject to further amendment. If more than one amendment is adopted, the amendment receiving the greatest number of affirmative votes shall be considered as finally adopted. In the case of a tie, only the last amendment to receive that number of affirmative votes shall be considered as finally adopted.
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.73 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.73 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.73 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.73 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.