PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Became Public Law No: 106-88.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Nov 3, 1999
Extends the law making continuing appropriations for FY 2000 through November 10, 1999. Extends, until November 10, 1999, a certain provision of law that allows fewer than three members of the Board of Directors of the Export-Import Bank of the United States to constitute a quorum.
People & committees
Rep. Young, C. W. Bill [R-FL-10] · R–FL
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 106-88.
Became Public Law No: 106-88.
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 S13925)
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 S13925)
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 417 - 6 (Roll no. 565). (text: CR H11501)
House roll call 565 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 417 - 6 (Roll no. 565).(text: CR H11501)
House roll call 565 · Individual votesThe previous question was ordered pursuant to a previous order of the House.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate on H.J. Res. 75.
Considered by previous order of the House. (consideration: CR H11501-11507)
Consideration initiated by previous order of the House.
Mr. Goss asked unanimous consent that it may be in order at any time, without intervention of any point of order, to consider in the House H.J. Res. 75, that the joint resolution be debatable for one hour equally divided and controlled, and that the previous question otherwise be considered as ordered to passage without intervening motion except one motion to recommit. Agreed to without objection.
Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 358 Reported to House. Rule provides for consideration of H.J. Res. 75 with 1 hour of general debate. Previous question shall be considered as ordered without intervening motions except motion to recommit with or without instructions. Waives all points of order against consideration of the joint resolution. Measure will be considered read. Bill is closed to amendments.
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.75 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.75 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.75 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.75 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.