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 · May 8, 1997
Constitutional Amendment - Declares that: (1) to secure the people's right to acknowledge God according to the dictates of conscience, the people's right to pray and to recognize their religious beliefs, heritage, or traditions on public property, including schools, shall not be infringed; and (2) the Government shall not require any person to join in prayer or other religious activity, initiate or designate school prayers, discriminate against religion, or deny equal access to a benefit on account of religion.
People & committees
Rep. Istook, Ernest J., Jr. [R-OK-5] · R–OK
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 recorded vote (2/3 required): 224 - 203 (Roll No. 201).
House roll call 201 · Individual votesFailed of passage/not agreed to in House: On passage Failed by recorded vote (2/3 required): 224 - 203 (Roll No. 201).
House roll call 201 · Individual votesOn motion to recommit with instructions Failed by recorded vote: 203 - 223 (Roll No. 200). (consideration: CR H4111)
House roll call 200 · Individual votesMr. Scott moved to recommit with instructions to Judiciary.
BISHOP PART 2 AMENDMENT - An amendment to strike language dealing with the denial of "equal access to a benefit on account of religion" and insert "or otherwise compel or discriminate against religion."
BISHOP PART 1 AMENDMENT - An amendment to strike language to secure the right to "acknowledge God" and insert the right to "freedom of religion"
DEMAND FOR DIVISION OF THE QUESTION - Demand for the division of the question between the two instructions in the Bishop amendment: Part 1, strike and insert page 3 line 18; and Part 2, strike and insert page 4 beginning in line 1.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 453, the House proceeded with one hour of debate on the Bishop amendment. Subsequently, Mr. Istook demanded that the question be divided when the Chair puts the question on agreeing to the amendment. Under the rule, the question will be divided between the first instruction contained in the amendment and the second instruction.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with two hours of debate.
Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 453. (consideration: CR H4078-4112)
Rule H. Res. 453 passed House.
Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 453 Reported to House. Rule provides for consideration of H.J. Res. 78.
Placed on the House Calendar, Calendar No. 192.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 105-543.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 105-543.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR H1840-1845)
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR H1770-1774)
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 16 - 11.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 8 - 4.
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
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.78 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.78 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.78 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.78 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.