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 · Jul 6, 2023
This joint resolution terminates the national emergency declared by President George W. Bush on May 11, 2004, which blocked the property of certain persons and export of certain goods to Syria in response to Syria supporting terrorist activity in Iraq, among other activities.
People & committees
Rep. Gaetz, Matt [R-FL-1] · R–FL
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 the Yeas and Nays: 24 - 394 (Roll no. 337). (text: CR H3668)
House roll call 337 · Individual votesFailed of passage/not agreed to in House On passage Failed by the Yeas and Nays: 24 - 394 (Roll no. 337). (text: CR H3668)
House roll call 337 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H3684)
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on H. J. Res. 79, the Chair put the question on passage and by voice vote, announced the ayes had prevailed. Mr. Wilson (SC) demanded the yeas and nays and the Chair postponed further proceedings until a time to be announced.
The previous question was ordered pursuant to a previous order of the House.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the previous order of the House of July 17, 2023, the House proceeded with 30 minutes of debate on H. J. Res. 79.
Considered pursuant to a previous order. (consideration: CR H3668-3670)
Consideration initiated pursuant to a previous order.
ORDER OF PROCEDURE - Mr. Steil asked unanimous consent that it be in order at any time through July 20, 2023, to consider in the House, H. J. Res. 79 if called up by the chair of the Committee on Foreign Affairs or his designee; that the joint resolution be considered as read; that the previous question be considered as ordered on the joint resolution to final passage without intervening motion except 30 minutes of debate equally divided among and controlled by Mr. McCaul, Mr. Meeks, and Mr. Gaetz or their respective designees; and that the provisions of section 202 of the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1622) shall not apply to the joint resolution through July 20, 2023. Agreed to without objection.
Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: May 27, 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.79 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.79 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.79 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.79 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.