PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Became Public Law No: 112-84.
Congressional Research Service
Version 49 · Public Law · Jan 3, 2012
(This measure has not been amended since it was reported to the Senate on November 15, 2011. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Revises the Ethics in Government Act of 1978 to extend until December 31, 2017, the Judicial Conference's authority to redact financial disclosure reports filed by a judicial officer or employee if it finds that revealing personal and sensitive information could endanger that individual or a family member of that individual.
People & committees
Rep. Conyers, John, Jr. [D-MI-14] · D–MI
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 112-84.
Became Public Law No: 112-84.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion that the House suspend the rules and agree to the Senate amendment Agreed to by voice vote. (text as House agreed to Senate amendment: CR 12/19/2011 H9937-9938)
Resolving differences -- House actions: On motion that the House suspend the rules and agree to the Senate amendment Agreed to by voice vote.(text as House agreed to Senate amendment: CR 12/19/2011 H9937-9938)
Considered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H9999)
At the conclusion of debate, the chair put the question on the motion to suspend the rules. Mr. Smith (TX) objected to the vote on the grounds that a quorum was not present. Further proceedings on the motion were postponed. The point of no quorum was withdrawn.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on agreeing to the Senate amendment to H.R. 1059.
Mr. Smith (TX) moved that the House suspend the rules and agree to the Senate amendment. (consideration: CR H9937-9938)
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate with an amendment by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S7776-7777; text as passed Senate: CR S7777)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate with an amendment by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S7776-7777; text as passed Senate: CR S7777)
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 232.
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. Reported by Senator Lieberman with an amendment. Without written report.
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. Reported by Senator Lieberman with an amendment. Without written report.
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. Ordered to be reported with an amendment favorably.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 384 - 0 (Roll no. 701). (text: CR H6048)
House roll call 701 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 384 - 0 (Roll no. 701).(text: CR H6048)
House roll call 701 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H6052)
At the conclusion of debate, the Yeas and Nays were demanded and ordered. Pursuant to the provisions of clause 8, rule XX, the Chair announced that further proceedings on the motion would be postponed.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 1059.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H6048-6049)
Mr. Coble moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 123.
Reported by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 112-189.
Reported by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 112-189.
Ordered to be Reported by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Courts, Commercial and Administrative Law.
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E475)
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: 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.R.1059 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.R.1059 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.R.1059 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.R.1059 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.