PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and read twice and referred to the Committee on Governmental Affairs.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Oct 21, 1997
Presidential and Executive Office Financial Accountability Act of 1997 - Provides, within the Executive Office of the President, for the designation or appointment of a Chief Financial Officer. Requires the Chief Financial Officer, to the extent that the President determines appropriate and in the interest of the United States, to have the same authority and perform the same functions as his or her Federal agency counterparts. Directs the President to: (1) notify the Congress of any provision of current law concerning chief financial officers that the President determines shall not apply to a Chief Financial Officer designated or appointed under this Act; and (2) communicate in writing, not later than 90 days after enactment, to the Chairman of the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight of the House and the Chairman of the Committee on Governmental Affairs of the Senate a plan for implementation of this Act.
People & committees
Rep. Horn, Stephen [R-CA-38] · R–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate and read twice and referred to the Committee on Governmental Affairs.
The title of the measure was amended. Agreed to without objection.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by recorded vote (2/3 required): 413 - 3 (Roll no. 517).
House roll call 517 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by recorded vote (2/3 required): 413 - 3 (Roll no. 517).
House roll call 517 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business.
At the conclusion of debate, the chair put the question on the motion to suspend the rules. Mr. Horn objected to the Yea - Nay 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 The point of no quorum was withdrawn.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.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H8872-8874, H8891)
Mr. Horn moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 193.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Government Reform. H. Rept. 105-331.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Government Reform. H. Rept. 105-331.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR H6970-6972)
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Government Management, Information and Technology.
Referred to the House Committee on Government Reform and Oversight.
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: Mar 23, 2026. 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.1962 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.1962 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.1962 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.1962 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.