PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on the Legislative and Budget Process.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Aug 4, 1995
Amends the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 to make it out of order in the House of Representatives or the Senate to consider any bill or joint resolution making continuing appropriations for all or a part of a fiscal year unless it provides that the amount which would be available or the authority which would be granted respecting any pertinent project or activity (except appropriated mandatory spending) shall be continued at a rate of operations not exceeding the lower of: (1) 95 percent of the current rate; or (2) if the applicable regular appropriations Act has passed both Houses, then the lowest rate permitted by either version of that Act, except that if the project or activity is funded in only one such version, that project or activity shall be continued under the authority granted by the one House.
People & committees
Rep. Allard, Wayne [R-CO-4] · R–CO
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on the Legislative and Budget Process.
Referred to the House Committee on Rules.
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: Jan 2, 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.2197 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.2197 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.2197 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.2197 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.