PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on the Legislative and Budget Process.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 4, 1995
House Ethics Protection Act of 1995 - Amends the Ethics Reform Act of 1989 to provide that if any Member of the House of Representatives who was the subject of an investigation during the previous Congress also serves in the current Congress, the following actions are prohibited: (1) action to disband the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct; (2) action to shift such Committee's jurisdiction to any other committee; (3) action to combine such Committee with any other committee or subcommittee; (4) action making such Committee a subcommittee; or (5) action to change the number of members nominated by either party caucus to such Committee. Prohibits a House Member from participating in the procedure nominating members to the Committee if the Member was a subject of an investigation by such Committee during the current or previous congressional session. Bars the Speaker of the House from taking any action regarding the appointment of members to the Committee if the Speaker is or has been the subject of such an investigation. Requires the Committee to report to the House on each investigation conducted and matters heard during the previous Congress for which final actions were postponed or unresolved.
People & committees
Rep. Gutierrez, Luis V. [D-IL-4] · D–IL
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: Aug 21, 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.251 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.251 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.251 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.251 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.