PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on District of Columbia.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 4, 1995
Repeals provisions of the District of Columbia Revenue Act of 1939 directing the Secretary of the Treasury to advance, on the requisition of the Mayor of the District of Columbia, funds out of the Treasury from time to time to meet the general expenses of the District. Amends the District of Columbia Self-Government and Governmental Reorganization Act to reduce the amount authorized to be appropriated as the annual Federal payment to the District for a fiscal year by the amount of any funds advanced to the District by the Secretary on or after January 4, 1995, that have not been reimbursed by the District to the Treasury as of the last day of the previous fiscal year.
People & committees
Rep. Rohrabacher, Dana [R-CA-45] · R–CA
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 District of Columbia.
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: Feb 4, 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.358 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.358 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.358 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.358 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.