PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · May 15, 2008
Alice Paul Women's Suffrage Congressional Gold Medal Act - Requires the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President pro tempore of the Senate to make arrangements for the presentation of a congressional gold medal in commemoration of Alice Paul, to recognize her role in the women's suffrage movement and in advancing equal rights for women. Requires that the medal be presented jointly to representatives of the Alice Paul Institute and the Sewall-Belmont House, to be shared equally and displayed as appropriate.
Authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to strike and sell duplicates in bronze of such medal. Requires proceeds from the sale of such medals to be deposited into the U.S. Mint Public Enterprise Fund.
People & committees
Rep. Baca, Joe [D-CA-43] · D–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 Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
The title of the measure was amended. Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 412 - 1 (Roll no. 326). (text: CR 5/13/2008 H3726-3727)
House roll call 326 · Individual votesMotion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 412 - 1 (Roll no. 326).(text: CR 5/13/2008 H3726-3727)
House roll call 326 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H3904)
At the conclusion of debate, the chair put the question on the motion to suspend the rules. Mr. Simpson 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 The point of no quorum was withdrawn.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 H.R. 406.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H3726-3729)
Mr. Baca moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Domestic and International Monetary Policy, Trade, and Technology.
Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Dec 5, 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.406 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.406 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.406 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.406 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.