PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
Congressional Research Service
Version 81 · Passed House without amendment · Mar 6, 2008
Sets forth the rule for consideration of H.R. 2857 (Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education Act).
People & committees
Rep. Matsui, Doris O. [D-CA-5] · D–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On agreeing to the resolution Agreed to by recorded vote: 222 - 190 (Roll no. 104). (text: CR H1345)
House roll call 104 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On agreeing to the resolution Agreed to by recorded vote: 222 - 190 (Roll no. 104).(text: CR H1345)
House roll call 104 · Individual votesOn ordering the previous question Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 217 - 193, 1 Present (Roll no. 103). (consideration: CR H1347-1348)
House roll call 103 · Individual votesDEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate on H. Res. 1015.
Considered as privileged matter. (consideration: CR H1345-1349)
Placed on the House Calendar, Calendar No. 193.
Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 2857 with 1 hour of general debate. Previous question shall be considered as ordered without intervening motions except motion to recommit with or without instructions. Measure will be considered read. A specified amendment is in order.
The House Committee on Rules reported an original measure, H. Rept. 110-539, by Ms. Matsui.
The House Committee on Rules reported an original measure, H. Rept. 110-539, by Ms. Matsui.
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Apr 7, 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.Res.1015 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.Res.1015 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.Res.1015 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.Res.1015 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.