PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 19, 2024
Sets forth the rule for consideration of the bill (H.R. 1023) to repeal section 134 of the Clean Air Act, relating to the greenhouse gas reduction fund; providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 1121) to prohibit a moratorium on the use of hydraulic fracturing; providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 6009) to require the Director of the Bureau of Land Management to withdraw the proposed rule relating to fluid mineral leases and leasing process, and for other purposes; providing for consideration of the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 86) expressing the sense of Congress that a carbon tax would be detrimental to the United States economy; providing for consideration of the resolution (H. Res. 987) denouncing the harmful, anti-American energy policies of the Biden administration, and for other purposes; and providing for consideration of the bill (H.R 7023) to amend section 404 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to codify certain regulatory provisions relating to nationwide permits for dredged or fill material.
People & committees
Rep. Reschenthaler, Guy [R-PA-14] · R–PA
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: 214 - 200 (Roll no. 90). (text: CR H1247-1248)
House roll call 90 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On agreeing to the resolution Agreed to by recorded vote: 214 - 200 (Roll no. 90). (text: CR H1247-1248)
House roll call 90 · Individual votesOn ordering the previous question Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 207 - 192 (Roll no. 89).
House roll call 89 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H1253-1254)
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on H. Res. 1085, the Chair put the question on ordering the previous question and by voice vote, announced that the ayes had prevailed. Ms. Scanlon demanded the yeas and nays and the Chair postponed further proceedings until a time to be announced.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate on H. Res. 1085.
Considered as privileged matter. (consideration: CR H1247-1253)
Placed on the House Calendar, Calendar No. 67.
The resolution provides for consideration H.R. 1023, H.R. 1121, H.R. 6009, H. Con. Res. 86, and H. Res. 987 under a closed rule, and H.R. 7023 under a structured rule, each with one hour of general debate. The rule provides for one motion to recommit each on H.R. 1023, H.R. 1121, H.R. 6009, and H.R. 7023.
The House Committee on Rules reported an original measure, H. Rept. 118-428, by Mr. Reschenthaler.
The House Committee on Rules reported an original measure, H. Rept. 118-428, by Mr. Reschenthaler.
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Sep 28, 2026. 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.1085 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.1085 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.1085 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.1085 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.