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 4, 2026
This resolution directs the House Committee on Ethics to preserve and publicly disclose records related to violations or alleged violations of the Code of Official Conduct involving acts of sexual harassment, unwelcome sexual advance, or sexual assault by a Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner. (The Code of Official Conduct is Rule XXIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives.)
Under the resolution, the committee must preserve all records (including investigative materials) of such a violation or alleged violation.
Further, within 60 days after the resolution is adopted, the committee must publicly release available reports, conclusions, recommendations, exhibits, and attachments related to such investigations. The personally identifiable information of victims, alleged victims, and witnesses must be redacted.
People & committees
Rep. Mace, Nancy [R-SC-1] · R–SC
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.
Referred to the House Committee on Ethics.
On motion to refer Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 357 - 65, 1 Present (Roll no. 83).
House roll call 83 · Individual votesThe previous question on the motion to refer was ordered without objection.
Mr. Garbarino moved to refer to Ethics. (CR H2391)
Considered as privileged matter. (consideration: CR H2391-2392; text: CR H2391)
Submitted in House
Submitted 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: Mar 10, 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.1100 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.1100 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.1100 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.1100 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.