PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Housing and Community Opportunity.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · May 20, 1997
Expresses the sense of the House of Representatives that: (1) the Members of the House of Representatives and Habitat for Humanity, with support from the National Partners in Homeownership, should sponsor and construct, commencing on June 5, 1997, two homes in the Anacostia neighborhood of the District of Columbia, each to be known as a "House That Congress Built"; (2) each house should be constructed primarily by Members and their families and staffs with the participation of the family that will own the home, involving and symbolizing the partnership of the public, private, and nonprofit sectors of society; (3) upon completion and initial occupancy of the homes in the fall of 1997, the Members, their families and staffs, each family that will own each house, and local and national leaders from the public and private nonprofit sectors of society should participate in an event to celebrate the occasion; (4) the Members and their families and staff should participate in similar house building activities of Habitat for Humanity in their own districts as part of National Homeownership Week; and (5) these occasions should be used to emphasize the importance of providing safe, clean, and healthy homes for all of the people in the United States.
People & committees
Rep. Lewis, Jerry [R-CA-40] · 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 Housing and Community Opportunity.
The title of the measure was amended. Agreed to without objection.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.
Considered as unfinished business.
Mr. Solomon asked unanimous consent that the demand for a recorded vote on H. Res. 147 be vacated. Agreed to without objection.
At the conclusion of debate, the Yeas and Nays were demanded and ordered. Pursuant to the provisions of clause 5, rule I, the Chair announced that further proceedings on the motion would be postponed.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H2941-2946, H2960)
Mr. Lazio moved to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution, as amended.
Referred to the House Committee on Banking and Financial Services.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR H2494)
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: 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.147 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.147 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.147 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.147 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.