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 · Jul 27, 2010
Sets forth the rule for consideration of the bill (H.R. 5822) making appropriations for military construction, the Department of Veterans Affairs, and related agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2011, and for other purposes and providing for consideration of motions to suspend the rules.
People & committees
Rep. Pingree, Chellie [D-ME-1] · D–ME
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 the Yeas and Nays: 243 - 178 (Roll no. 476). (text: CR H6206)
House roll call 476 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On agreeing to the resolution Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 243 - 178 (Roll no. 476).(text: CR H6206)
House roll call 476 · Individual votesThe previous question was ordered without objection. (consideration: CR H6213)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate on H. Res. 1559.
Considered as privileged matter. (consideration: CR H6206-6214)
On motion to consider the resolution Agreed to by voice vote.
At the conclusion of debate on the Flake point of order, the Chair put the question on consideration of the resolution.
POINT OF ORDER AGAINST CONSIDERATION - Mr. Flake stated that the provisions of H.Res. 1559 violate section 426(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 by imposing an unfunded mandate and made a point of order against the consideration of the resolution. Subsequently, the Chair noted that the required threshold of identifying the specific language in question had been met, and the House proceeded with 20 minutes of debate on the question of consideration. At the conclusion of debate on the question of consideration, the Chair will put the question to wit: Will the House now consider the resolution?
By direction of the Committee on Rules, Ms. Pingree called up the resolution, H.Res. 1559, and asked for its immediate consideration.
Placed on the House Calendar, Calendar No. 226.
Points of order against provisions in the bill for failure to comply with clause 2 of rule XXI are waived. The bill shall be considered as read through page 63, line 4. After consideration of the bill for amendment, the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations or their designees each may offer one pro forma amendment to the bill for the purpose of debate, which shall be controlled by the proponent. It shall be in order at any time through the calendar day of August 1, 2010, for the Speaker to entertain motions that the House suspend the rules.
The House Committee on Rules reported an original measure, H. Rept. 111-570, by Ms. Pingree (ME).
The House Committee on Rules reported an original measure, H. Rept. 111-570, by Ms. Pingree (ME).
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.1559 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.1559 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.1559 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.1559 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.