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 23, 2015
Sets forth the rule for consideration of the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 27) establishing the budget for the United States Government for fiscal year 2016 and setting forth appropriate budgetary levels for fiscal years 2017 through 2025.
People & committees
Rep. Woodall, Rob [R-GA-7] · R–GA
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: 237 - 180, 1 Present (Roll no. 133). (text: CR H1858)
House roll call 133 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On agreeing to the resolution Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 237 - 180, 1 Present (Roll no. 133).(text: CR H1858)
House roll call 133 · Individual votesOn ordering the previous question Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 238 - 180 (Roll no. 132). (consideration: CR H868)
House roll call 132 · Individual votesDEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate on H. Res. 163.
Considered as privileged matter. (consideration: CR H1858-1869)
Placed on the House Calendar, Calendar No. 17.
The resolution waives all points of order against consideration of the concurrent resolution. The resolution waives all points of order against the amendments printed in the report. The resolution provides that if more than one such amendment is adopted, then only the one receiving the greater number of affirmative votes shall be considered as finally adopted. In the case of a tie for the greater number of affirmative votes, then only the last amendment to receive that number of affirmative votes shall be considered as finally adopted. The resolution permits the chair of the Budget Committee to offer amendments in the House pursuant to section 305(a)(5) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 to achieve mathematical consistency. The resolution provides that the concurrent resolution shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question of its adoption.
The House Committee on Rules reported an original measure, H. Rept. 114-49, by Mr. Woodall.
The House Committee on Rules reported an original measure, H. Rept. 114-49, by Mr. Woodall.
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.163 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.163 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.163 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.163 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.