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 · Sep 28, 2010
Expresses the support of the House of Representatives for the goals and ideals of the inaugural USA Science & Engineering Festival to promote science scholarship and an interest in scientific research and development as the cornerstones of innovation and competition in America.
Supports festivals, such as the USA Science & Engineering Festival, which focus on the importance of science and engineering to our everyday lives.
Congratulates all the individuals and organizations whose efforts will make the Festival possible.
Encourages families and their children to participate in the activities and exhibits which will occur on the National Mall and across America as satellite events of the Festival.
People & committees
Rep. Bilbray, Brian P. [R-CA-50] · R–CA
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 motion to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H7058)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H7058)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H. Res. 1660.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H7058-7059)
Mr. Gordon (TN) moved to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution.
Referred to the House Committee on Science and Technology.
Introduced in House
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.1660 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.1660 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.1660 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.1660 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.