PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Mr. Walker moved to table the motion to reconsider
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jun 29, 1995
Sets forth the modified closed rule for the consideration of H.R. 1944 (emergency supplemental appropriations).
People & committees
Rep. Dreier, David [R-CA-28] · R–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Mr. Walker moved to table the motion to reconsider
Mr. Doggett moved to reconsider the vote.
On agreeing to the resolution Agreed to by recorded vote: 234 - 192 (Roll No. 461).
House roll call 461 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On agreeing to the resolution Agreed to by recorded vote: 234 - 192 (Roll No. 461).
House roll call 461 · Individual votesOn motion to table the motion to reconsider the vote Agreed to by recorded vote: 235 - 193 (Roll No. 460).
House roll call 460 · Individual votesMr. Beilenson moved to reconsider the vote.
Mr. Dreier moved to table the motion to reconsider the vote
On ordering the previous question Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 236 - 194 (Roll no. 459).
House roll call 459 · Individual votesDEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate.
Considered as privileged matter. (consideration: CR H6594-6604)
Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 1944. Providing for the consideration of the bill in the House. A specified amendment is in order. It shall be in order, any rule of the House to the contrary notwithstanding, to consider an amendment offered by the chairman of the Committee on Appropriations. The amendment, if offered shall be considered as read and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question. The previous question on the amendment shall be considered as ordered on the amendment and on final passage without intervening motion except: one hour of debate and one motion to recommit with or without instructions.
Placed on the House Calendar, Calendar No. 66.
The House Committee on Rules reported an original measure, H. Rept. 104-166, by Mr. Dreier.
The House Committee on Rules reported an original measure, H. Rept. 104-166, by Mr. Dreier.
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.176 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.176 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.176 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.176 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.