PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.The title of the measure was amended. Agreed to without objection.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Apr 20, 2005
Recognizes: (1) the University of Pittsburgh and the University of Michigan on the 50th anniversary of the discovery of the Salk polio vaccine; (2) the pioneering achievement of Dr. Jonas Salk and his University of Pittsburgh research team in the vaccine's development; and (3) the field trials conducted by Dr. Thomas Francis, Jr., and his University of Michigan team of statisticians and epidemiologists.
Expresses appreciation to: (1) the University of Pittsburgh for the elimination of the diseas; (2) the members of Dr. Salk's research team; (3) the individuals, a majority of whom were Allegheny County, Pennsylvania, residents, who agreed to participate in the vaccine clinical trials; (4) the family members of Dr. Salk for their participation in medical history; (5) the University of Michigan for its efforts in proving the vaccine was safe and effective; and (6) the members of Dr. Francis' team.
People & committees
Rep. Murphy, Tim [R-PA-18] · R–PA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
The title of the measure was amended. Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 422 - 0 (Roll no. 114). (text: CR H2171-2172)
House roll call 114 · Individual votesMotion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 422 - 0 (Roll no. 114).(text: CR H2171-2172)
House roll call 114 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H2179-2180)
At the conclusion of debate, the Yeas and Nays were demanded and ordered. Pursuant to the provisions of clause 8, rule XX, the Chair announced that further proceedings on the motion would be postponed.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H. Res. 208.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H2171-2174)
Mr. Murphy moved to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution, as amended.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
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.208 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.208 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.208 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.208 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.