PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
Congressional Research Service
Version 53 · Passed House · Mar 13, 2019
This resolution sets forth the rule for consideration of H.Con.Res. 24 (expressing the sense of Congress that the report of Special Counsel Mueller should be made available to the public and to Congress).
On any legislative day from March 15, 2019, through March 22, 2019, the Journal of the proceedings of the previous day shall be considered as approved, and the chair may at any time declare the House adjourned to meet at a date and time.
The Speaker of the House may appoint Members to perform the duties of the chair for the duration of such specified period.
People & committees
Rep. DeSaulnier, Mark [D-CA-11] · D–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 agreeing to the resolution Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 233 - 195 (Roll no. 124). (text: CR H2690)
House roll call 124 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On agreeing to the resolution Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 233 - 195 (Roll no. 124).(text: CR H2690)
House roll call 124 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H2701-2702)
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on H.Res. 208, the Chair put the question on agreeing to the resolution and by voice vote, announced that the ayes had prevailed. Mr. Woodall demanded the yeas and nays and the Chair postponed further proceedings until later in the legislative day.
The previous question was ordered without objection.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate on H. Res. 208.
Considered as privileged matter. (consideration: CR H2690-2697)
Placed on the House Calendar, Calendar No. 12.
Rule provides for consideration H. Con. Res. 24 under a closed rule; Rule also provides for proceedings during the period from March 15, 2019, through March 22, 2019
The House Committee on Rules reported an original measure, H. Rept. 116-17, by Mr. DeSaulnier.
The House Committee on Rules reported an original measure, H. Rept. 116-17, by Mr. DeSaulnier.
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.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.