PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.
H.Res.212 / 104th Congress

To express the sense of the House of Representatives that the provisions of S. 4 (the Line Item Veto Act), as passed by the House, should apply to all fiscal year 1996 appropriation bills and to the reconciliation bill required by H. Con. Res. 67.

Referred to the Subcommittee on the Legislative and Budget Process.

Official summary

Version 00 · Introduced in House · Aug 4, 1995

Expresses the sense of the House of Representatives that: (1) the Speaker of the House should move to appoint conferees on S. 4 (granting the President legislative line item veto rescission authority) immediately so that the House and Senate may resolve their differences on this important legislation; and (2) no conference report on any appropriation bill or the reconciliation bill required by H. Con. Res. 67 (congressional budget for FY 1996 through 2002) should be considered by the House unless such conference report makes the provisions of S. 4, as passed by the House, applicable to that bill, or Congress has considered the conference report on S. 4.

Read the summary on Congress.gov
PlainBill analysis is coming later. This page presents official source data. We have not yet published a PlainBill explanation for this bill.

Who introduced it

Rep. Orton, Bill [D-UT-3] · D–UT

Committees

  • Rules Committee
66 cosponsorship records, including any withdrawals

Actions

A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.

  1. Referred to the Subcommittee on the Legislative and Budget Process.

  2. Referred to the House Committee on Rules.

  3. Introduced in House

  4. Introduced in House

Bill text & related measures

Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.

Related bills identified by Congress.gov

No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.

Source last updated: Jan 2, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.

Explore the bill from different angles

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.

Neutral evidence review

Objective

Analyze H.Res.212 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.

View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact

Progressive lens

Examine H.Res.212 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.

View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope

Conservative lens

Examine H.Res.212 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.

View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power

Liberty lens

Examine H.Res.212 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.

View full prompt & sources