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 · Apr 12, 2011
Sets forth the rule for consideration of the bill (H.R. 1473) making appropriations for the Department of Defense and the other departments and agencies of the Government for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2011, and for other purposes; providing for consideration of the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 35) directing the Clerk of the House of Representatives to make a correction in the enrollment of H.R. 1473; and providing for consideration of the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 36) directing the Clerk of the House of Representatives to make a correction in the enrollment of H.R. 1473.
People & committees
Rep. Dreier, David [R-CA-26] · 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 agreeing to the resolution Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 241 - 179 (Roll no. 260). (text: CR H2616-2617)
House roll call 260 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On agreeing to the resolution Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 241 - 179 (Roll no. 260).(text: CR H2616-2617)
House roll call 260 · Individual votesOn ordering the previous question Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 242 - 183 (Roll no. 259). (consideration: CR H2632-2633)
House roll call 259 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H2632-2633)
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on H.Res. 218, the Chair put the question on ordering the previous question and by voice vote announced that the ayes had prevailed. Mr. Polis (CO) demanded the yeas and nays, and the Chair postponed further proceedings on ordering the previous question until later in the legislative day.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate on H. Res. 218.
Considered as privileged matter. (consideration: CR H2616-2624)
Point of order raised by Mr. Weiner on the content of the measure. Mr Weiner stated that the measure violated the rules of the House because its action was not contingent upon Senate action. Point of order overruled by the Chair.
SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT FILED - Mr. Dreier submitted a supplemental report on H.Res. 218.
Supplemental report filed by the Committee on Rules, H. Rept. 112-60, Part II.
Supplemental report filed by the Committee on Rules, H. Rept. 112-60, Part II.
Placed on the House Calendar, Calendar No. 29.
All points of order against consideration of H.R. 1473 are waived. If H.R. 1473 is passed by the House, it shall be in order to consider separately in the House H. Con. Res. 35 and H. Con. Res. 36. All points of order against each concurrent resolution are waived. Each concurrent resolution shall be debatable for 20 minutes, equally divided and controlled and the previous question shall be considered as ordered on each concurrent resolution.
The House Committee on Rules reported an original measure, H. Rept. 112-60, by Mr. Dreier.
The House Committee on Rules reported an original measure, H. Rept. 112-60, 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.218 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.218 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.218 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.218 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.