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 · Sep 18, 1997
Instructs the Sergeant-at-Arms to remove former Representative Robert Dornan from the Hall of the House and rooms leading thereto and to prevent him from returning until the election contest concerning the 46th district of California is resolved.
People & committees
Rep. Menendez, Robert [D-NJ-13] · D–NJ
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 recorded vote: 289 - 65, 7 Present (Roll no. 415).
House roll call 415 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On agreeing to the resolution Agreed to by recorded vote: 289 - 65, 7 Present (Roll no. 415).
House roll call 415 · Individual votesThe previous question was ordered without objection.
DEBATE - By unanimous consent, the House proceeded with 20 minutes of debate on the resolution, equally divided and controlled.
On motion to table the measure Failed by recorded vote: 86 - 291, 3 Present (Roll no. 414).
House roll call 414 · Individual votesMr. Stearns moved to table the measure.
Considered as privileged matter. (consideration: CR H7573-7578)
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR H7533)
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: Oct 26, 2016. 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.233 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.233 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.233 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.233 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.