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 · Aug 4, 1993
Instructs the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct to investigate allegations that the House Post Office provided cash to any Member in exchange for official vouchers, stamps purchased with official vouchers, campaign account checks, or in any other way inconsistent with the Rules of the House. Requires the Committee to: (1) determine which Members are alleged by the former Postmaster to have engaged in improper conduct in connection with the House Post Office and whether these Members are the subjects of any current investigation by the Department of Justice; and (2) defer further inquiry into a Member's conduct if that be the case, pending conclusion of the investigation. Requires the Committee to report to the House on its investigations and makes such report available to the public.
People & committees
Rep. Istook, Ernest J., Jr. [R-OK-5] · R–OK
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 motion to table the measure Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 238 - 186 (Roll no. 37).
House roll call 37 · Individual votesMr. Gephardt moved to table the measure.
DEBATE - The Speaker declared that the resolution constituted a point of privilege and the House proceeded with one hour of debate.
Consideration initiated pursuant to order of Feb. 23, 1994.
Considered as privileged matter. (consideration: CR H968-977)
Mr. Istook asked unanimous consent That he be permitted to call up H. Res. 238 on Wednesday, March 2, 1994, at a time and place on that day to be determined by the Speaker if determined by the Speaker to present a question of the privileges of the House, without further notification to the House of his intention to call up that resolution pursuant to Rule IX, but that if he intends to call up a resolution on that day different in form from H. Res. 238, that he notify the House of his intention to offer the resolution, and the form of the resolution, at least one legislative day prior to offering the resolution. Agreed to without objection.
QUESTION OF PRIVILEGE - Mr. Istook rose to a question of the privileges of the House and, pursuant to the provisions of rule IX of the rules of the House, gave formal notice of his intention to call up House Resolution 238, or a similar resolution, in the event that H. Res. 238 cannot be called up for any reason.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR H506)
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR H301, H350-352, H355-358)
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR H8334)
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR H7714)
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR H7547)
Referred to the House Committee on Rules.
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: Feb 7, 2024. 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.238 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.238 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.238 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.238 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.