PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.On motion to table the measure Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 220 - 196 (Roll no. 151). (text: CR H2768-2769)
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · May 3, 2005
Declares that the House of Representatives: (1) finds that the Committee on the Judiciary purposefully and deliberately mischaracterized five amendments in House Report 109-51; and (2) directs the Chairman of such Committee to report to the House a supplement to such Report that corrects the record by describing the five amendments with nonargumentative, objective captions.
People & committees
Rep. Conyers, John, Jr. [D-MI-14] · D–MI
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
On motion to table the measure Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 220 - 196 (Roll no. 151). (text: CR H2768-2769)
House roll call 151 · Individual votesMr. Sensenbrenner moved to table the measure.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate on H. Res. 253.
Considered as privileged matter. (consideration: CR H2768-2778)
RESOLUTION RAISING QUESTION OF PRIVILEGE - Mr. Conyers submitted a resolution raising a question of the privileges of the House. Upon examination of the resolution, the Chair determined that the resolution did constitute a question of the privileges of the House and pursuant to rule 9 of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the Chair recognized Mr. Conyers and a Member opposed thereto, each for 30 minutes.
Introduced in House
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.253 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.253 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.253 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.253 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.