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 · May 23, 2011
Sets forth the rule for consideration of the bill (H.R. 1216) to amend the Public Health Service Act to convert funding for graduate medical education in qualified teaching health centers from direct appropriations to an authorization of appropriations; providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 1540) to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2012 for military activities of the Department of Defense and for military construction, to prescribe military personnel strengths for fiscal year 2012, and for other purposes; and waiving a requirement of clause 6(a) of rule XIII with respect to consideration of certain resolutions reported from the Committee on Rules.
People & committees
Rep. Foxx, Virginia [R-NC-5] · R–NC
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: 238 - 181 (Roll no. 334). (text: CR H3353-3354)
House roll call 334 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On agreeing to the resolution Agreed to by recorded vote: 238 - 181 (Roll no. 334).(text: CR H3353-3354)
House roll call 334 · Individual votesOn ordering the previous question Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 233 - 179 (Roll no. 333). (consideration: CR H3360-3361)
House roll call 333 · Individual votesDEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate on H. Res. 269.
Considered as privileged matter. (consideration: CR H3353-3361)
Placed on the House Calendar, Calendar No. 39.
The rule provides for 1 hour of general debate and waives all points of order against consideration of the measures. The rule provides one motion to recommit H.R. 1216 with or without instructions. The rule also provides that after general debate on H.R. 1540, the Committee of the Whole shall rise without motion and that no further consideration of the bill shall occur except pursuant to a subsequent order of the House. The rule provides that after general debate on H.R. 1216 the measure shall be considered for amendment under the five-minute rule and shall be considered as read. The rule makes in orderonly those amendments that are received for printing in the Congressional Record dated May 23, 2011, and pro forma amendments for the purpose of debate. The rule waives clause 6(a) of rule XIII (requiring a two-thirds vote to consider a rule on the same day it is reported from the Rules Committee) against any resolution reported from the Rules Committee providing for consideration or disposition of a measure addressing expiring provisions of the USA PATRIOT Improvement and Requthorization Act of 2005, through the legislative day of May 27, 2011.
The House Committee on Rules reported an original measure, H. Rept. 112-86, by Ms. Foxx.
The House Committee on Rules reported an original measure, H. Rept. 112-86, by Ms. Foxx.
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.269 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.269 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.269 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.269 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.