PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
Congressional Research Service
Version 53 · Passed House · Apr 3, 2019
This resolution urges the Department of Justice (DOJ) to cease its efforts against the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) and reverse its position in Texas v. United States. (On March 25, 2019, DOJ submitted a letter to the appellate court agreeing with the lower court's decision that PPACA should be struck in its entirety).
People & committees
Rep. Allred, Colin Z. [D-TX-32] · D–TX
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: 240 - 186, 1 Present (Roll no. 146). (text: CR 4/2/2019 H2956-2957)
House roll call 146 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On agreeing to the resolution Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 240 - 186, 1 Present (Roll no. 146).(text: CR 4/2/2019 H2956-2957)
House roll call 146 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H3002-3003)
The previous question was ordered pursuant to the rule.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate on H. Res. 271.
Rule provides for consideration of S.J. Res. 7 and H. Res. 271. Rule provides for the previous question to be considered as ordered without intervening motions for both measures except for one hour of debate; one motion to recommit S.J. Res. 7 is allowed. It shall be in order at any time on the legislative day of April 4, 2019 for the Speaker to entertain motions that the House suspend the rules.
Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 274. (consideration: CR H2956-2969)
Rule H. Res. 274 passed House.
Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 274 Reported to House. Rule provides for consideration of S.J. Res. 7 and H. Res. 271. Rule provides for the previous question to be considered as ordered without intervening motions for both measures except for one hour of debate; one motion to recommit S.J. Res. 7 is allowed. It shall be in order at any time on the legislative day of April 4, 2019 for the Speaker to entertain motions that the House suspend the rules.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
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.271 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.271 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.271 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.271 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.