PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
Congressional Research Service
Version 81 · Passed House without amendment · Feb 23, 2010
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Expresses support for the designation of, and the goals and ideals of, National Nutrition Month.
Encourages: (1) local communities to raise awareness surrounding nutritional health; and (2) awareness about diseases and death caused by lack of nutrition.
Recognizes health care professionals, such as registered dietitians, who spread the knowledge and importance of nutrition each day.
People & committees
Rep. Castor, Kathy [D-FL-11] · D–FL
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 suspend the rules and agree to the resolution Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H688-689)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H688-689)
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H688-690)
Ms. Castor (FL) moved to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H. Res. 274.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
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: 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.274 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.274 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.274 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.274 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.