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 · May 25, 2011
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Sets forth the rule for consideration of H.R. 1540 (National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012).
People & committees
Rep. Bishop, Rob [R-UT-1] · R–UT
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, as amended Agreed to by recorded vote: 243 - 170 (Roll no. 342).
House roll call 342 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On agreeing to the resolution, as amended Agreed to by recorded vote: 243 - 170 (Roll no. 342).
House roll call 342 · Individual votesOn ordering the previous question Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 239 - 181 (Roll no. 341). (consideration: CR H3430, H3435)
House roll call 341 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H3434-3436)
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - The Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and on ordering the previous question on the resolution, and by voice vote announced that the ayes had prevailed. Mr. McGovern demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings on adoption of the amendment and order the previous question until later in the legislative day.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate on H. Res. 276.
Point of order raised by Mr. Garamendi on the content of the measure. Mr. Garamendi made point of order against the measure and the Chair announced that the disposition of the point of order would be resolved by the question of consideration on H.Res. 276. The House proceeded with 20 minutes of debate on the point of order, and if necessary, the Chair will put the question on consideration. Point of order overruled by the Chair.
Considered as privileged matter. (consideration: CR H3423-3430; text of measure as introduced: CR H3423-3424)
Placed on the House Calendar, Calendar No. 40.
It shall be in order to consider as an original bill for the purpose of amendment under the five-minute rule the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on Armed Services now printed in the bill.
The House Committee on Rules reported an original measure, H. Rept. 112-88, by Mr. Bishop (UT).
The House Committee on Rules reported an original measure, H. Rept. 112-88, by Mr. Bishop (UT).
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.276 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.276 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.276 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.276 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.