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 · Nov 8, 1997
Waives provisions of rule XI of the Rules of the House of Representatives that require a two-thirds vote to consider a report from the Committee on Rules on the same day it is presented to the House with respect to resolutions reported from such Committee before November 11, 1997, to provide for the consideration or disposition of: (1) a bill or joint resolution (including any amendment, conference report, or any amendment from conference in disagreement thereon) that makes general appropriations for FY 1998 or that includes provisions making continuing appropriations for FY 1998; and (2) H.R. 2621 (reciprocal trade agreement authorities). Makes it in order at any time before November 11, 1997, for the Speaker to entertain motions that the House suspend the rules, provided that the object of any such motion is announced from the House floor at least one hour before the motion is offered.
People & committees
Rep. Linder, John [R-GA-11] · R–GA
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: 213 - 193 (Roll no. 630).
House roll call 630 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On agreeing to the resolution Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 213 - 193 (Roll no. 630).
House roll call 630 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business.
At the Conclusion of debate, the Speaker put the question on agreeing to the resolution and announced that, by voice vote the resolution was agreed to. Ms. Slaughter demanded the Yeas and Nays and further proceedings were postponed.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate.
Considered as privileged matter. (consideration: CR H10586-10588, H10597-10598)
Mr. Solomon asked unanimous consent that the resolution be considered as having been amended when called up.
Placed on the House Calendar, Calendar No. 133.
The requirement of clause 4(b) of rule XI for a two-thirds vote to consider a report from the Committee on Rules on the same day it is presented to the House is waived with respect to any resolution reported from that committee before November 11, 1997, providing for consideration or disposition of any of the following: 1) a bill or joint resolution making general appropriations for FY 1998, any amendment thereto, any conference report thereon, or any amendment reported in disagreement from a conference
The House Committee on Rules reported an original measure, H. Rept. 105-394, by Mr. Linder.
The House Committee on Rules reported an original measure, H. Rept. 105-394, by Mr. Linder.
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.314 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.314 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.314 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.314 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.