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 · Jan 12, 2011
Condemns in the strongest possible terms the horrific attack that occurred at the "Congress on your Corner" event hosted by Representative Gabrielle Giffords in Tucson, Arizona, on January 8, 2011.
Offers heartfelt condolences to the families, friends, and loved ones of those killed in that attack.
Expresses hope for the rapid and complete recovery of those wounded in the shooting.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Honors the memory of Christina Taylor Green, Dorothy Morris, John Roll, Phyllis Schneck, Dorwan Stoddard, and Gabriel Zimmerman.
Applauds the bravery and quick thinking exhibited by those who prevented the gunman from taking more lives and helped to save those who had been wounded.
Recognizes the service of the first responders who raced to the scene and the health care professionals who tended to the victims once they reached the hospital and whose service and skill saved lives.
Reaffirms the bedrock principle of American democracy and representative government, memorialized in the First Amendment and which Representative Giffords herself read in the Hall of the House of Representatives on January 6, 2011, of "the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
Stands firm in the belief in a democracy in which all can participate and in which intimidation and threats of violence cannot silence the voices of any American.
Honors the service and leadership of Representative Giffords, a distinguished Member of the House of Representatives, as she courageously fights to recover.
States that when the House adjourns on January 12, 2011, it does so out of respect to the victims of this attack.
People & committees
Rep. Boehner, John A. [R-OH-8] · R–OH
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 voice vote. (text: CR H144)
Passed/agreed to in House: On agreeing to the resolution Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H144)
The previous question was ordered without objection. (consideration: CR H200)
DEBATE - The Chair announced that when proceedings were postponed earlier, 4 hours and 6 minutes of debate remained on the resolution. The House proceeded with further debate on H. Res. 32.
Considered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H160-200)
The Chair announced that pursuant to clause 1(c) of rule 19, proceedings would resume on H. Res. 32.
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - The Chair announced that further proceedings on H.Res. 32 would be postponed.
DEBATE - Pursuant to a previous special order the House proceeded with 6 hours of debate on H.Res. 32.
Considered pursuant to a special order. (consideration: CR H144-160)
Consideration initiated pursuant to a special order.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Jan 3, 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.32 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.32 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.32 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.32 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.