PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.On motion to table the motion to appeal the ruling of the Chair Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 214 - 161 (Roll no. 884).
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Dec 21, 1995
Directs the House Committee on Rules to report a resolution providing for the consideration of H.R. 2530 (Federal budget revisions).
People & committees
Rep. Taylor, Gene [D-MS-5] · D–MS
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
On motion to table the motion to appeal the ruling of the Chair Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 214 - 161 (Roll no. 884).
House roll call 884 · Individual votesMr. Burton moved to table the motion to appeal the ruling of the Chair
Mr. Taylor (MS) moved to appeal the ruling of the Chair.
The Chair ruled that the resolution did not constitute a question of the privileges of the House.
Point of order sustained against the motion to consider.
The House proceeded with debate on the question of whether the resolution constituted a question of the privileges of the House.
Consideration initiated as a question of privilege.
Mr. Taylor (MS) moved to consider.
Referred to the House Committee on Rules.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR H15543-15544)
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: Jan 2, 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.321 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.321 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.321 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.321 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.