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 · Jun 17, 2015
Sets forth the rule for consideration of the Senate amendment to the bill (H.R. 2146) to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow Federal law enforcement officers, firefighters, and air traffic controllers to make penalty-free withdrawals from governmental plans after age 50.
People & committees
Rep. Sessions, Pete [R-TX-32] · R–TX
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: 244 - 181 (Roll no. 373). (text: CR H4497)
House roll call 373 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On agreeing to the resolution Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 244 - 181 (Roll no. 373).(text: CR H4497)
House roll call 373 · Individual votesThe previous question was ordered without objection. (consideration: CR H4506)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate on H. Res. 321.
On consideration of the resolution Agreed to by voice vote. (consideration: CR H4499)
POINT OF ORDER - Ms. Slaughter raised a point of order against the provisions of H.Res. 321 because it violates the Congressional Budget Act. The Chair announced that the disposition of the point of order would be resolved by the question of consideration on the resolution. The House proceeded with 20 minutes of debate on the point of order at the end of which the Chair will put the question on consideration.
By direction of the Committeee on Rules, Mr. Sessions called up H.Res. 321 and asked for its immediate consideration. (consideration: CR H4497-4507)
Placed on the House Calendar, Calendar No. 43.
Resolution provides for consideration of the Senate amendment to H.R. 2146.
The House Committee on Rules reported an original measure, H. Rept. 114-167, by Mr. Sessions.
The House Committee on Rules reported an original measure, H. Rept. 114-167, by Mr. Sessions.
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.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.