PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on the Legislative and Budget Process.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 25, 1996
Amends rule X of the Rules of the House of Representatives to require the respective party conference or caucus to each nominate to the House at the beginning of each Congress five members to serve on the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct. Limits an individual's membership on the Committee to two Congresses (currently, three Congresses in any period of five successive Congresses). Provides that of the Members nominated to serve on the Committee in the 105th Congress, two designated by the party conference and two designated by the party caucus shall only serve on the Committee during that Congress. Requires the senior majority and minority party members of the Committee to serve as its chairman and ranking minority member. Provides that if a complaint is filed with the Committee against a Member, officer, or employee of the House, the Committee shall determine if the complaint is properly filed and, if so, whether a preliminary investigation is warranted. Conditions such investigation on the approval of the Committee's members by an affirmative vote of the majority. Sets forth procedures for selecting members (excluding members of the Committee or any Member deemed by the conference or caucus to be exempt) to serve on an investigative panel with respect to the complaint. Requires the Committee to adopt rules providing for staff, funding, reports, proceedings, disbanding, and the disposition of the recommendations of investigative panels. Allows the Committee, at any time and by a majority vote, to determine that a complaint is frivolous if: (1) it deems that the complaint has no basis in fact; (2) the alleged violation is of such a minor and technical nature that it does not reflect discredit upon the House or its Members; (3) the complaint was filed for purely partisan reasons and not out of concern for maintaining the ethical standards of the House; or (4) the complaint is part of a pattern of abuse and misuse of the Committee. Requires the Committee, in the case of any complaint deemed frivolous, to determine the costs of its inquiry and report such costs to the House Committee on House Oversight, the Clerk of the House, and the public. Authorizes the Committee, by majority vote, to recommend to the House that any Member who has filed a frivolous complaint repay the costs of the inquiry over a period of greater than one year or be fined an appropriate amount.
People & committees
Rep. Goss, Porter J. [R-FL-14] · R–FL
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on the Legislative and Budget Process.
Referred to the House Committee on Rules.
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.346 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.346 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.346 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.346 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.