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 · Feb 1, 1996
Directs the enrolling clerk of the House of Representatives to prepare an engrossment of, and transmit to the Senate, H.R. 2409 (public debt limit), which shall be deemed to have passed the House.
People & committees
Rep. Gephardt, Richard A. [D-MO-3] · D–MO
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 motion to table the appeal of the ruling of the Chair Agreed to by recorded vote: 229 - 187 (Roll No. 26).
House roll call 26 · Individual votesMotion to appeal the ruling of the Chair tabled.
Mr. Solomon moved to table the motion to appeal the ruling of the Chair.
Mr. Volkmer moved to appeal the ruling of the Chair.
The Chair announced that the resolution did not constitute a question of the privilege.
Members were recognized to speak on whether the resolution constituted a question of privilege.
Consideration initiated question of privileges of the House.
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.356 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.356 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.356 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.356 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.