PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Mar 22, 1994
Makes available from the contingent fund of the House of Representatives certain amounts for investigations and studies by the following House committees in the second session of the 103d Congress: Agriculture; Armed Services; Banking, Finance and Urban Affairs; District of Columbia; Education and Labor; Energy and Commerce; Foreign Affairs; Government Operations; House Administration; Intelligence; Judiciary; Merchant Marine and Fisheries; Natural Resources; Post Office and Civil Service; Public Works and Transportation; Rules; Science, Space, and Technology; Small Business; Standards of Official Conduct; Veterans' Affairs; and Ways and Means. Limits the funds that may be used for procurement of consultant services and specialized training for professional staff. Directs the Committee on House Administration, through the House Information Systems, to develop, operate, and improve computer and information services for the House of Representatives. Authorizes the Committee to: (1) oversee any reimbursement for such services; (2) provide for professional development programs, office and personnel management consultation services, and publication of items for the House; and (3) adjust amounts for investigations and studies if necessary to comply with an order of the President under the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (Gramm-Rudman-Hollings Act) or to conform to any reduction in appropriations.
People & committees
Rep. Frost, Martin [D-TX-24] · D–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 recorded vote: 250 - 172 (Roll no. 80).
House roll call 80 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On agreeing to the resolution Agreed to by recorded vote: 250 - 172 (Roll no. 80).
House roll call 80 · Individual votesOn motion to recommit with instructions Failed by the Yeas and Nays: 172 - 251 (Roll no. 79).
House roll call 79 · Individual votesThe previous question on the motion to recommit with instructions was ordered without objection.
The instructions contained in the Roberts motion seek to provide an allocation of 33% of all committee funds to the control of the Ranking Minority Member of each committee.
Mr. Roberts moved to recommit with instructions to House Administration.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate on the resolution and the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute.
Considered as privileged matter. (consideration: CR H1814-1824)
Placed on the House Calendar, Calendar No. 139.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on House Administration. H. Rept. 103-433.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on House Administration. H. Rept. 103-433.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 12 - 7.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 8 - 5.
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Accounts.
Referred to the House Committee on House Administration.
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: Feb 7, 2024. 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.369 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.369 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.369 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.369 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.