PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
Congressional Research Service
Version 81 · Passed House without amendment · Jun 15, 2017
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Expresses:
gratitude to U.S. Capitol Police Special Agents Crystal Griner, David Bailey, and Henry Cabrera who placed themselves in harm's way to protect individuals when an armed gunman opened fire at a practice for the annual Congressional Baseball Game for Charity on June 14, 2017;
appreciation for the courage and dedication of the U.S. Capitol Police; and
thanks to the Alexandria Police Department, Alexandria Sheriff's Office, Alexandria Fire Department and other first responders to the scene.
Reaffirms that an attack on any Member of Congress is an attack on every Member, on the institution, and on representative democracy.
Stands firm in the belief that violence has no place in a pluralistic society.
People & committees
Rep. McCarthy, Kevin [R-CA-23] · R–CA
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 voice vote. (text: CR H4931)
Passed/agreed to in House: On agreeing to the resolution Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H4931)
Mr. McCarthy asked unanimous consent to consider as introduced.
Considered by unanimous consent. (consideration: CR H4931)
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 3, 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.385 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.385 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.385 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.385 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.