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 28, 1996
Sets forth the rule for the consideration of H.R. 3136 (social security earnings limit, line item veto, regulatory analysis, and public debt increase). Provides that if, before March 30, 1996, the House of Representatives receives a message that the Senate has adopted the conference report for S. 4 (line item veto): (1) the Clerk of the House, in the enrollment of H.R. 3136, shall strike title II (line item veto); and (2) the House shall be considered to have adopted that conference report.
People & committees
Rep. Solomon, Gerald B. H. [R-NY-22] · R–NY
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: 232 - 177 (Roll no. 98).
House roll call 98 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On agreeing to the resolution Agreed to by recorded vote: 232 - 177 (Roll no. 98).
House roll call 98 · Individual votesOn ordering the previous question on the amendment and Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 232 - 180 (Roll no. 97).
House roll call 97 · Individual votesDEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate on the resolution and on the amendment.
Considered as privileged matter. (consideration: CR H2972-2986)
Placed on the House Calendar, Calendar No. 200.
Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 3136 with 1 hour of general debate. Previous question shall be considered as ordered except motion to recommit with or without instructions. Providing for the consideration of the bill in the House without intervention of any point of order, except those arising under sec. 425(a) of the Congressional Budget Act. Specified amendments are in order. Upon adoption of this resolution, the amendments specified in the report accompanying this resolution shall be considered as having been adopted. A further amendment, if offered by the chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means shall be in order without intervention of any point of order, except those arising under sec. 425(a) of the Budget Act, debatable for 10 minutes. If, before March 30, 1996, the House has received a message informing it that the Senate has adopted the conference report to accompany the bill S. 4, the...
The House Committee on Rules reported an original measure, H. Rept. 104-500, by Mr. Solomon.
The House Committee on Rules reported an original measure, H. Rept. 104-500, by Mr. Solomon.
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.391 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.391 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.391 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.391 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.